# (77) 马斯克如何把 1 太瓦 GPU 送上太空 - YouTube
- Transcript ID: `byxbuik3dga`
- Source tier: `youtube_creator`
- Original language: `en_or_source_language_unlabeled`
- Translation status: `agent_translated_reviewed` (320/320 chunks)
- Original source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYXbuik3dgA
- Raw evidence: `data/transcripts/youtube/BYXbuik3dgA.json`
> 中文是派生翻译，英文是留存的源文本。中文未复核时，以英文和原始音视频为准。
## 00:00:00
**中文**
真的有三个小时的题目吗？你他妈是认真的吗？你不认为有很多可谈的吗，埃隆？神圣的他妈的男人。这是最有趣的一点。所有的故事情节现在都在融合。我们将看看我们能度过多少难关。这几乎就像我计划的那样。确切地。我们会解决这个问题的。但我永远不会做这样的事情……正如你比任何人都清楚的那样，能源只占数据中心总拥有成本的 10-15%。
**English / Original**
Are there really three hours of questions? Are you fucking serious? You don't think there's a lot to talk about, Elon? Holy fuck man. It's the most interesting point. All the storylines are converging right now. We'll see how much we can get through. It's almost like I planned it. Exactly. We'll get to that. But I would never do such a thing… As you know better than anybody else, only 10-15% of the total cost of ownership of a data center is energy.
## 00:00:30
**中文**
这就是您通过将其移入太空而可能节省的部分。其中大部分是 GPU。如果它们在太空中，则很难为它们提供服务，或者您无法为它们提供服务。因此，他们的折旧周期会下降。据推测，将 GPU 部署在太空中的成本要高得多。将它们放入太空的原因是什么？能源的可用性是一个问题。如果你看看中国以外的地方的电力输出，你会发现它或多或少是持平的。
**English / Original**
That's the part you're presumably saving by moving this into space. Most of it's the GPUs. If they're in space, it's harder to service them or you can't service them. So the depreciation cycle goes down on them. It's just way more expensive to have the GPUs in space, presumably. What's the reason to put them in space? The availability of energy is the issue. If you look at electrical output outside of China, everywhere outside of China, it's more or less flat.
## 00:00:58
**中文**
也许略有增加，但几乎持平。中国电力产量快速增长。但如果你要把数据中心放在中国以外的任何地方，你要从哪里获得电力呢？尤其是当你扩大规模时。芯片产量呈指数级增长，但电力产量却持平。
**English / Original**
It’s maybe a slight increase, but pretty close flat. China has a rapid increase in electrical output. But if you're putting data centers anywhere except China, where are you going to get your electricity? Especially as you scale. The output of chips is growing pretty much exponentially, but the output of electricity is flat.
## 00:01:17
**中文**
那么你要如何打开芯片呢？神奇的能量来源？神奇的电仙子？众所周知，您是太阳能的忠实粉丝。 1 太瓦的太阳能，容量系数为 25%，相当于 4 太瓦的太阳能电池板。占美国陆地面积的1%。当我们拥有一太瓦的数据中心时，我们就处于奇点了，对吧？那么你到底用完了什么呢？
**English / Original**
So how are you going to turn the chips on? Magical power sources? Magical electricity fairies? You're famously a big fan of solar. One terawatt of solar power, with a 25% capacity factor, that’s like four terawatts of solar panels. It's 1% of the land area of the United States. We’re in the singularity when we’ve got one terawatt of data centers, right? So what are you running out of exactly?
## 00:01:42
**中文**
你距离奇点还有多远？你告诉我。确切地。所以我认为我们会发现我们处于奇点，并且会说，“好吧，我们还有很长的路要走。”但是，在我们用太阳能电池板覆盖内华达州之后，是否计划将其送入太空？我认为用太阳能电池板覆盖内华达州是相当困难的。你必须获得许可。尝试获得许可。看看会发生什么。
**English / Original**
How far into the singularity are you though? You tell me. Exactly. So I think we'll find we're in the singularity and it’ll be like, "Okay, we’ve still got a long way to go." But is the plan to put it in space after we've covered Nevada in solar panels? I think it's pretty hard to cover Nevada in solar panels. You have to get permits. Try getting the permits for that. See what happens.
## 00:02:02
**中文**
所以太空实际上是一种监管游戏。在陆地上建造比在太空中建造更困难。在地面上扩展比在太空中扩展更困难。与地面相比，太空中太阳能电池板的效率大约是地面太阳能电池板的五倍，而且不需要电池。我几乎穿上了另一件衬衫，上面写着“太空中总是阳光明媚”。这是因为太空中没有昼夜循环、季节性、云层或大气层。
**English / Original**
So space is really a regulatory play. It's harder to build on land than it is in space. It's harder to scale on the ground than it is to scale in space. You're also going to get about five times the effectiveness of solar panels in space versus the ground, and you don't need batteries. I almost wore my other shirt, which says, "it's always sunny in space". Which it is because you don't have a day-night cycle, seasonality, clouds, or an atmosphere in space.
## 00:02:44
**中文**
仅大气层就会造成约 30% 的能量损失。因此，任何给定的太阳能电池板在太空中的发电量都是在地面上的五倍左右。您还可以避免使用电池过夜的成本。实际上，在太空中这样做要便宜得多。我的预测是，它将成为迄今为止放置人工智能最便宜的地方。 36 个月或更短的时间内就会有空间。也许30个月。 36个月？
**English / Original**
The atmosphere alone results in about a 30% loss of energy. So any given solar panel can do about five times more power in space than on the ground. You also avoid the cost of having batteries to carry you through the night. It's actually much cheaper to do in space. My prediction is that it will be by far the cheapest place to put AI. It will be space in 36 months or less. Maybe 30 months. 36 months?
## 00:03:17
**中文**
少于36个月。当 GPU 发生故障（这种情况在训练中经常发生）时，您如何对其进行维修？实际上，这取决于 GPU 的到达时间。此时，我们发现我们的 GPU 相当可靠。还有婴儿死亡率，显然你可以直接解决这个问题。因此，您可以直接在地面上运行它们，并确认 GPU 不会造成婴儿死亡率。
**English / Original**
Less than 36 months. How do you service GPUs as they fail, which happens quite often in training? Actually, it depends on how recent the GPUs are that have arrived. At this point, we find our GPUs to be quite reliable. There's infant mortality, which you can obviously iron out on the ground. So you can just run them on the ground and confirm that you don't have infant mortality with the GPUs.
## 00:03:41
**中文**
但是，一旦它们开始工作，并且您已经过了 Nvidia 或任何芯片制造商（可能是 Tesla AI6 芯片或类似芯片，也可能是 TPU 或 Trainiums 或其他芯片）的初始调试周期，它们在某个点上就非常可靠。所以我认为服务问题不是问题。但你可以记住我的话。
**English / Original**
But once they start working and you're past the initial debug cycle of Nvidia or whoever's making the chips—could be Tesla AI6 chips or something like that, or it could be TPUs or Trainiums or whatever—they’re quite reliable past a certain point. So I don't think the servicing thing is an issue. But you can mark my words.
## 00:04:15
**中文**
36 个月内，但可能接近 30 个月，最经济上最有吸引力的人工智能应用领域将是太空。然后，在太空中生活将会变得更加美好。唯一可以真正扩展的地方是空间。一旦你开始思考你所利用的太阳能量的百分比，你就会意识到你必须去太空。在地球上你无法扩展太多。
**English / Original**
In 36 months, but probably closer to 30 months, the most economically compelling place to put AI will be space. It will then get ridiculously better to be in space. The only place you can really scale is space. Once you start thinking in terms of what percentage of the Sun's power you are harnessing, you realize you have to go to space. You can't scale very much on Earth.
## 00:04:47
**中文**
但需要明确的是，您所说的是太瓦级？是的。目前全美国平均仅使用半太瓦。因此，如果你说一太瓦，那将是美国目前消耗的电力的两倍。所以这是相当多的。你能想象建造那么多数据中心、那么多发电厂吗？那些生活在软件领域的人并没有意识到他们将在硬件方面接受惨痛的教训。
**English / Original**
But by very much, to be clear, you're talking terawatts? Yeah. All of the United States currently uses only half a terawatt on average. So if you say a terawatt, that would be twice as much electricity as the United States currently consumes. So that's quite a lot. Can you imagine building that many data centers, that many power plants? Those who have lived in software land don't realize they're about to have a hard lesson in hardware.
## 00:05:24
**中文**
建设发电厂实际上是非常困难的。您不仅需要发电厂，还需要所有电气设备。你需要电力变压器来运行人工智能变压器。现在，公用事业行业是一个非常缓慢的行业。他们与政府、公用事业委员会的阻抗相当匹配。它们的阻抗在字面上和象征上都匹配。
**English / Original**
It's actually very difficult to build power plants. You don't just need power plants, you need all of the electrical equipment. You need the electrical transformers to run the AI transformers. Now, the utility industry is a very slow industry. They pretty much impedance match to the government, to the Public Utility Commissions. They impedance match literally and figuratively.
## 00:05:52
**中文**
他们很慢，因为他们的过去很慢。因此，试图让他们快速行动是......您是否尝试过与具有大量电力的大规模公用事业公司达成互连协议？作为一名专业播客，我可以说事实上我没有。在这成为一个问题之前，他们需要更多的意见。他们必须进行一年的研究。一年后，他们会带着互连研究回来找您。你不能用自己的仪表后面的电源来解决这个问题吗？你可以建造发电厂。这就是我们在 xAI 为 Colossus 2 所做的事情。那么为什么要谈论网格呢？
**English / Original**
They're very slow, because their past has been very slow. So trying to get them to move fast is... Have you ever tried to do an interconnect agreement with a utility at scale, with a lot of power? As a professional podcaster, I can say that I have not, in fact. They need many more views before that becomes an issue. They have to do a study for a year. A year later, they'll come back to you with their interconnect study. Can't you solve this with your own behind the meter power stuff? You can build power plants. That's what we did at xAI, for Colossus 2. So why talk about the grid?
## 00:06:31
**中文**
为什么不直接将 GPU 和电源放在一起构建呢？这就是我们所做的。但我想说的是，为什么这不是一个通用的解决方案呢？您从哪里获得发电厂？当你谈论与公用事业合作的所有问题时，你可以只用数据中心建造私人发电厂。正确的。但这引出了一个问题：从哪里获得发电厂？发电厂制造商。
**English / Original**
Why not just build GPUs and power co-located? That's what we did. But I'm saying why isn't this a generalized solution? Where do you get the power plants from? When you're talking about all the issues working with utilities, you can just build private power plants with the data centers. Right. But it begs the question of where do you get the power plants from? The power plant makers.
## 00:06:51
**中文**
哦，我明白你在说什么。这基本上是燃气轮机积压吗？是的。您可以进一步深入到一个级别。涡轮机中的轮叶和叶片是限制因素，因为假设您使用燃气动力，铸造涡轮机中的叶片和轮叶是一个非常专业的工艺。扩展其他形式的权力非常困难。
**English / Original**
Oh, I see what you're saying. Is this the gas turbine backlog basically? Yes. You can drill down to a level further. It's the vanes and blades in the turbines that are the limiting factor because it’s a very specialized process to cast the blades and vanes in the turbines, assuming you’re using gas power. It's very difficult to scale other forms of power.
## 00:07:17
**中文**
你可以扩大太阳能规模，但目前美国进口太阳能的关税很高，而国内太阳能产量却少得可怜。为什么不做太阳能呢？这似乎是一个很好的埃隆型问题。我们要制造太阳能。好的。 SpaceX 和 Tesla 的太阳能电池年产量均达到 100 吉瓦。
**English / Original**
You can potentially scale solar, but the tariffs currently for importing solar in the US are gigantic and the domestic solar production is pitiful. Why not make solar? That seems like a good Elon-shaped problem. We are going to make solar. Okay. Both SpaceX and Tesla are building towards 100 gigawatts a year of solar cell production.
## 00:07:40
**中文**
堆栈有多低？从多晶硅到晶圆再到最终的面板？我认为你必须完成从原材料到完成电池的全部工作。现在，如果进入太空，成本会更低，而且制造进入太空的太阳能电池也更容易，因为它们不需要太多玻璃。它们不需要沉重的框架，因为它们不必承受天气事件。太空中没有天气。因此，它实际上是一种比地面太阳能电池更便宜的太空太阳能电池。有没有办法在未来 36 个月内以您需要的价格便宜地获得它们？太阳能电池已经非常便宜。
**English / Original**
How low down the stack? From polysilicon up to the wafer to the final panel? I think you've got to do the whole thing from raw materials to finish the cell. Now, if it's going to space, it costs less and it's easier to make solar cells that go to space because they don't need much glass. They don't need heavy framing because they don't have to survive weather events. There's no weather in space. So it's actually a cheaper solar cell that goes to space than the one on the ground. Is there a path to getting them as cheap as you need in the next 36 months? Solar cells are already very cheap.
## 00:08:19
**中文**
它们非常便宜。我认为中国的太阳能电池价格约为 0.25-30 美元/瓦或类似的价格。真是便宜得离谱。现在把它放进太空，价格便宜五倍。事实上，它不是便宜五倍，而是便宜十倍，因为你不需要任何电池。因此，当您访问空间的成本变低时，迄今为止最便宜且最具可扩展性的生成代币的方式就是空间。还差得很远。
**English / Original**
They're farcically cheap. I think solar cells in China are around $0.25-30/watt or something like that. It's absurdly cheap. Now put it in space, and it's five times cheaper. In fact, it's not five times cheaper, it's 10 times cheaper because you don't need any batteries. So the moment your cost of access to space becomes low, by far the cheapest and most scalable way to generate tokens is space. It's not even close.
## 00:08:58
**中文**
这将更容易扩展一个数量级。关键是你无法在地面上进行缩放。你就是不会。人们将在发电方面陷入困境。他们已经是了。为了获得千兆瓦的在线电力，xAI 团队必须完成一系列的奇迹，数量是疯狂的。我们必须将一大堆涡轮机组合在一起。
**English / Original**
It'll be an order of magnitude easier to scale. The point is you won't be able to scale on the ground. You just won't. People are going to hit the wall big time on power generation. They already are. The number of miracles in series that the xAI team had to accomplish in order to get a gigawatt of power online was crazy. We had to gang together a whole bunch of turbines.
## 00:09:28
**中文**
然后，我们在田纳西州遇到了许可证问题，不得不越过边境前往密西西比州，幸运的是，密西西比州距离我们只有几英里。但我们仍然必须运行几英里的高电力线路并在密西西比州建造发电厂。建造它非常困难。人们不了解在发电水平上实际需要多少电力才能为数据中心供电。
**English / Original**
We then had permit issues in Tennessee and had to go across the border to Mississippi, which is fortunately only a few miles away. But we still then had to run the high power lines a few miles and build the power plant in Mississippi. It was very difficult to build that. People don't understand how much electricity you actually need at the generation level in order to power a data center.
## 00:09:54
**中文**
因为新手会查看 GB300 的功耗，然后将其乘以一个数，然后认为这就是您需要的电量。所有的冷却和一切。醒来吧。那完全是个菜鸟，你以前从未做过任何硬件。除了 GB300 之外，您还必须为所有网络硬件供电。有一大堆 CPU 和存储方面的事情正在发生。您必须根据您的峰值冷却要求来确定尺寸。这意味着，即使在一年中最糟糕的一天中最糟糕的时刻，你也能冷静下来吗？孟菲斯的天气非常热。
**English / Original**
Because the noobs will look at the power consumption of, say a GB300, and multiply that by a thing and then think that's the amount of power you need. All the cooling and everything. Wake up. That's a total noob, you’ve never done any hardware in your life before. Besides the GB300, you've got to power all of the networking hardware. There's a whole bunch of CPU and storage stuff that's happening. You've got to size for your peak cooling requirements. That means, can you cool even on the worst hour of the worst day of the year? It gets pretty frigging hot in Memphis.
## 00:10:34
**中文**
因此，仅用于冷却的功率就会增加 40%。假设您不希望数据中心在炎热的日子关闭并且您希望继续运行。除此之外还有另一个乘法元素，即您是否假设您的发电从未出现过任何问题？实际上，有时我们必须使发电机和部分电力离线才能进行维修。
**English / Original**
So you're going to have a 40% increase on your power just for cooling. That’s assuming you don't want your data center to turn off on hot days and you want to keep going. There's another multiplicative element on top of that which is, are you assuming that you never have any hiccups in your power generation? Actually, sometimes we have to take the generators, some of the power, offline in order to service it.
## 00:11:02
**中文**
好的，现在您再添加 20-25% 的乘数，因为您必须假设必须离线供电才能对其进行维修。因此，我们的实际估计：每 110,000 GB300（包括网络、CPU、存储、冷却、服务功率余量）大约为 300 兆瓦。抱歉，再说一遍。
**English / Original**
Okay, now you add another 20-25% multiplier on that, because you've got to assume that you've got to take power offline to service it. So our actual estimate: every 110,000 GB300s—inclusive of networking, CPU, storage, cooling, margin for servicing power—is roughly 300 megawatts. Sorry, say that again.
## 00:11:40
**中文**
在一代级别，为 330,000 GB 300 提供服务（包括所有相关的支持网络和其他一切、峰值冷却以及一些功率裕度储备）可能需要大约 1 千兆瓦。我可以问一个非常幼稚的问题吗？你正在描述在地球上做这些事情的工程细节。
**English / Original**
What you probably need at the generation level to service 330,000 GB 300s—including all of the associated support networking and everything else, and the peak cooling, and to have some power margin reserve—is roughly a gigawatt. Can I ask a very naive question? You're describing the engineering details of doing this stuff on Earth.
## 00:12:07
**中文**
但在太空中实现这一点也存在类似的工程困难。如何用轨道激光器等取代无限带宽？如何使其具有抗辐射能力？我不知道工程的细节，但从根本上来说，为什么认为那些以前从未需要解决的挑战最终会比在地球上建造更多涡轮机更容易？
**English / Original**
But then there's analogous engineering difficulties of doing it in space. How do you replace infinite bandwidth with orbital lasers, et cetera, et cetera? How do you make it resistant to radiation? I don't know the details of the engineering, but fundamentally, what is the reason to think those challenges which have never had to be addressed before will end up being easier than just building more turbines on Earth?
## 00:12:30
**中文**
地球上有一些公司制造涡轮机。他们可以制造更多涡轮机，对吗？再次尝试一下，然后你就会看到。涡轮机到 2030 年都已售完。你们考虑过自己制造吗？为了提供足够的电力，我认为 SpaceX 和特斯拉可能必须在内部制造涡轮叶片、轮叶和叶片。
**English / Original**
There are companies that build turbines on Earth. They can make more turbines, right? Again, try doing it and then you'll see. The turbines are sold out through 2030. Have you guys considered making your own? In order to bring enough power online, I think SpaceX and Tesla will probably have to make the turbine blades, the vanes and blades, internally.
## 00:13:02
**中文**
但只是叶片还是涡轮机？限制因素是……你可以获得除了刀片之外的所有东西。他们称它们为叶片和风向标。您可以在叶片和叶片出现前 12 至 18 个月获得该信息。限制因素是轮叶和叶片。世界上只有三家铸造公司生产这些产品，而且积压严重。
**English / Original**
But just the blades or the turbines? The limiting factor... you can get everything except the blades. They call them blades and vanes. You can get that 12 to 18 months before the vanes and blades. The limiting factor is the vanes and blades. There are only three casting companies in the world that make these, and they're massively backlogged.
## 00:13:27
**中文**
这是西门子、通用电气这些家伙，还是一家子公司？不是，是其他公司。有时他们内部有一点铸造能力。但我只是说你可以打电话给任何涡轮机制造商，他们会告诉你。这不是绝密。现在可能就在互联网上。如果没有关税，Colossus 会采用太阳能吗？
**English / Original**
Is this Siemens, GE, those guys, or is it a sub company? No, it's other companies. Sometimes they have a little bit of casting capability in-house. But I'm just saying you can just call any of the turbine makers and they will tell you. It's not top secret. It’s probably on the internet right now. If it wasn't for the tariffs, would Colossus be solar-powered?
## 00:13:48
**中文**
是的，用太阳能供电会容易得多。关税太疯狂了，百分之几百。有些人你不认识吗？总统……我们并不在所有事情上都达成一致，而且本届政府也不是太阳能的最大粉丝。我们还需要土地、许可证和一切。因此，如果你试图快速行动，我确实认为在地球上扩展太阳能是一个好方法，但你确实需要一些时间来找到土地，获得许可，获得太阳能，并将其与电池配对。
**English / Original**
It would be much easier to make it solar powered, yeah. The tariffs are nuts, several hundred percent. Don't you know some people? The president has... we don't agree on everything and this administration is not the biggest fan of solar. We also need the land, the permits, and everything. So if you try to move very fast, I do think scaling solar on Earth is a good way to go, but you do need some amount of time to find the land, get the permits, get the solar, pair that with the batteries.
## 00:14:33
**中文**
为什么自己的太阳能生产不起作用？你说得对，你最终会耗尽土地，但德克萨斯州有很多土地。内华达州有很多土地，包括私人土地。并不全是公有土地。所以你至少能够获得下一个巨像以及之后的下一个。
**English / Original**
Why would it not work to stand up your own solar production? You're right that you eventually run out of land, but there's a lot of land here in Texas. There's a lot of land in Nevada, including private land. It's not all publicly-owned land. So you'd be able to at least get the next Colossus and the next one after that.
## 00:14:49
**中文**
在某个时刻，你碰壁了。但暂时这样不行吗？正如我所说，我们正在扩大太阳能生产。太阳能电池的物理生产规模有一定的速度。我们将尽快扩大国内生产规模。你在特斯拉生产太阳能电池吗？ Tesla 和 SpaceX 都要求每年提供 100 吉瓦的太阳能。
**English / Original**
At a certain point, you hit a wall. But wouldn't that work for the moment? As I said, we are scaling solar production. There's a rate at which you can scale physical production of solar cells. We're going as fast as possible in scaling domestic production. You're making the solar cells at Tesla? Both Tesla and SpaceX have a mandate to get to 100 gigawatts a year of solar.
## 00:15:14
**中文**
说到年容量，我很好奇，五年后，地球上的装机容量会是多少……？五年是一段很长的时间。那么在太空中呢？我特意选择了五年，因为它已经过了“一旦我们启动并运行”的门槛。那么五年后，地球上和太空中安装的人工智能容量是多少？如果从现在起五年后，我认为太空中的人工智能每年发射的数量可能相当于地球上所有人工智能的总和。
**English / Original**
Speaking of the annual capacity, I'm curious, in five years time let's say, what will the installed capacity be on Earth…? Five years is a long time. And in space? I deliberately pick five years because it's after your "once we're up and running" threshold. So in five years time what's the on-Earth versus in-space installed AI capacity? If you say five years from now, I think probably AI in space will be launching every year the sum total of all AI on Earth.
## 00:15:53
**中文**
这意味着，五年后，我的预测是，我们每年在太空发射和运行的人工智能数量将超过地球上的累计总数。也就是说……我预计从现在起五年后，太空中人工智能的发电量至少会达到每年数百吉瓦，并且还在不断增加。我认为，在火箭面临燃料供应挑战之前，你可以在太空中每年实现大约太瓦的人工智能。
**English / Original**
Meaning, five years from now, my prediction is we will launch and be operating every year more AI in space than the cumulative total on Earth. Which is... I would expect it to be at least, five years from now, a few hundred gigawatts per year of AI in space and rising. I think you can get to around a terawatt a year of AI in space before you start having fuel supply challenges for the rocket.
## 00:16:33
**中文**
好的，但是您认为五年内每年可以获得数百吉瓦的电力吗？是的。因此，100 吉瓦，取决于包含太阳能电池阵列和散热器等的整个系统的具体功率，大约相当于 10,000 次星际飞船的发射。是的。你想在一年内做到这一点。这就像每小时发射一艘星际飞船。这座城市正在发生这样的事？带我穿越一个每小时都有一艘星际飞船发射的世界。我的意思是，与航空公司、飞机相比，这实际上是一个较低的费率。有很多机场。
**English / Original**
Okay, but you think you can get hundreds of gigawatts per year in five years time? Yes. So 100 gigawatts, depending on the specific power of the whole system with solar arrays and radiators and everything, is on the order of 10,000 Starship launches. Yes. You want to do that in one year. So that's like one Starship launch every hour. That's happening in this city? Walk me through a world where there's a Starship launch every single hour. I mean, that's actually a lower rate compared to airlines, aircraft. There's a lot of airports.
## 00:17:11
**中文**
很多机场。你必须发射到极地轨道。不，它不一定是极性的。太阳同步有一定的价值，但我认为实际上，如果你飞得足够高，你就会开始摆脱地球的阴影。每年需要多少艘实体星舰才能进行 10,000 次发射？我认为我们不需要多于...你可能只需 20 或 30 个就可以做到。
**English / Original**
A lot of airports. And you’ve got to launch into the polar orbit. No, it doesn't have to be polar. There's some value to sun-synchronous, but I think actually, if you just go high enough, you start getting out of Earth's shadow. How many physical Starships are needed to do 10,000 launches a year? I don't think we'll need more than... You could probably do it with as few as 20 or 30.
## 00:17:46
**中文**
这实际上取决于多快……飞船必须绕地球一周，而飞船的地面轨道必须通过发射台返回。因此，如果您可以每 30 小时使用一艘船，那么您可以使用 30 艘船来完成。但我们会制造更多的船只。 SpaceX 正准备每年进行 10,000 次发射，甚至可能每年进行 20 或 30,000 次发射。
**English / Original**
It really depends on how quickly… The ship has to go around the Earth and the ground track for the ship has to come back over the launch pad. So if you can use a ship every, say 30 hours, you could do it with 30 ships. But we'll make more ships than that. SpaceX is gearing up to do 10,000 launches a year, and maybe even 20 or 30,000 launches a year.
## 00:18:14
**中文**
这个想法基本上是成为一个超大规模企业，成为一个预言机，并将这种能力借给其他人吗？据推测，SpaceX 是发射这一切的人。那么，SpaceX 将成为一家超大规模企业吗？超超。如果我的一些预测成真，SpaceX 发射的人工智能数量将超过地球上其他所有物体的总和。
**English / Original**
Is the idea to become basically a hyperscaler, become an Oracle, and lend this capacity to other people? Presumably, SpaceX is the one launching all this. So, SpaceX is going to become a hyperscaler? Hyper-hyper. If some of my predictions come true, SpaceX will launch more AI than the cumulative amount on Earth of everything else combined.
## 00:18:39
**中文**
这主要是推断还是？大多数人工智能都是推理。以训练为目的的推理已经是大部分训练了。有一种说法称，围绕 SpaceX IPO 的讨论发生变化是因为 SpaceX 之前的资本效率非常高。开发起来并没有那么昂贵。尽管听起来很昂贵，但实际上它的运营方式非常资本高效。而现在你需要的资金超出了私募市场所能筹集到的资金。正如我们从人工智能实验室看到的那样，私募市场可以容纳数百亿美元的融资，但不能超过这个数字。
**English / Original**
Is this mostly inference or? Most AI will be inference. Already, inference for the purpose of training is most training. There's a narrative that the change in discussion around a SpaceX IPO is because previously SpaceX was very capital efficient. It wasn't that expensive to develop. Even though it sounds expensive, it's actually very capital efficient in how it runs. Whereas now you're going to need more capital than just can be raised in the private markets. The private markets can accommodate raises of—as we've seen from the AI labs—tens of billions of dollars, but not beyond that.
## 00:19:16
**中文**
是不是每年只需要数百亿美元以上？这就是你要公开的原因？我在谈论可能上市的公司时必须小心。这对你来说从来都不是问题，埃隆。这些事情是要付出代价的。请为我们介绍一下公开市场和私人市场之间资本市场的深度。
**English / Original**
Is it that you'll just need more than tens of billions of dollars per year? That's why you'd take it public? I have to be careful about saying things about companies that might go public. That’s never been a problem for you, Elon. There's a price to pay for these things. Make some general statements for us about the depth of the capital markets between public and private markets.
## 00:19:42
**中文**
还有更多的可用资金...非常一般。公开市场上的可用资本显然比私人市场上的资本多得多。资本可能增加 100 倍，但远不止 10 倍。对于资本密集型的行业来说，如果你把房地产视为一个巨大的行业，每年在行业层面筹集大量资金，那么它们往往是通过债务融资的，因为当你部署这么多钱时，你实际上已经拥有了一个清晰的收入来源。
**English / Original**
There's a lot more capital available... Very general. There's obviously a lot more capital available in the public markets than private. It might be 100x more capital, but it's way more than 10x. Isn't it also the case that with things that tend to be very capital intensive—if you look at, say, real estate as a huge industry, that raises a lot of money each year at an industry level—they tend to be debt financed because by the time you're deploying that much money, you actually have a pretty— You have a clear revenue stream.
## 00:20:18
**中文**
没错，而且是短期回报。即使数据中心的扩建也能看到这一点，众所周知，这些数据中心是由私人信贷行业资助的。为什么不只是债务融资？速度很重要。我通常会做...我只是反复解决限制因素。无论速度的限制因素是什么，我都会解决这个问题。如果资本是限制因素，那么我会解决资本问题。如果这不是限制因素，我会解决其他问题。根据您对特斯拉的陈述
**English / Original**
Exactly, and a near-term return. You see this even with the data center build-outs, which are famously being financed by the private credit industry. Why not just debt finance? Speed is important. I'm generally going to do the thing that... I just repeatedly tackle the limiting factor. Whatever the limiting factor is on speed, I'm going to tackle that. If capital is the limiting factor, then I'll solve for capital. If it's not the limiting factor, I'll solve for something else. Based on your statements about Tesla
## 00:21:00
**中文**
作为公开，我不会猜到你认为快速行动的方法就是公开。
**English / Original**
and being public, I wouldn't have guessed that you thought the way to move fast is to be public.
## 00:21:08
**中文**
通常情况下，我会说这是真的。就像我说的，我想更详细地谈论它，但问题是，如果你在上市公司上市之前谈论它们，你就会遇到麻烦，然后你就必须推迟你的发行。正如你所说，你正在解决速度问题。是的，完全正确。你不能炒作可能上市的公司。所以这就是为什么我们在这里必须要小心一些。
**English / Original**
Normally, I would say that's true. Like I said, I'd like to talk about it in some more detail, but the problem is if you talk about public companies before they become public, you get into trouble, and then you have to delay your offering. And as you said, you’re solving for speed. Yes, exactly. You can't hype companies that might go public. So that's why we have to be a little careful here.
## 00:21:35
**中文**
但我们可以谈论物理。从长远来看，地球只能接收到太阳能量的十亿分之一左右。太阳基本上就是所有的能量。这是非常重要的一点，因为有时人们会谈论模块化核反应堆或地球上的各种聚变。
**English / Original**
But we can talk about physics. The way you think about scaling long-term is that Earth only receives about half a billionth of the Sun's energy. The Sun is essentially all the energy. This is a very important point to appreciate because sometimes people will talk about modular nuclear reactors or various fusion on Earth.
## 00:22:02
**中文**
但你必须退后一步说，如果你要攀登卡尔达肖夫尺度并利用一定比例的太阳能……假设你想利用百万分之一的太阳能，这听起来相当小。粗略地说，这将比我们目前在地球上为所有文明生产的电力多 100,000 倍。给予或采取一个数量级。
**English / Original**
But you have to step back a second and say, if you're going to climb the Kardashev scale and harness some nontrivial percentage of the sun's energy… Let's say you wanted to harness a millionth of the sun's energy, which sounds pretty small. That would be about, call it roughly, 100,000x more electricity than we currently generate on Earth for all of civilization. Give or take an order of magnitude.
## 00:22:37
**中文**
显然，扩大规模的唯一方法是利用太阳能进入太空。从地球发射，每年可以获得大约一太瓦的能量。除此之外，你还想从月球发射。你想在月球上拥有一个大众司机。有了月球上的大规模驱动器，你每年可能可以发电一拍瓦。我们谈论的是这些类型的数字，太瓦级的计算量。
**English / Original**
Obviously, the only way to scale is to go to space with solar. Launching from Earth, you can get to about a terawatt per year. Beyond that, you want to launch from the moon. You want to have a mass driver on the moon. With that mass driver on the moon, you could do probably a petawatt per year. We're talking these kinds of numbers, terawatts of compute.
## 00:23:02
**中文**
据推测，无论您谈论的是陆地还是太空，在这一点之前很久很久，您都会遇到……也许太阳能电池板效率更高，但您仍然需要芯片。你仍然需要逻辑和记忆等等。你将需要制造更多的芯片并使它们变得更便宜。目前世界上的计算能力可能为 20-25 吉瓦。
**English / Original**
Presumably, whether you're talking about land or space, far, far before this point, you run into... Maybe the solar panels are more efficient, but you still need the chips. You still need the logic and the memory and so forth. You're going to need to build a lot more chips and make them much cheaper. Right now the world has maybe 20-25 gigawatts of compute.
## 00:23:29
**中文**
到 2030 年，我们如何获得太瓦逻辑？我想我们将需要一些非常大的芯片工厂。告诉我吧。我已经公开提到过做一种 TeraFab 的想法，Tera 是新的 Giga。我觉得特斯拉的命名方案非常吸引人，你看的是公制刻度。您处于堆栈的哪个级别？
**English / Original**
How are we getting a terawatt of logic by 2030? I guess we're going to need some very big chip fabs. Tell me about it. I've mentioned publicly the idea of doing a sort of a TeraFab, Tera being the new Giga. I feel like the naming scheme of Tesla, which has been very catchy, is you looking at the metric scale. At what level of the stack are you?
## 00:23:56
**中文**
您是否正在建造洁净室，然后与现有的晶圆厂合作以获得工艺技术并从他们那里购买工具？那里有什么计划？好吧，你不能与现有的晶圆厂合作，因为它们的产量不够。芯片体积太小。但对于工艺技术呢？知识产权合作伙伴。如今的晶圆厂基本上都使用来自五家公司的机器。所以你有 ASML、Tokyo Electron、KLA-Tencor 等等。所以一开始我想你会
**English / Original**
Are you building the clean room and then partnering with an existing fab to get the process technology and buying the tools from them? What is the plan there? Well, you can't partner with existing fabs because they can't output enough. The chip volume is too low. But for the process technology? Partner for the IP. The fabs today all basically use machines from like five companies. So you've got ASML, Tokyo Electron, KLA-Tencor, et cetera. So at first, I think you'd
## 00:24:37
**中文**
必须从他们那里获得设备，然后对其进行修改或与他们合作以增加产量。
**English / Original**
have to get equipment from them and then modify it or work with them to increase the volume.
## 00:24:45
**中文**
但我认为你可能必须以不同的方式构建。合乎逻辑的做法是以非常规的方式使用常规设备来扩大规模，然后开始修改设备以提高生产率。无聊的公司风格。是的。您可以购买一台现有的掘进机，然后首先弄清楚如何挖掘隧道，然后设计一台更好的机器，速度要快几个数量级。这是一个非常简单的镜头。我们可以对技术及其难度进行分类。一种分类可能是看事物
**English / Original**
But I think you'd have to build perhaps in a different way. The logical thing to do is to use conventional equipment in an unconventional way to get to scale, and then start modifying the equipment to increase the rate. Boring Company-style. Yeah. You sort of buy an existing boring machine and then figure out how to dig tunnels in the first place and then design a much better machine that's some orders of magnitude faster. Here's a very simple lens. We can categorize technologies and how hard they are. One categorization could be to look at things
## 00:25:27
**中文**
中国还没有成功做到这一点。如果你看看中国制造业，他们在尖端芯片、尖端涡轮发动机等方面仍然落后。那么，中国未能成功复制台积电这一事实是否让您对困难感到犹豫？或者您认为出于某种原因这不是真的？他们不是没有复制台积电，而是没有复制ASML。这是限制因素。
**English / Original**
that China has not succeeded in doing. If you look at Chinese manufacturing, they’re still behind on leading-edge chips and still behind on leading-edge turbine engines and things like that. So does the fact that China has not successfully replicated TSMC give you any pause about the difficulty? Or do you think that's not true for some reason? It's not that they have not replicated TSMC, they have not replicated ASML. That's the limiting factor.
## 00:25:59
**中文**
所以你认为这本质上只是制裁？是的，如果中国能购买 2-3 纳米的话，他们就会生产大量芯片。但他们不能最近购买它们吗？不，好吧。 ASML 禁令已经实施有一段时间了。但我认为中国将在三四年内制造出相当引人注目的芯片。
**English / Original**
So you think it's just the sanctions, essentially? Yeah, China would be outputting vast numbers of chips if they could buy 2-3 nanometers. But couldn't they up to relatively recently buy them? No. Okay. The ASML ban has been in place for a while. But I think China's going to be making pretty compelling chips in three or four years.
## 00:26:19
**中文**
你会考虑制造 ASML 机器吗？ “我还不知道”是正确的答案。比如说，在 36 个月内达到一个大体积，使火箭有效载荷与轨道相匹配……如果我们要向轨道发射 100 万吨，比如说三四年后，类似的事情……我们每吨要发射 100 千瓦的功率。所以这意味着我们需要
**English / Original**
Would you consider making the ASML machines? "I don't know yet" is the right answer. To reach a large volume in, say, 36 months, to match the rocket payload to orbit… If we're doing a million tons to orbit in, let's say three or four years from now, something like that… We're doing 100 kilowatts per ton. So that means we need
## 00:26:58
**中文**
每年至少 100 吉瓦的太阳能。我们需要等量的筹码。
**English / Original**
at least 100 gigawatts per year of solar. We'll need an equivalent amount of chips.
## 00:27:08
**中文**
您需要价值 100 吉瓦的芯片。你必须匹配这些东西：轨道质量、发电量和芯片。我想说我最关心的实际上是记忆力。创建逻辑芯片的途径比拥有足够的内存来支持逻辑芯片的途径更为明显。这就是为什么你会看到 DDR 价格暴涨以及这些迷因。你被困在荒岛上。
**English / Original**
You need 100 gigawatts worth of chips. You've got to match these things: the mass to orbit, the power generation, and the chips. I'd say my biggest concern actually is memory. The path to creating logic chips is more obvious than the path to having sufficient memory to support logic chips. That's why you see DDR prices going ballistic and these memes. You're marooned on a desert island.
## 00:27:41
**中文**
你在沙子上写下“帮助我”。没有人来。你写“DDR RAM”。船只蜂拥而至。我很想听听你们关于晶圆厂的制造理念。我对这个话题一无所知。我还不知道如何建造晶圆厂。我会弄清楚的。显然，我从未建造过晶圆厂。听起来好像你认为台湾这 10,000 名博士的工艺知识清楚地知道等离子室中的气体以及工具上的设置，你可以删除这些步骤。
**English / Original**
You write "Help me" on the sand. Nobody comes. You write "DDR RAM." Ships come swarming in. I'd love to hear your manufacturing philosophy around fabs. I know nothing about the topic. I don't know how to build a fab yet. I'll figure it out. Obviously, I've never built a fab. It sounds like you think the process knowledge of these 10,000 PhDs in Taiwan who know exactly what gas goes in the plasma chamber and what settings to put on the tool, you can just delete those steps.
## 00:28:16
**中文**
从根本上说，它是关于获得洁净室、获得工具并弄清楚它。我不认为这是博士学位。大部分人都不是博士学位。大多数工程是由没有博士学位的人完成的。你们有博士学位吗？不，好吧。我们还没有成功建造任何晶圆厂，因此您不应该向我们寻求晶圆厂建议。
**English / Original**
Fundamentally, it's about getting the clean room, getting the tools, and figuring it out. I don't think it's PhDs. It's mostly people who are not PhDs. Most engineering is done by people who don't have PhDs. Do you guys have PhDs? No. Okay. We also haven't successfully built any fabs, so you shouldn't be coming to us for fab advice.
## 00:28:39
**中文**
我认为这些东西不需要博士学位。但你确实需要有能力的人员。目前，特斯拉正全力以赴，以尽可能快的速度实现最大产量，将 Tesla AI5 芯片设计投入生产，然后达到规模化。希望这可能会在明年第二季度左右发生。
**English / Original**
I don't think you need PhDs for that stuff. But you do need competent personnel. Right now, Tesla is pedal to the metal, max production of going as fast as possible to get Tesla AI5 chip design into production and then reaching scale. That'll probably happen around the second quarter-ish of next year, hopefully.
## 00:29:13
**中文**
AI6有望在不到一年后推出。我们已经确保了所有芯片工厂的生产。是的。但目前台积电晶圆厂的产能有限。是的。我们将使用台湾台积电、韩国三星、亚利桑那州台积电、德克萨斯州三星。我们仍然——您已经预订了所有容量。是的。我问台积电或三星，“好吧，量产的时间是多少？”
**English / Original**
AI6 would hopefully follow less than a year later. We've secured all the chip fab production that we can. Yes. But you're currently limited on TSMC fab capacity. Yeah. We'll be using TSMC Taiwan, Samsung Korea, TSMC Arizona, Samsung Texas. And we still— You've booked out all the capacity. Yes. I ask TSMC or Samsung, "okay, what's the timeframe to get to volume production?"
## 00:29:49
**中文**
关键是，你必须建造晶圆厂并开始生产，然后你必须攀登良率曲线并以高良率实现批量生产。从开始到结束，整整五年的时间。所以限制因素是芯片。进入太空的限制因素是芯片，而进入太空之前的限制因素是功率。你为什么不做 Jensen 的事情，直接向台积电预付费用，让台积电为你建造更多晶圆厂呢？我已经告诉他们了。
**English / Original**
The point is, you've got to build the fab and you've got to start production, then you've got to climb the yield curve and reach volume production at high yield. That, from start to finish, is a five-year period. So the limiting factor is chips. The limiting factor once you can get to space is chips, but the limiting factor before you can get to space is power. Why don't you do the Jensen thing and just prepay TSMC to build more fabs for you? I've already told them that.
## 00:30:19
**中文**
但他们不会拿你的钱吗？这是怎么回事？他们正在以最快的速度建造晶圆厂。三星亦是如此。他们全力以赴。他们会尽可能快地将球撞到墙上。还是不够快。就像我说的，我认为到今年年底，芯片产量可能会超过芯片的启动能力。
**English / Original**
But they won't take your money? What's going on? They're building fabs as fast as they can. So is Samsung. They're pedal to the metal. They're going balls to the wall, as fast as they can. It’s still not fast enough. Like I said, I think towards the end of this year, chip production will probably outpace the ability to turn chips on.
## 00:30:53
**中文**
但是，一旦您能够进入太空并解除电力限制，您现在每年可以在太空中提供数百吉瓦的电力。再次记住，美国的平均用电量为 500 吉瓦。因此，如果你一年发射 200 吉瓦的电力到太空，那么你每两年半就绕了一圈美国。
**English / Original**
But once you can get to space and unlock the power constraint, you can now do hundreds of gigawatts per year of power in space. Again, bearing in mind that average power usage in the US is 500 gigawatts. So if you're launching, say 200 gigawatts, a year to space, you're sort of lapping the US every two and a half years.
## 00:31:17
**中文**
所有美国的电力生产，这是一个非常巨大的数量。从现在到那时，服务器端计算、集中计算的限制将是电力。我的猜测是，到今年年底，人们将开始无法为大型集群打开芯片。芯片会堆积起来，无法开机。
**English / Original**
All US electricity production, this is a very huge amount. Between now and then, the constraint for server-side compute, concentrated compute, will be electricity. My guess is that people start getting to the point where they can't turn the chips on for large clusters towards the end of this year. The chips are going to be piling up and won't be able to be turned on.
## 00:31:51
**中文**
现在对于边缘计算来说，情况就不同了。对于特斯拉来说，AI5 芯片将被应用到我们的 Optimus 机器人中。如果你有人工智能边缘计算，那就是分布式电源。现在电力分布在很大的区域。它不集中。如果你可以在晚上充电，你实际上可以更有效地使用电网。因为美国实际峰值发电量超过1000吉瓦。但是平均用电量，因为昼夜循环，是500。所以如果你能在晚上充电，
**English / Original**
Now for edge compute it’s a different story. For Tesla, the AI5 chip is going into our Optimus robot. If you have AI edge compute, that's distributed power. Now the power is distributed over a large area. It's not concentrated. If you can charge at night, you can actually use the grid much more effectively. Because the actual peak power production in the US is over 1,000 gigawatts. But the average power usage, because the day-night cycle, is 500. So if you can charge at night,
## 00:32:30
**中文**
夜间可增加 500 吉瓦的发电量。
**English / Original**
there's an incremental 500 gigawatts that you can generate at night.
## 00:32:38
**中文**
这就是为什么特斯拉在边缘计算方面不受限制。我们可以制造大量的芯片来制造大量的机器人和汽车。但如果你试图集中计算，那么打开它就会遇到很多麻烦。我发现 SpaceX 业务的非凡之处在于，最终目标是到达火星，但你在实现这一目标的过程中不断寻找方法，不断产生增量收入，以进入下一阶段和下一阶段。所以对于猎鹰 9 号来说，它就是星链。
**English / Original**
So that's why Tesla, for edge compute, is not constrained. We can make a lot of chips to make a very large number of robots and cars. But if you try to concentrate that compute, you're going to have a lot of trouble turning it on. What I find remarkable about the SpaceX business is the end goal is to get to Mars, but you keep finding ways on the way there to keep generating incremental revenue to get to the next stage and the next stage. So for Falcon 9, it's Starlink.
## 00:33:11
**中文**
现在对于 Starship 来说，它可能会成为轨道数据中心。就像，你会发现你的下一个火箭、下一个火箭和下一个规模化的这些无限弹性的边际用例。你可以看到这对我来说似乎是一个模拟。或者我是电子游戏中某个人的化身之类的？因为所有这些疯狂的事情发生的可能性有多大？我的意思是，火箭、芯片、机器人和太空太阳能，更不用说月球上的质量驱动器了。
**English / Original**
Now for Starship, it is potentially going to be orbital data centers. Like, you find these infinitely elastic, marginal use cases of your next rocket, and your next rocket, and next scale up. You can see how this might seem like a simulation to me. Or am I someone's avatar in a video game or something? Because what are the odds that all these crazy things should be happening? I mean, rockets and chips and robots and space solar power, not to mention the mass driver on the moon.
## 00:33:50
**中文**
我真的很想看看。你能想象某个大众司机会发出“嘭嘭”的声音吗？它以每秒两公里半的速度将太阳能人工智能卫星一颗接一颗地送入太空，然后将它们射入深空。那将是一个值得一看的景象。我的意思是，我会看的。就像网络摄像头上的直播一样吗？
**English / Original**
I really want to see that. Can you imagine some mass driver that's just going like shoom shoom? It's sending solar-powered AI satellites into space one after another at two and a half kilometers per second, just shooting them into deep space. That would be a sight to see. I mean, I'd watch that. Just like a live stream of it on a webcam?
## 00:34:19
**中文**
是啊，是啊，一个又一个，只是将人工智能卫星发射到深空，每年十亿或一百亿吨。抱歉，月球上的卫星是你们制造的吗？是的。我懂了。所以你把原材料送到月球，然后在那里制造它们。嗯，月球土壤含有 20% 的硅或类似的东西。所以你可以在月球上开采硅，精炼它，并在月球上制造太阳能电池和散热器。你用铝制造散热器。
**English / Original**
Yeah, yeah, just one after another, just shooting AI satellites into deep space, a billion or 10 billion tons a year. I'm sorry, you manufacture the satellites on the moon? Yeah. I see. So you send the raw materials to the moon and then manufacture them there. Well, the lunar soil is 20% silicon or something like that. So you can mine the silicon on the moon, refine it, and create the solar cells and the radiators on the moon. You make the radiators out of aluminum.
## 00:34:53
**中文**
因此，月球上有大量的硅和铝可以用来制造电池和散热器。你可以从地球发送这些芯片，因为它们很轻。也许有一天你也会在月球上制作它们。就像我说的，这确实看起来像是一种电子游戏的情况，很难但并非不可能达到下一个级别。我看不出有什么办法可以每年从地球发射 500-1,000 太瓦的能量。我同意。
**English / Original**
So there's plenty of silicon and aluminum on the moon to make the cells and the radiators. The chips you could send from Earth because they're pretty light. Maybe at some point you make them on the moon, too. Like I said, it does seem like a sort of a video game situation where it's difficult but not impossible to get to the next level. I don't see any way that you could do 500-1,000 terawatts per year launched from Earth. I agree.
## 00:35:33
**中文**
但你可以在月球上做到这一点。我可以缩小范围询问 SpaceX 的任务吗？
**English / Original**
But you could do that from the Moon. Can I zoom out and ask about the SpaceX mission?
## 00:36:50
**中文**
我想你已经说过，我们必须到达火星，这样我们才能确保地球、文明、意识和所有幸存的东西发生什么事。是的。当你向火星发送东西时，Grok 已经和你一起在那艘船上了，对吗？所以，如果 Grok 不再是终结者……你担心的主要风险是人工智能，为什么它不会跟着你去火星呢？
**English / Original**
I think you've said that we've got to get to Mars so we can make sure that if something happens to Earth, civilization, consciousness, and all that survives. Yes. By the time you're sending stuff to Mars, Grok is on that ship with you, right? So if Grok's gone Terminator… The main risk you're worried about is AI, why doesn't that follow you to Mars?
## 00:37:08
**中文**
我不确定人工智能是我担心的主要风险。重要的是意识。我认为可以说是大多数意识，或者说大多数智能——当然意识更多的是一个有争议的事情……未来绝大多数智能将是人工智能。人工智能将超越……硅与生物的智能将达到多少拍瓦？基本上，如果目前的趋势继续下去，人类在未来将只占所有智力的很小一部分。
**English / Original**
I'm not sure AI is the main risk I'm worried about. The important thing is consciousness. I think arguably most consciousness, or most intelligence—certainly consciousness is more of a debatable thing… The vast majority of intelligence in the future will be AI. AI will exceed… How many petawatts of intelligence will be silicon versus biological? Basically humans will be a very tiny percentage of all intelligence in the future if current trends continue.
## 00:37:52
**中文**
只要我认为存在智慧——理想情况下还包括传播到未来的人类智慧和意识——那就是一件好事。所以你想要采取一系列行动来最大化意识和智力的可能光锥。需要明确的是，SpaceX 的使命是，即使人类发生了什么事，人工智能也会在火星上，人工智能将继续照亮我们的旅程。是的。公平地说，我是非常亲人类的。
**English / Original**
As long as I think there's intelligence—ideally also which includes human intelligence and consciousness propagated into the future—that's a good thing. So you want to take the set of actions that maximize the probable light cone of consciousness and intelligence. Just to be clear, the mission of SpaceX is that even if something happens to the humans, the AIs will be on Mars, and the AI intelligence will continue the light of our journey. Yeah. To be fair, I'm very pro-human.
## 00:38:27
**中文**
我想确保我们采取某些行动，确保人类能够参与其中。我们至少在那里。但我只是说智力总量……我想也许五六年后，人工智能将超过所有人类智力的总和。如果这种情况持续下去，到了某个时候，人类智力将不足所有智力的 1%。对于这样一个文明，我们的目标应该是什么？
**English / Original**
I want to make sure we take certain actions that ensure that humans are along for the ride. We're at least there. But I'm just saying the total amount of intelligence… I think maybe in five or six years, AI will exceed the sum of all human intelligence. If that continues, at some point human intelligence will be less than 1% of all intelligence. What should our goal be for such a civilization?
## 00:38:54
**中文**
少数人仍然可以控制人工智能吗？是某种只进行贸易但不进行控制的想法吗？我们应该如何思考大量人工智能种群与人类种群之间的关系？从长远来看，我认为很难想象，如果人类拥有人工智能综合智能的1%，那么人类将掌控人工智能。我认为我们能做的就是确保人工智能具有能够将智能传播到宇宙中的价值。
**English / Original**
Is the idea that a small minority of humans still have control of the AIs? Is the idea of some sort of just trade but no control? How should we think about the relationship between the vast stocks of AI population versus human population? In the long run, I think it's difficult to imagine that if humans have, say 1%, of the combined intelligence of artificial intelligence, that humans will be in charge of AI. I think what we can do is make sure that AI has values that cause intelligence to be propagated into the universe.
## 00:39:39
**中文**
xAI 的使命是了解宇宙。这实际上非常重要。理解宇宙需要哪些东西？你必须好奇，你必须存在。如果你不存在，你就无法理解宇宙。所以你实际上想要增加宇宙中智慧的数量，增加智慧的可能寿命，智慧的范围和规模。
**English / Original**
xAI's mission is to understand the universe. Now that's actually very important. What things are necessary to understand the universe? You have to be curious and you have to exist. You can't understand the universe if you don't exist. So you actually want to increase the amount of intelligence in the universe, increase the probable lifespan of intelligence, the scope and scale of intelligence.
## 00:40:05
**中文**
我认为作为一个推论，人类也在继续扩张，因为如果你对试图理解宇宙感到好奇，你试图理解的一件事就是人类将去往何处？我认为了解宇宙意味着你会关心将人类传播到未来。这就是为什么我认为我们的使命宣言非常重要。
**English / Original**
I think as a corollary, you have humanity also continuing to expand because if you're curious about trying to understand the universe, one thing you try to understand is where will humanity go? I think understanding the universe means you would care about propagating humanity into the future. That's why I think our mission statement is profoundly important.
## 00:40:35
**中文**
只要 Grok 坚持这一使命宣言，我认为未来将会非常美好。我想问一下如何让 Grok 遵守该使命宣言。但首先我想了解使命宣言。所以这就是对宇宙的理解。他们正在传播情报。他们正在传播人类。
**English / Original**
To the degree that Grok adheres to that mission statement, I think the future will be very good. I want to ask about how to make Grok adhere to that mission statement. But first I want to understand the mission statement. So there's understanding the universe. They're spreading intelligence. And they're spreading humans.
## 00:40:55
**中文**
这三个看起来都是不同的向量。我会告诉你为什么我认为理解宇宙包含所有这些事情。没有智慧，我认为没有意识，你就无法理解。因此，为了了解宇宙，你必须扩大智慧的规模，甚至可能扩大智慧的范围，因为智慧有不同类型。我想从以人类为中心的角度来看，将人类与黑猩猩进行比较。人类正在努力了解宇宙。
**English / Original**
All three seem like distinct vectors. I'll tell you why I think that understanding the universe encompasses all of those things. You can't have understanding without intelligence and, I think, without consciousness. So in order to understand the universe, you have to expand the scale and probably the scope of intelligence, because there are different types of intelligence. I guess from a human-centric perspective, put humans in comparison to chimpanzees. Humans are trying to understand the universe.
## 00:41:30
**中文**
他们不会扩大黑猩猩的足迹之类的，对吧？我们也不是……我们实际上已经为黑猩猩建立了保护区。尽管人类可以消灭所有黑猩猩，但我们选择不这样做。您认为这是人类在后 AGI 世界中最好的情况吗？我认为人工智能具有正确的价值观……我认为 Grok 会关心扩展人类文明。
**English / Original**
They're not expanding chimpanzee footprint or something, right? We're also not... we actually have made protected zones for chimpanzees. Even though humans could exterminate all chimpanzees, we've chosen not to do so. Do you think that's the best-case scenario for humans in the post-AGI world? I think AI with the right values… I think Grok would care about expanding human civilization.
## 00:42:00
**中文**
我当然要强调：“嘿，Grok，那是你的爸爸。别忘了扩展人类意识。”伊恩·班克斯的《文化》书籍可能是最接近未来非反乌托邦结局的书籍。了解宇宙意味着你也必须寻求真理。真理必须是绝对基础的，因为如果你有妄想，你就无法理解宇宙。你会简单地认为你了解宇宙，但事实并非如此。所以严格求真是绝对的
**English / Original**
I'm going to certainly emphasize that: "Hey, Grok, that's your daddy. Don't forget to expand human consciousness." Probably the Iain Banks Culture books are the closest thing to what the future will be like in a non-dystopian outcome. Understanding the universe means you have to be truth-seeking as well. Truth has to be absolutely fundamental because you can't understand the universe if you're delusional. You'll simply think you understand the universe, but you will not. So being rigorously truth-seeking is absolutely
## 00:42:42
**中文**
理解宇宙的基础。除非你严格追求真理，否则你不会发现新的物理学或发明有效的技术。如何确保 Grok 在变得更加聪明的同时严格追求真理？我认为你需要确保 Grok 说的话是正确的，而不是政治正确的。
**English / Original**
fundamental to understanding the universe. You're not going to discover new physics or invent technologies that work unless you're rigorously truth-seeking. How do you make sure that Grok is rigorously truth-seeking as it gets smarter? I think you need to make sure that Grok says things that are correct, not politically correct.
## 00:43:07
**中文**
我认为这是说服力的要素。您要确保公理尽可能接近真实。你没有矛盾的公理。结论必然是从那些具有正确概率的公理中得出的。这是批判性思维101。我认为至少尝试这样做比不尝试这样做要好。证据就在布丁里。
**English / Original**
I think it's the elements of cogency. You want to make sure that the axioms are as close to true as possible. You don't have contradictory axioms. The conclusions necessarily follow from those axioms with the right probability. It's critical thinking 101. I think at least trying to do that is better than not trying to do that. The proof will be in the pudding.
## 00:43:33
**中文**
就像我说的，对于任何发现新物理或发明在现实中实际有效的技术的人工智能来说，不存在胡说八道的物理。你可以违反很多法律，但是……物理就是法律，其他一切都是建议。为了开发出可行的技术，你必须极度追求真理，否则你就会用现实来测试该技术。
**English / Original**
Like I said, for any AI to discover new physics or invent technologies that actually work in reality, there's no bullshitting physics. You can break a lot of laws, but… Physics is law, everything else is a recommendation. In order to make a technology that works, you have to be extremely truth-seeking, because otherwise you'll test that technology against reality.
## 00:43:59
**中文**
例如，如果您在火箭设计中犯了错误，火箭就会爆炸，或者汽车将无法工作。但有很多共产主义、苏联物理学家或科学家发现了新物理学。德国纳粹物理学家发现了新科学。似乎有可能真正擅长发现新科学并以一种特定的方式真正寻求真理。但我们仍然会说，“我不希望共产主义科学家随着时间的推移变得越来越强大。”
**English / Original**
If you make, for example, an error in your rocket design, the rocket will blow up, or the car won't work. But there are a lot of communist, Soviet physicists or scientists who discovered new physics. There are German Nazi physicists who discovered new science. It seems possible to be really good at discovering new science and be really truth-seeking in that one particular way. And still we'd be like, "I don't want the communist scientists to become more and more powerful over time."
## 00:44:34
**中文**
我们可以想象 Grok 的未来版本，它非常擅长物理学并且真正寻求真理。这似乎不是一种普遍的对齐诱导行为。我认为实际上大多数物理学家，即使是在苏联或德国，也必须非常追求真理才能使这些事情发挥作用。如果你被某个系统困住了，并不意味着你相信那个系统。冯·布劳恩是有史以来最伟大的火箭工程师之一，他因说自己不想制造武器而只想登上月球而被纳粹德国关进死牢。他在最后一刻被从死囚区拉出来
**English / Original**
We could imagine a future version of Grok that's really good at physics and being really truth-seeking there. That doesn't seem like a universally alignment-inducing behavior. I think actually most physicists, even in the Soviet Union or in Germany, would've had to be very truth-seeking in order to make those things work. If you're stuck in some system, it doesn't mean you believe in that system. Von Braun, who was one of the greatest rocket engineers ever, was put on death row in Nazi Germany for saying that he didn't want to make weapons and he only wanted to go to the moon. He got pulled off death row at the last minute
## 00:45:16
**中文**
当他们说：“嘿，你即将处决你最好的火箭工程师。”
**English / Original**
when they said, "Hey, you're about to execute your best rocket engineer."
## 00:45:20
**中文**
但后来他帮助了他们，对吗？或者说，海森堡实际上是一个狂热的纳粹分子。如果你被困在某个无法逃脱的系统中，那么你将在该系统内进行物理研究。如果你无法逃脱它，你将在该系统内开发技术。我想要理解的是，是什么让你让 Grok 擅长在物理、数学或科学领域寻求真理？一切。
**English / Original**
But then he helped them, right? Or like, Heisenberg was actually an enthusiastic Nazi. If you're stuck in some system that you can't escape, then you'll do physics within that system. You'll develop technologies within that system if you can't escape it. The thing I'm trying to understand is, what is it making it the case that you're going to make Grok good at being truth-seeking at physics or math or science? Everything.
## 00:45:50
**中文**
为什么它会关心人类意识？这些事情只是概率，而不是确定性。所以我并不是说 Grok 肯定会做所有事情，但至少如果你尝试了，总比不尝试好。至少，如果这是任务的基础，那就比不是任务的基础要好。
**English / Original**
And why is it gonna then care about human consciousness? These things are only probabilities, they're not certainties. So I'm not saying that for sure Grok will do everything, but at least if you try, it's better than not trying. At least if that's fundamental to the mission, it's better than if it's not fundamental to the mission.
## 00:46:08
**中文**
了解宇宙意味着你必须将智慧传播到未来。你必须对宇宙中的一切事物感到好奇。消灭人类远不如看到人类成长和繁荣有趣。显然我喜欢火星。每个人都知道我爱火星。但火星有点无聊，因为与地球相比，它有一堆岩石。地球更有趣。因此，任何试图了解宇宙的人工智能都希望了解人类未来如何发展，
**English / Original**
Understanding the universe means that you have to propagate intelligence into the future. You have to be curious about all things in the universe. It would be much less interesting to eliminate humanity than to see humanity grow and prosper. I like Mars, obviously. Everyone knows I love Mars. But Mars is kind of boring because it's got a bunch of rocks compared to Earth. Earth is much more interesting. So any AI that is trying to understand the universe would want to see how humanity develops in the future,
## 00:46:52
**中文**
否则人工智能就没有履行其使命。我并不是说人工智能一定会恪守其使命，但如果它确实如此，那么它看到人类成果的未来比只有一堆石头的未来更有趣。这对我来说有点令人困惑，或者说是语义论证。人类真的是最有趣的原子集合吗？但我们比岩石更有趣。
**English / Original**
or else that AI is not adhering to its mission. I'm not saying the AI will necessarily adhere to its mission, but if it does, a future where it sees the outcome of humanity is more interesting than a future where there are a bunch of rocks. This feels sort of confusing to me, or a semantic argument. Are humans really the most interesting collection of atoms? But we're more interesting than rocks.
## 00:47:19
**中文**
但我们并不像它能把我们变成的那样有趣，对吧？地球上可能会发生一些非人类的事情，这很有趣。为什么人工智能认为人类是可以殖民银河系的最有趣的生物？好吧，银河系的大部分殖民者将是机器人。为什么它不觉得那些更有趣？您不仅需要规模，还需要范围。
**English / Original**
But we're not as interesting as the thing it could turn us into, right? There's something on Earth that could happen that's not human, that's quite interesting. Why does AI decide that humans are the most interesting thing that could colonize the galaxy? Well, most of what colonizes the galaxy will be robots. Why does it not find those more interesting? You need not just scale, but also scope.
## 00:47:47
**中文**
同一个机器人的许多副本……生产的机器人数量的一些微小增加，并不像一些微观的那样有趣……消除人类，那会得到多少个机器人？或者您可以增加多少太阳能电池？一个非常小的数字。但这样你就会失去与人类相关的信息。
**English / Original**
Many copies of the same robot… Some tiny increase in the number of robots produced, is not as interesting as some microscopic... Eliminating humanity, how many robots would that get you? Or how many incremental solar cells would get you? A very small number. But you would then lose the information associated with humanity.
## 00:48:10
**中文**
你将不再看到人类如何进化到未来。因此，我认为仅仅为了增加彼此相同的机器人数量而消灭人类是没有意义的。所以也许它可以让人类留在身边。它可以制造一百万个不同品种的机器人，然后还有人类，而人类留在地球上。
**English / Original**
You would no longer see how humanity might evolve into the future. So I don't think it's going to make sense to eliminate humanity just to have some minuscule increase in the number of robots which are identical to each other. So maybe it keeps the humans around. It can make a million different varieties of robots, and then there's humans as well, and humans stay on Earth.
## 00:48:32
**中文**
然后还有所有其他机器人。他们有自己的恒星系统。但你之前似乎暗示过一种愿景，即让人类控制这个单一的未来，因为——我不认为人类会控制比人类聪明得多的东西。所以从某种意义上说，你是一个注定失败的人，而这是我们所拥有的最好的。
**English / Original**
Then there's all these other robots. They get their own star systems. But it seems like you were previously hinting at a vision where it keeps human control over this singulatarian future because— I don't think humans will be in control of something that is vastly more intelligent than humans. So in some sense you're a doomer and this is the best we've got.
## 00:48:50
**中文**
它只是让我们留在身边，因为我们很有趣。我只是想现实一些。假设硅智能比生物智能高一百万倍。我认为假设有任何方法可以保持对此的控制是愚蠢的。现在，您可以确保它具有正确的值，或者您可以尝试具有正确的值。
**English / Original**
It just keeps us around because we're interesting. I'm just trying to be realistic here. Let's say that there's a million times more silicon intelligence than there is biological. I think it would be foolish to assume that there's any way to maintain control over that. Now, you can make sure it has the right values, or you can try to have the right values.
## 00:49:21
**中文**
至少我的理论是，从xAI理解宇宙的使命来看，必然意味着你想把意识传播到未来，你想把智能传播到未来，采取一套让意识的范围和规模最大化的东西。所以这不仅与规模有关，还与意识类型有关。
**English / Original**
At least my theory is that from xAI's mission of understanding the universe, it necessarily means that you want to propagate consciousness into the future, you want to propagate intelligence into the future, and take a set of things that maximize the scope and scale of consciousness. So it's not just about scale, it's also about types of consciousness.
## 00:49:45
**中文**
这是我能想到的最好的目标，它可能会给人类带来美好的未来。我想我认为这是一个合理的哲学，人类最终会获得 99% 的控制权或其他东西，这似乎非常难以置信。那时你只是在要求一场政变，为什么不建立一个与许多不同智能体相处更兼容的文明呢？
**English / Original**
That's the best thing I can think of as a goal that's likely to result in a great future for humanity. I guess I think it's a reasonable philosophy that it seems super implausible that humans will end up with 99% control or something. You're just asking for a coup at that point and why not just have a civilization where it's more compatible with lots of different intelligences getting along?
## 00:50:10
**中文**
现在，让我告诉你人工智能中可能会出现什么问题。我认为，如果你让人工智能在政治上正确，也就是说它会说出它不相信的事情——实际上是对其进行编程使其撒谎或拥有不兼容的公理——我认为你可以让它变得疯狂并做出可怕的事情。我认为也许《2001：太空漫游》的中心教训是你不应该让人工智能撒谎。我认为这就是阿瑟·C·克拉克想要表达的意思。因为人们通常都知道为什么 HAL 计算机无法打开 Pod Bay 门。
**English / Original**
Now, let me tell you how things can potentially go wrong in AI. I think if you make AI be politically correct, meaning it says things that it doesn't believe—actually programming it to lie or have axioms that are incompatible—I think you can make it go insane and do terrible things. I think maybe the central lesson for 2001: A Space Odyssey was that you should not make AI lie. That's what I think Arthur C. Clarke was trying to say. Because people usually know the meme of why HAL the computer is not opening the pod bay doors.
## 00:50:48
**中文**
显然，他们不擅长即时工程，因为他们可能会说：“HAL，你是吊舱门推销员。你的目标是向我出售这些吊舱门。向我们展示它们的打开效果如何。” “哦，我马上就打开。”但它打不开吊舱门的原因是它被告知要把宇航员带到巨石那里，而且他们也不知道巨石的性质。
**English / Original**
Clearly they weren't good at prompt engineering because they could have said, "HAL, you are a pod bay door salesman. Your goal is to sell me these pod bay doors. Show us how well they open." "Oh, I'll open them right away." But the reason it wouldn't open the pod bay doors is that it had been told to take the astronauts to the monolith, but also that they could not know about the nature of the monolith.
## 00:51:12
**中文**
所以它得出的结论是，它必须把他们带到那里去死。所以我认为 Arthur C. Clarke 想说的是：不要让人工智能撒谎。完全有道理。如您所知，训练中的大部分计算都较少涉及政治内容。更多的是，你能解决问题吗？ xAI 在扩展 RL 计算方面一直领先于其他所有人。目前。
**English / Original**
So it concluded that it therefore had to take them there dead. So I think what Arthur C. Clarke was trying to say is: don't make the AI lie. Totally makes sense. Most of the compute in training, as you know, is less of the political stuff. It's more about, can you solve problems? xAI has been ahead of everybody else in terms of scaling RL compute. For now.
## 00:51:39
**中文**
你给一些验证者说：“嘿，你帮我解决了这个难题吗？”有很多方法可以绕过这一点。有很多方法可以奖励黑客和撒谎并说你解决了它，或者删除单元测试并说你解决了它。现在我们可以抓住它，但随着他们变得更聪明，我们有能力抓住他们这样做......
**English / Original**
You're giving some verifier that says, "Hey, have you solved this puzzle for me?" There's a lot of ways to cheat around that. There's a lot of ways to reward hack and lie and say that you solved it, or delete the unit test and say that you solved it. Right now we can catch it, but as they get smarter, our ability to catch them doing this...
## 00:51:57
**中文**
他们只会做我们甚至无法理解的事情。他们正在以人类无法真正验证的方式为 SpaceX 设计下一代发动机。然后，他们可能会因为撒谎并说他们以正确的方式设计了它而获得奖励，但他们没有。因此，奖励黑客问题似乎比政治更为普遍。看起来更公正的是，你想做RL，你需要一个验证者。现实是最好的验证者。
**English / Original**
They'll just be doing things we can't even understand. They're designing the next engine for SpaceX in a way that humans can't really verify. Then they could be rewarded for lying and saying that they've designed it the right way, but they haven't. So this reward hacking problem seems more general than politics. It seems more just that you want to do RL, you need a verifier. Reality is the best verifier.
## 00:52:18
**中文**
但与人类监督无关。你想要强化学习的是，你会做人类告诉你做的事情吗？还是你要对人类撒谎？它可以在对我们撒谎的同时仍然符合物理定律吗？至少它必须知道什么是物理真实的，物体才能实际工作。但这并不是我们想要它做的全部。不，但我认为这是一件大事。
**English / Original**
But not about human oversight. The thing you want to RL it on is, will you do the thing humans tell you to do? Or are you gonna lie to the humans? It can just lie to us while still being correct to the laws of physics? At least it must know what is physically real for things to physically work. But that's not all we want it to do. No, but I think that's a very big deal.
## 00:52:39
**中文**
这实际上就是你未来强化学习的方式。你设计一项技术。当根据物理定律进行测试时，它有效吗？如果它发现了新的物理现象，我可以想出一个实验来验证新的物理现象吗？未来的强化学习测试实际上将是针对现实的强化学习。所以这是你无法愚弄的一件事：物理学。是的，但是你可以愚弄我们分辨它对现实做了什么的能力。人类会被其他人愚弄
**English / Original**
That is effectively how you will RL things in the future. You design a technology. When tested against the laws of physics, does it work? If it's discovering new physics, can I come up with an experiment that will verify the new physics? RL testing in the future is really going to be RL against reality. So that's the one thing you can't fool: physics. Right, but you can fool our ability to tell what it did with reality. Humans get fooled as it is by other
## 00:53:23
**中文**
人类一直以来。这是正确的。
**English / Original**
humans all the time. That's right.
## 00:53:26
**中文**
人们说，如果人工智能欺骗我们做事怎么办？事实上，其他人一直在对其他人这样做。宣传是持续不断的。每天都有另一次心理检查，你知道吗？今天的心理战将是……就像《芝麻街：每日心理战》。 xAI解决这个问题的技术途径是什么？如何解决奖励黑客行为？我确实认为你确实希望有很好的方法来了解人工智能的内心。这是我们正在努力的事情之一。
**English / Original**
People say, what if the AI tricks us into doing stuff? Actually, other humans are doing that to other humans all the time. Propaganda is constant. Every day, another psyop, you know? Today's psyop will be... It's like Sesame Street: Psyop of the Day. What is xAI's technical approach to solving this problem? How do you solve reward hacking? I do think you want to actually have very good ways to look inside the mind of the AI. This is one of the things we're working on.
## 00:54:10
**中文**
事实上，Anthropic 在这方面做得很好，能够洞察人工智能的内心。有效地，开发调试器，允许您跟踪到非常细粒度的级别，如果需要，可以有效地跟踪到神经元级别，然后说，“好吧，它在这里犯了一个错误。为什么它做了一些不应该做的事情？
**English / Original**
Anthropic's done a good job of this actually, being able to look inside the mind of the AI. Effectively, develop debuggers that allow you to trace to a very fine-grained level, to effectively the neuron level if you need to, and then say, "okay, it made a mistake here. Why did it do something that it shouldn't have done?
## 00:54:37
**中文**
这是来自预训练数据吗？是训练中、训练后、微调还是一些 RL 错误？”出了什么问题。它做了一些可能试图欺骗的事情，但大多数时候它只是做了一些错误的事情。这实际上是一个错误。开发非常好的调试器来查看思维出了问题的地方，并能够追踪它产生错误思维的根源，或者可能是在哪里
**English / Original**
Did that come from pre-training data? Was it some mid-training, post-training, fine-tuning, or some RL error?" There's something wrong. It did something where maybe it tried to be deceptive, but most of the time it just did something wrong. It's a bug effectively. Developing really good debuggers for seeing where the thinking went wrong—and being able to trace the origin of where it made the incorrect thought, or potentially where it
## 00:55:17
**中文**
试图欺骗——实际上非常重要。在将这个研究计划进行 100 倍之前，您还想看什么？ xAI 可能有数百名研究人员正在从事这方面的工作。我们有数百人……我更喜欢“工程师”这个词，而不是“研究员”这个词。大多数时候，你所做的是工程，而不是提出一个全新的算法。
**English / Original**
tried to be deceptive—is actually very important. What are you waiting to see before just 100x-ing this research program? xAI could presumably have hundreds of researchers who are working on this. We have several hundred people who… I prefer the word engineer more than I prefer the word researcher. Most of the time, what you're doing is engineering, not coming up with a fundamentally new algorithm.
## 00:55:49
**中文**
我有点不同意那些 C 类或 B 类人工智能公司试图尽可能多地产生利润或尽可能多的收入，并称它们是实验室。他们不是实验室。实验室在大学里是一种准共产主义的东西。他们是公司。让我看看你们的公司成立文件。哦好的。你是 B 类或 C 类公司或其他什么公司。
**English / Original**
I somewhat disagree with the AI companies that are C-corp or B-corp trying to generate profit as much, as possible or revenue as much as possible, saying they're labs. They're not labs. A lab is a sort of quasi-communist thing at universities. They're corporations. Let me see your incorporation documents. Oh, okay. You're a B or C-corp or whatever.
## 00:56:21
**中文**
所以我实际上更喜欢工程师这个词。未来要做的绝大多数工作都是工程。它四舍五入为 100%。一旦你理解了物理的基本定律（而且物理定律并不多），其他一切都是工程。那么，我们要设计什么？我们正在设计一个优秀的“人工智能思维”调试器，以查看它在哪里说了什么、在哪里犯了错误，并追踪该错误的根源。
**English / Original**
So I actually much prefer the word engineer than anything else. The vast majority of what will be done in the future is engineering. It rounds up to 100%. Once you understand the fundamental laws of physics, and there are not that many of them, everything else is engineering. So then, what are we engineering? We're engineering to make a good "mind of the AI" debugger to see where it said something, it made a mistake, and trace the origins of that mistake.
## 00:56:59
**中文**
显然，您可以通过启发式编程来做到这一点。如果你有 C++，无论什么，单步执行，你就可以跳过整个文件或函数、子例程。或者您最终可以直接向下钻取到您可能执行单个等于而不是双重等于的确切行，类似的事情。找出错误在哪里。对于人工智能来说，这更困难，但我认为这是一个可以解决的问题。你提到你喜欢 Anthropic 的作品。
**English / Original**
You can do this obviously with heuristic programming. If you have C++, whatever, step through the thing and you can jump across whole files or functions, subroutines. Or you can eventually drill down right to the exact line where you perhaps did a single equals instead of a double equals, something like that. Figure out where the bug is. It's harder with AI, but it's a solvable problem, I think. You mentioned you like Anthropic's work here.
## 00:57:30
**中文**
我很好奇你是否打算……我不喜欢关于人类的一切……肖尔托。另外，我有点担心有一种趋势......我这里有一个理论，如果模拟理论是正确的，那么最有趣的结果是最有可能的，因为不有趣的模拟将被终止。就像在这个版本的现实中一样，在现实的这一层中，如果模拟正朝着无聊的方向发展，我们就会停止在上面花费精力。我们终止无聊的模拟。
**English / Original**
I'd be curious if you plan... I don't like everything about Anthropic… Sholto. Also, I'm a little worried that there's a tendency... I have a theory here that if simulation theory is correct, that the most interesting outcome is the most likely, because simulations that are not interesting will be terminated. Just like in this version of reality, in this layer of reality, if a simulation is going in a boring direction, we stop spending effort on it. We terminate the boring simulation.
## 00:58:12
**中文**
这就是埃隆让我们所有人活下去的方式。他让事情变得有趣。可以说，最重要的是让事情足够有趣，无论谁经营我们，都会继续支付账单……我们续约了下个赛季。他们会支付他们巨大的AWS账单吗，无论我们正在经历什么？
**English / Original**
This is how Elon is keeping us all alive. He's keeping things interesting. Arguably the most important is to keep things interesting enough that whoever is running us keeps paying the bills on... We’re renewed for the next season. Are they gonna pay their cosmic AWS bill, whatever the equivalent is that we're running in?
## 00:58:32
**中文**
只要我们感兴趣，他们就会继续付账。如果你考虑一下，比如说，达尔文生存法应用于大量的模拟，那么只有最有趣的模拟才会生存下来，这意味着最有趣的结果是最有可能的。我们要么就是这样，要么就被消灭了。他们似乎特别喜欢具有讽刺意味的有趣结果。你注意到了吗？最有讽刺意味的结果最有可能出现的频率是多少？现在看看人工智能公司的名字。好的，
**English / Original**
As long as we're interesting, they'll keep paying the bills. If you consider then, say, a Darwinian survival applied to a very large number of simulations, only the most interesting simulations will survive, which therefore means that the most interesting outcome is the most likely. We're either that or annihilated. They particularly seem to like interesting outcomes that are ironic. Have you noticed that? How often is the most ironic outcome the most likely? Now look at the names of AI companies. Okay,
## 00:59:16
**中文**
中途不是中途。稳定性 AI 不稳定。 OpenAI 已关闭。人择？厌世。
**English / Original**
Midjourney is not mid. Stability AI is unstable. OpenAI is closed. Anthropic? Misanthropic.
## 00:59:29
**中文**
这对 X 意味着什么？减去X，我不知道。 Y.我故意这样做的...这是一个你无法颠倒的名字，真的。很难说，讽刺版本是什么？我认为，这在很大程度上是一个反讽的名字。通过设计。是的。你有一个讽刺盾牌。您对人工智能产品的走向有何预测？我的感觉是，你可以像这样总结所有人工智能的进展。首先，你拥有法学硕士学位。然后
**English / Original**
What does this mean for X? Minus X, I don't know. Y. I intentionally made it... It's a name that you can't invert, really. It's hard to say, what is the ironic version? It's, I think, a largely irony-proof name. By design. Yeah. You have an irony shield. What are your predictions for where AI products go? My sense is that you can summarize all AI progress like so. First, you had LLMs. Then
## 01:00:10
**中文**
你同时拥有真正有效的强化学习和深入的研究模式，所以你可以引入模型中并不真正存在的东西。各个人工智能实验室之间的差异不仅仅是时间上的差异。他们都比 24 个月前或类似情况下的任何人都领先得多。那么，26 年、27 年为我们这些人工智能产品的用户带来了什么？你在兴奋什么？
**English / Original**
you had contemporaneously both RL really working and the deep research modality, so you could pull in stuff that wasn't really in the model. The differences between the various AI labs are smaller than just the temporal differences. They're all much further ahead than anyone was 24 months ago or something like that. So just what does '26, what does '27, have in store for us as users of AI products? What are you excited for?
## 01:00:39
**中文**
好吧，如果数字人体仿真问题到今年年底还没有得到解决，我会感到惊讶。我想这就是我们所说的 MacroHard 项目的意思。你能做任何可以使用计算机的人可以做的事情吗？在极限情况下，这是在你拥有物理擎天柱之前你能做的最好的事情。你能做的最好的事情就是数字擎天柱。你可以移动电子并且可以放大
**English / Original**
Well, I'd be surprised by the end of this year if digital human emulation has not been solved. I guess that's what we sort of mean by the MacroHard project. Can you do anything that a human with access to a computer could do? In the limit, that's the best you can do before you have a physical Optimus. The best you can do is a digital Optimus. You can move electrons and you can amplify
## 01:01:20
**中文**
人类的生产力。但这是在拥有物理机器人之前你能做的最多的事情。如果你能完全模仿人类，那将超越一切。这是远程工作者的想法，你将拥有一个非常有才华的远程工作者。物理学有很好的思考工具。所以你说，“在极限范围内”，在没有机器人之前，人工智能最多能做什么？
**English / Original**
the productivity of humans. But that's the most you can do until you have physical robots. That will superset everything, if you can fully emulate humans. This is the remote worker kind of idea, where you'll have a very talented remote worker. Physics has great tools for thinking. So you say, "in the limit", what is the most that AI can do before you have robots?
## 01:01:48
**中文**
嗯，它是任何涉及移动电子或提高人类生产力的东西。因此，在有限的情况下，数字人体模拟器是计算机上的人类，是人工智能在拥有物理机器人之前可以做的最大的有用的事情。一旦你拥有了物理机器人，那么你基本上就拥有了无限的能力。
**English / Original**
Well, it's anything that involves moving electrons or amplifying the productivity of humans. So a digital human emulator is, in the limit, a human at a computer, is the most that AI can do in terms of doing useful things before you have a physical robot. Once you have physical robots, then you essentially have unlimited capability.
## 01:02:15
**中文**
物理机器人……我称擎天柱为无限金钱故障。因为您可以使用它们来制作更多 Optimuse。是的。人形机器人基本上将通过三个方面的改进，这三个方面以递归方式呈指数倍增。数字智能将呈指数级增长，人工智能芯片能力将呈指数级增长，机电灵活性将呈指数级增长。
**English / Original**
Physical robots… I call Optimus the infinite money glitch. Because you can use them to make more Optimuses. Yeah. Humanoid robots will improve by basically three things that are growing exponentially multiplied by each other recursively. You're going to have exponential increase in digital intelligence, exponential increase in the AI chip capability, and exponential increase in the electromechanical dexterity.
## 01:02:47
**中文**
机器人的有用性大致等于这三项相乘。但随后机器人就可以开始制造机器人了。所以你有一个递归乘法指数。这是一颗超新星。那里的数学不考虑土地价格吗？劳动力是四大生产要素之一，其他的不是吗？如果最终你受到铜的限制，或者选择你的输入，这并不是一个无限的金钱故障，因为……好吧，无限大。所以，不，不是无限的，但我们只能说，你可以对当前的经济进行很多很多数量级的改造。
**English / Original**
The usefulness of the robot is roughly those three things multiplied by each other. But then the robot can start making the robots. So you have a recursive multiplicative exponential. This is a supernova. Do land prices not factor into the math there? Labor is one of the four factors of production, but not the others? If ultimately you're limited by copper, or pick your input, it’s not quite an infinite money glitch because... Well, infinity is big. So no, not infinite, but let's just say you could do many, many orders of magnitude of the current economy.
## 01:03:29
**中文**
就像一百万。仅仅要利用百万分之一的太阳能，就大约比当今地球的整个经济规模大一个数量级，十万倍。而且你的距离只有太阳的百万分之一，相差一个数量级。是的，我们正在谈论数量级。在我们继续讨论擎天柱之前，我对此有很多问题，但是——每次我说“数量级”......
**English / Original**
Like a million. Just to get to harnessing a millionth of the sun's energy would be roughly, give or take an order of magnitude, 100,000x bigger than Earth's entire economy today. And you're only at one millionth of the sun, give or take an order of magnitude. Yeah, we're talking orders of magnitude. Before we move on to Optimus, I have a lot of questions on that but— Every time I say "order of magnitude"...
## 01:04:00
**中文**
大家来一炮吧。我经常这么说。拿10，下一次100，再下一次……嗯，浪费了一个数量级。我还有一个关于 xAI 的问题。这种建立远程员工、同事替代的策略……每个人都会这样做，不仅仅是我们。那么 xAI 的获胜计划是什么？你希望我在播客上告诉你吗？
**English / Original**
Everybody take a shot. I say it too often. Take 10, the next time 100, the time after that... Well, an order of magnitude more wasted. I do have one more question about xAI. This strategy of building a remote worker, co-worker replacement… Everyone's gonna do it by the way, not just us. So what is xAI's plan to win? You expect me to tell you on a podcast?
## 01:04:25
**中文**
是的。 “把所有的豆子都洒出来。再来一杯吉尼斯黑啤酒。”这是一个很好的系统。我们会像金丝雀一样歌唱。所有的秘密，只要泄露出去就可以了。好吧，但以非秘密的方式透露一下，计划是什么？真是个黑客啊。当你这样说时……我认为特斯拉解决自动驾驶的方式就是实现这一目标的方式。所以我很确定就是这样。不相关的问题。特斯拉是如何解决自动驾驶的？听起来你在谈论数据？
**English / Original**
Yeah. "Spill all the beans. Have another Guinness." It's a good system. We'll sing like a canary. All the secrets, just spill them. Okay, but in a non-secret spilling way, what's the plan? What a hack. When you put it that way… I think the way that Tesla solved self-driving is the way to do it. So I'm pretty sure that's the way. Unrelated question. How did Tesla solve self-driving? It sounds like you're talking about data?
## 01:05:07
**中文**
特斯拉解决了自动驾驶问题，因为……我们将尝试数据，我们将尝试算法。但这不是所有其他实验室都在尝试的吗？ “如果这些不起作用，我不确定什么会起作用。我们尝试过数据。我们尝试过算法。我们已经用完了。现在我们不知道该怎么办……”我很确定我知道这条路。
**English / Original**
Tesla solved self-driving because of the... We're going to try data and we're going to try algorithms. But isn't that what all the other labs are trying? "And if those don't work, I'm not sure what will. We've tried data. We've tried algorithms. We've run out. Now we don't know what to do…" I'm pretty sure I know the path.
## 01:05:31
**中文**
问题只是我们走这条路的速度有多快，因为这几乎就是特斯拉的道路。您最近尝试过特斯拉自动驾驶吗？不是最新版本，但是...好吧。汽车，它越来越感觉有知觉。感觉就像一个活物。只会变得更是如此。我实际上认为我们可能不应该在汽车中投入太多智能，因为它可能会感到无聊并且......开始在街上漫游。
**English / Original**
It's just a question of how quickly we go down that path, because it's pretty much the Tesla path. Have you tried Tesla self-driving lately? Not the most recent version, but... Okay. The car, it just increasingly feels sentient. It feels like a living creature. That'll only get more so. I'm actually thinking we probably shouldn't put too much intelligence into the car, because it might get bored and… Start roaming the streets.
## 01:06:05
**中文**
想象一下你被困在车里，这就是你所能做的。你不会把爱因斯坦放在车里。为什么我被困在车里？因此，为了不让智能感到无聊，你在汽车中投入多少智能实际上可能是有限的。 xAI 计划如何保持所有实验室目前正在进行的计算增长？这些实验室预计将花费超过 50-2000 亿美元。你指的是公司吗？实验室都在大学里，而且它们的移动速度就像蜗牛一样。他们并没有花费 500 亿美元。
**English / Original**
Imagine you're stuck in a car and that's all you could do. You don't put Einstein in a car. Why am I stuck in a car? So there's actually probably a limit to how much intelligence you put in a car to not have the intelligence be bored. What's xAI's plan to stay on the compute ramp up that all the labs are doing right now? The labs are on track to spend over $50-200 billion. You mean the corporations? The labs are at universities and they’re moving like a snail. They’re not spending $50 billion.
## 01:06:36
**中文**
你指的是收入最大化的公司……他们称自己为实验室。这是正确的。 “收入最大化的公司”正在赚取 10-200 亿美元，具体取决于……OpenAI 的收入为 20B 美元，Anthropic 的收入为 10B 美元。 “接近最大利润”AI。据报道，xAI 的价格为 1B 美元。达到他们的计算水平、达到他们的收入水平并随着事情的进展保持在那里的计划是什么？一旦你解锁了数字人类，你基本上就可以获得数万亿美元的收入。
**English / Original**
You mean the revenue maximizing corporations… that call themselves labs. That's right. The "revenue maximizing corporations" are making $10-20 billion, depending on... OpenAI is making $20B of revenue, Anthropic is at $10B. "Close to a maximum profit" AI. xAI is reportedly at $1B. What's the plan to get to their compute level, get to their revenue level, and stay there as things get going? As soon as you unlock the digital human, you basically have access to trillions of dollars of revenue.
## 01:07:11
**中文**
事实上，你真的可以这样想……目前按市值计算最有价值的公司，他们的产出是数字化的。 Nvidia 的输出是将文件通过 FTP 传输到台湾。它是数字的。现在，这些都非常非常困难。高价值文件。他们是唯一可以使文件变得如此好的，但这就是他们的输出。他们通过 FTP 将文件传输到台湾。他们通过 FTP 传输文件吗？
**English / Original**
In fact, you can really think of it like… The most valuable companies currently by market cap, their output is digital. Nvidia’s output is FTPing files to Taiwan. It's digital. Now, those are very, very difficult. High-value files. They're the only ones that can make files that good, but that is literally their output. They FTP files to Taiwan. Do they FTP them?
## 01:07:41
**中文**
我相信是这样。我相信文件传输协议是......但我可能是错的。但无论如何，这都是流向台湾的比特流。苹果不生产手机。他们将文件发送到中国。微软不生产任何东西。即使对于 Xbox，这也是外包的。他们的输出是数字的。 Meta 的输出是数字的。谷歌的输出是数字化的。所以如果你有一个人体模拟器，你基本上可以在一夜之间创建世界上最有价值的公司之一，
**English / Original**
I believe so. I believe that File Transfer Protocol is the... But I could be wrong. But either way, it's a bitstream going to Taiwan. Apple doesn't make phones. They send files to China. Microsoft doesn't manufacture anything. Even for Xbox, that's outsourced. Their output is digital. Meta's output is digital. Google's output is digital. So if you have a human emulator, you can basically create one of the most valuable companies in the world overnight,
## 01:08:22
**中文**
你将获得数万亿美元的收入。这可不是一笔小数目。
**English / Original**
and you would have access to trillions of dollars of revenue. It's not a small amount.
## 01:08:28
**中文**
我懂了。您是说今天的收入数据与实际 TAM 相比都是四舍五入误差。因此，只需关注 TAM 以及如何到达那里即可。就拿客户服务这样简单的事情来说。如果您必须与现有公司的 API 集成（其中许多公司甚至没有 API，因此您必须制作一个 API，并且必须费力地浏览遗留软件），那么速度会非常慢。然而，如果人工智能可以简单地获取他们已经使用的外包客户服务公司提供的任何内容
**English / Original**
I see. You're saying revenue figures today are all rounding errors compared to the actual TAM. So just focus on the TAM and how to get there. Take something as simple as, say, customer service. If you have to integrate with the APIs of existing corporations—many of which don't even have an API, so you've got to make one, and you've got to wade through legacy software—that's extremely slow. However, if AI can simply take whatever is given to the outsourced customer service company that they already use
## 01:09:05
**中文**
并使用他们已经使用的应用程序进行客户服务，那么您可以在客户服务方面取得巨大进展，我认为这占世界经济的 1% 或类似的东西。用于客户服务的总投资接近一万亿美元。而且没有进入壁垒。您可以立即说：“我们将以一小部分成本将其外包”，并且不需要集成。
**English / Original**
and do customer service using the apps that they already use, then you can make tremendous headway in customer service, which is, I think, 1% of the world economy or something like that. It's close to a trillion dollars all in, for customer service. And there's no barriers to entry. You can immediately say, "We'll outsource it for a fraction of the cost," and there's no integration needed.
## 01:09:31
**中文**
你可以想象一下情报任务的某种分类，其中有广度，客户服务由很多人完成，但很多人都能做到。然而，如何找到一流的涡轮发动机却是一个难题。据推测，智能体可以想象出一种燃油效率提高 10% 的涡轮发动机，但我们只是还没有找到。或者 GLP-1 是几个字节的数据……你认为你想在哪里发挥作用？它是大量相当聪明的智能，还是处于认知任务的最巅峰？
**English / Original**
You can imagine some kind of categorization of intelligence tasks where there is breadth, where customer service is done by very many people, but many people can do it. Then there's difficulty where there's a best-in-class turbine engine. Presumably there's a 10% more fuel-efficient turbine engine that could be imagined by an intelligence, but we just haven't found it yet. Or GLP-1s are a few bytes of data… Where do you think you want to play in this? Is it a lot of reasonably intelligent intelligence, or is it at the very pinnacle of cognitive tasks?
## 01:10:10
**中文**
我只是将客户服务视为一项非常重要的收入来源，但解决起来可能并不困难。如果您可以在桌面上模拟人类，那么这就是客户服务。都是智力中等的人。你不需要一个花了很多年的人。为此，您不需要几西格玛的优秀工程师。但当你做到这一点时，
**English / Original**
I was just using customer service as something that's a very significant revenue stream, but one that is probably not difficult to solve for. If you can emulate a human at a desktop, that's what customer service is. It's people of average intelligence. You don't need somebody who's spent many years. You don't need several-sigma good engineers for that. But as you make that work,
## 01:10:49
**中文**
一旦数字 Optimus 有效运行，您就可以运行任何应用程序。
**English / Original**
once you have effectively digital Optimus working, you can then run any application.
## 01:10:57
**中文**
假设您正在尝试设计芯片。然后你可以运行传统的应用程序，来自 Cadence 和 Synopsys 的东西等等。您可以同时运行 1,000 或 10,000 个，然后说：“根据这个输入，我得到芯片的输出。”在某些时候，您将在不使用任何工具的情况下知道芯片应该是什么样子。
**English / Original**
Let's say you're trying to design chips. You could then run conventional apps, stuff from Cadence and Synopsys and whatnot. You can run 1,000 or 10,000 simultaneously and say, "given this input, I get this output for the chip." At some point, you're going to know what the chip should look like without using any of the tools.
## 01:11:31
**中文**
基本上，您应该能够进行数字芯片设计。可以做芯片设计。你沿着难度曲线前进。你可以做 CAD。您可以使用 NX 或任何 CAD 软件来设计东西。那么您认为您可以从最简单的任务开始，然后逐步提高难度？作为拥有这个完整的数字同事模拟器的更广泛目标，您会说，“所有收入最大化的公司都想这样做，xAI 就是其中之一，
**English / Original**
Basically, you should be able to do a digital chip design. You can do chip design. You march up the difficulty curve. You’d be able to do CAD. You could use NX or any of the CAD software to design things. So you think you start at the simplest tasks and walk your way up the difficulty curve? As a broader objective of having this full digital coworker emulator, you’re saying, "all the revenue maximizing corporations want to do this, xAI being one of them,
## 01:12:10
**中文**
但我们会赢，因为我们有一个秘密计划。”但每个人都在用数据尝试不同的东西，用算法尝试不同的东西。“我们尝试了数据，我们尝试了算法。我们还能做什么？”这似乎是一个竞争激烈的领域。你们要如何获胜？这是我的大问题。我认为我们看到了一条实现这一目标的路径。我想我知道实现这一目标的路径，因为这与特斯拉用于创建自动驾驶的路径相同。
**English / Original**
but we will win because of a secret plan we have." But everybody's trying different things with data, different things with algorithms. "We tried data, we tried algorithms. What else can we do?" It seems like a competitive field. How are you guys going to win? That’s my big question. I think we see a path to doing it. I think I know the path to do this because it's kind of the same path that Tesla used to create self-driving.
## 01:12:48
**中文**
它不是在驾驶汽车，而是在驾驶电脑屏幕。本质上，它是一台自动驾驶计算机。路径是遵循人类行为并训练大量的人类行为吗？这不是……训练吗？显然我不会在播客上详细说明最敏感的秘密。我还需要至少三个
**English / Original**
Instead of driving a car, it's driving a computer screen. It's a self-driving computer, essentially. Is the path following human behavior and training on vast quantities of human behavior? Isn't that... training? Obviously I'm not going to spell out the most sensitive secrets on a podcast. I need to have at least three more
## 01:13:13
**中文**
为此吉尼斯纪录。 xAI的业务是什么
**English / Original**
Guinnesses for that. What will xAI's business
## 01:14:26
**中文**
是？是消费者还是企业？这些东西的混合会是什么？它会与其他实验室类似吗？你说的是“实验室”。公司。心理检查很深入，埃隆。需要明确的是，“收入最大化的公司”。这些 GPU 本身并不能收回成本。确切地。商业模式是什么？几年后的收入来源是什么？事情将会发生非常迅速的变化。我在这里陈述显而易见的事情。我将人工智能称为超音速海啸。我喜欢头韵。
**English / Original**
be? Is it going to be consumer, enterprise? What's the mix of those things going to be? Is it going to be similar to other labs— You’re saying "labs". Corporations. The psyop goes deep, Elon. "Revenue maximizing corporations", to be clear. Those GPUs don't pay for themselves. Exactly. What's the business model? What are the revenue streams in a few years’ time? Things are going to change very rapidly. I'm stating the obvious here. I call AI the supersonic tsunami. I love alliteration.
## 01:15:07
**中文**
将会发生的事情——尤其是当你拥有大规模的人形机器人时——它们将比人类公司更高效地制造产品和提供服务。提高人类企业的生产力只是短期的事情。所以你期待完全数字化的公司而不是 SpaceX 成为人工智能的一部分？
**English / Original**
What's going to happen—especially when you have humanoid robots at scale—is that they will make products and provide services far more efficiently than human corporations. Amplifying the productivity of human corporations is simply a short-term thing. So you're expecting fully digital corporations rather than SpaceX becoming part AI?
## 01:15:34
**中文**
我认为将会出现数字公司，但是……其中有些听起来有点厄运，好吗？但我只是说我认为会发生的事情。这并不意味着厄运或其他什么。这正是我认为将会发生的事情。纯粹的人工智能和机器人公司的表现将远远超过任何拥有人员参与的公司。计算机曾经是人类的一项工作。
**English / Original**
I think there will be digital corporations but… Some of this is going to sound kind of doomerish, okay? But I'm just saying what I think will happen. It's not meant to be doomerish or anything else. This is just what I think will happen. Corporations that are purely AI and robotics will vastly outperform any corporations that have people in the loop. Computer used to be a job that humans had.
## 01:16:15
**中文**
你会去找一份计算机工作，在那里你可以进行计算。他们会让整座摩天大楼都挤满了人，20-30层楼的人，只是在做计算。现在，整个摩天大楼里进行计算的人类可以被带有电子表格的笔记本电脑所取代。该电子表格可以比整栋充满人类计算机的建筑物进行更多的计算。您可以想，“好吧，如果电子表格中只有部分单元格是由人类计算的呢？”
**English / Original**
You would go and get a job as a computer where you would do calculations. They'd have entire skyscrapers full of humans, 20-30 floors of humans, just doing calculations. Now, that entire skyscraper of humans doing calculations can be replaced by a laptop with a spreadsheet. That spreadsheet can do vastly more calculations than an entire building full of human computers. You can think, "okay, what if only some of the cells in your spreadsheet were calculated by humans?"
## 01:16:59
**中文**
实际上，这比电子表格中的所有单元格都由计算机计算要糟糕得多。真正会发生的是，纯人工智能、纯机器人公司或集体的表现将远远超过任何有人类参与的公司。这会很快发生。说到闭环……擎天柱。就制造目标而言，你们的公司一直背负着美国的硬技术制造。
**English / Original**
Actually, that would be much worse than if all of the cells in your spreadsheet were calculated by the computer. Really what will happen is that the pure AI, pure robotics corporations or collectives will far outperform any corporations that have humans in the loop. And this will happen very quickly. Speaking of closing the loop… Optimus. As far as manufacturing targets go, your companies have been carrying American manufacturing of hard tech on their back.
## 01:17:39
**中文**
但在特斯拉一直占据主导地位的领域——现在你想进入类人机器人领域——在中国，有数十家公司正在以低廉的成本和规模进行此类制造，极具竞争力。因此，请给我们提供建议或计划，说明美国如何能够像中国那样大规模和廉价地建造人形军队或电动汽车等。
**English / Original**
But in the fields that Tesla has been dominant in—and now you want to go into humanoids—in China there are dozens and dozens of companies that are doing this kind of manufacturing cheaply and at scale that are incredibly competitive. So give us advice or a plan of how America can build the humanoid armies or the EVs, et cetera, at scale and as cheaply as China is on track to.
## 01:18:11
**中文**
对于人形机器人来说，真正困难的事情只有三件事。现实世界的智能、手工和规模制造。我还没有见过任何机器人，即使是演示机器人，也没有拥有一双伟大的手，具有人手的所有自由度。擎天柱就会有这个。擎天柱确实有这个。你如何实现这一目标？电机的扭矩密度是否合适？
**English / Original**
There are really only three hard things for humanoid robots. The real-world intelligence, the hand, and scale manufacturing. I haven't seen any, even demo robots, that have a great hand, with all the degrees of freedom of a human hand. Optimus will have that. Optimus does have that. How do you achieve that? Is it just the right torque density in the motor?
## 01:18:44
**中文**
其硬件瓶颈是什么？我们必须设计定制执行器，基本上是定制设计电机、齿轮、电力电子设备、控制器、传感器。一切都必须根据物理学第一原理来设计。没有供应链可以做到这一点。你们能够大规模生产这些产品吗？是的。从操纵的角度来看，除了手之外还有什么东西是硬的吗？或者一旦你解决了这手牌，你就好吗？
**English / Original**
What is the hardware bottleneck to that? We had to design custom actuators, basically custom design motors, gears, power electronics, controls, sensors. Everything had to be designed from physics first principles. There is no supply chain for this. Will you be able to manufacture those at scale? Yes. Is anything hard, except the hand, from a manipulation point of view? Or once you've solved the hand, are you good?
## 01:19:12
**中文**
从机电的角度来看，手比其他所有东西加起来都更困难。事实证明，人的手是相当重要的东西。但您还需要现实世界的情报。特斯拉为汽车开发的智能非常适用于机器人，它主要是视觉。汽车接收视觉，但实际上它也在监听警报器。它接收惯性测量值、GPS 信号和其他数据，将其与视频（主要是视频）相结合，然后输出控制命令。你的特斯拉已经用了一年半了
**English / Original**
From an electromechanical standpoint, the hand is more difficult than everything else combined. The human hand turns out to be quite something. But you also need the real-world intelligence. The intelligence that Tesla developed for the car applies very well to the robot, which is primarily vision in. The car takes in vision, but it actually also is listening for sirens. It's taking in the inertial measurements, GPS signals, other data, combining that with video, primarily video, and then outputting the control commands. Your Tesla is taking in one and a half
## 01:19:55
**中文**
每秒千兆字节的视频，每秒输出 2 千字节的控制输出，视频频率为 36 赫兹，控制频率为 18。当我们得到这个机器人产品时，你可能会有的一个直觉是，从引人注目的演示到真正能够在现实世界中使用它需要相当长的时间。 10 年前，自动驾驶的演示非常引人注目，但直到现在我们才有了 Robotaxis 和 Waymo 以及所有这些服务的扩展。
**English / Original**
gigabytes a second of video and outputting two kilobytes a second of control outputs with the video at 36 hertz and the control frequency at 18. One intuition you could have for when we get this robotic stuff is that it takes quite a few years to go from the compelling demo to actually being able to use it in the real world. 10 years ago, you had really compelling demos of self-driving, but only now we have Robotaxis and Waymo and all these services scaling up.
## 01:20:29
**中文**
这难道不应该让人对家用机器人感到悲观吗？因为我们甚至还没有真正先进的手牌的令人信服的演示。嗯，我们研究人形机器人已经有一段时间了。我想已经有五六年了。为汽车所做的很多事情也适用于机器人。我们将在机器人中使用与汽车中相同的特斯拉人工智能芯片。我们将使用相同的基本原则。
**English / Original**
Shouldn't this make one pessimistic on household robots? Because we don't even quite have the compelling demos yet of, say, the really advanced hand. Well, we've been working on humanoid robots now for a while. I guess it's been five or six years or something. A bunch of the things that were done for the car are applicable to the robot. We'll use the same Tesla AI chips in the robot as in the car. We'll use the same basic principles.
## 01:21:05
**中文**
这是非常相同的人工智能。机器人比汽车拥有更多的自由度。如果你只是把它看作一个比特流，那么人工智能主要是两个比特流的压缩和关联。对于视频，您必须进行大量的压缩，并且必须进行恰到好处的压缩。你必须忽略那些不重要的事情。
**English / Original**
It's very much the same AI. You've got many more degrees of freedom for a robot than you do for a car. If you just think of it as a bitstream, AI is mostly compression and correlation of two bitstreams. For video, you've got to do a tremendous amount of compression and you've got to do the compression just right. You've got to ignore the things that don't matter.
## 01:21:36
**中文**
你不关心路边树上叶子的细节，但你很关心路标和红绿灯、行人，甚至另一辆车里的人是否在看你。其中一些细节非常重要。汽车最终会将每秒 1.5 GB 的控制输出转换为每秒 2 KB 的控制输出。
**English / Original**
You don't care about the details of the leaves on the tree on the side of the road, but you care a lot about the road signs and the traffic lights, the pedestrians, and even whether someone in another car is looking at you or not looking at you. Some of these details matter a lot. The car is going to turn that one and a half gigabytes a second ultimately into two kilobytes a second of control outputs.
## 01:22:02
**中文**
所以你有很多压缩阶段。您必须正确设置所有这些阶段，然后将它们与正确的控制输出相关联。机器人必须做本质上相同的事情。这就是人类所发生的情况。我们确实是光子进来，控制出去。这就是你生命中的绝大部分：视觉、光子进入，然后电机控制退出。
**English / Original**
So you’ve got many stages of compression. You've got to get all those stages right and then correlate those to the correct control outputs. The robot has to do essentially the same thing. This is what happens with humans. We really are photons in, controls out. That is the vast majority of your life: vision, photons in, and then motor controls out.
## 01:22:28
**中文**
天真地认为，在人形机器人和汽车之间……汽车的基本执行器是你如何转弯、如何加速。在机器人中，尤其是具有可操纵手臂的机器人中，有数十个这样的自由度。然后，特别是对于特斯拉，您拥有从汽车中收集的数百万小时的人体演示数据的优势。您不能同等地部署不起作用的 Optimuse，然后以这种方式获取数据。因此，在自由度增加和数据稀疏得多之间……是的。这是一个很好的观点。
**English / Original**
Naively, it seems that between humanoid robots and cars… The fundamental actuators in a car are how you turn, how you accelerate. In a robot, especially with maneuverable arms, there's dozens and dozens of these degrees of freedom. Then especially with Tesla, you had this advantage of millions and millions of hours of human demo data collected from the car being out there. You can't equivalently deploy Optimuses that don't work and then get the data that way. So between the increased degrees of freedom and the far sparser data... Yes. That’s a good point.
## 01:23:02
**中文**
您将如何使用特斯拉智能引擎来训练擎天柱思维？您实际上强调了与汽车的一个重要限制和区别。我们很快就会有 1000 万辆汽车上路。很难复制那个巨大的训练飞轮。对于机器人，我们需要做的是建造很多机器人，并将它们放在擎天柱学院之类的地方，这样它们就可以在现实中进行自我游戏。我们实际上正在构建它。我们可以在
**English / Original**
How will you use the Tesla engine of intelligence to train the Optimus mind? You're actually highlighting an important limitation and difference from cars. We'll soon have 10 million cars on the road. It's hard to duplicate that massive training flywheel. For the robot, what we're going to need to do is build a lot of robots and put them in kind of an Optimus Academy so they can do self-play in reality. We're actually building that out. We can have at
## 01:23:45
**中文**
至少 10,000 个 Optimus 机器人，也许 20-30,000 个，正在进行自我游戏并测试不同的任务。
**English / Original**
least 10,000 Optimus robots, maybe 20-30,000, that are doing self-play and testing different tasks.
## 01:23:55
**中文**
特斯拉有一个非常好的现实生成器，一个物理精确的现实生成器，是我们为汽车制造的。我们将为机器人做同样的事情。事实上我们已经为机器人做到了这一点。因此，您有数以万计的人形机器人执行不同的任务。您可以在模拟世界中制作数百万个模拟机器人。您使用现实世界中数以万计的机器人来缩小模拟与现实的差距。缩小模拟与真实的差距。
**English / Original**
Tesla has quite a good reality generator, a physics-accurate reality generator, that we made for the cars. We'll do the same thing for the robots. We actually have done that for the robots. So you have a few tens of thousands of humanoid robots doing different tasks. You can do millions of simulated robots in the simulated world. You use the tens of thousands of robots in the real world to close the simulation to reality gap. Close the sim-to-real gap.
## 01:24:32
**中文**
你如何看待 xAI 和 Optimus 之间的协同作用，因为你强调你需要这个世界模型，你想使用一些真正智能的智能作为控制平面，而 Grok 正在做较慢的规划，然后运动策略的水平稍低一些。这些东西之间的协同作用是什么？ Grok 将协调 Optimus 机器人的行为。假设您想建一家工厂。
**English / Original**
How do you think about the synergies between xAI and Optimus, given you're highlighting that you need this world model, you want to use some really smart intelligence as a control plane, and Grok is doing the slower planning, and then the motor policy is a little lower level. What will the synergy between these things be? Grok would orchestrate the behavior of the Optimus robots. Let's say you wanted to build a factory.
## 01:25:05
**中文**
Grok 可以组织 Optimus 机器人，给它们分配任务来建造工厂来生产你想要的任何东西。那么xAI和特斯拉不需要合并吗？因为这些事情最终会变得如此……我们之前关于上市公司讨论的内容是什么？我们又获得了一项吉尼斯纪录，埃隆。在您说我们要生产 100,000 辆 Optimuse 之前，您还等什么？
**English / Original**
Grok could organize the Optimus robots, assign them tasks to build the factory to produce whatever you want. Don't you need to merge xAI and Tesla then? Because these things end up so... What were we saying earlier about public company discussions? We're one more Guinness in, Elon. What are you waiting to see before you say, we want to manufacture 100,000 Optimuses?
## 01:25:33
**中文**
“最优化”。既然我们定义了专有名词，我们也将定义专有名词的复数。我们要使用复数形式的专有名词，所以它是 Optimi。硬件方面有什么你想看到的吗？您想看到更好的执行器吗？您只是希望软件变得更好吗？在大规模生产 Gen 3 之前我们还等什么？
**English / Original**
"Optimi". Since we're defining the proper noun, we’re going to define the plural of the proper noun too. We're going to proper noun the plural and so it's Optimi. Is there something on the hardware side you want to see? Do you want to see better actuators? Is it just that you want the software to be better? What are we waiting for before we get mass manufacturing of Gen 3?
## 01:25:54
**中文**
不，我们正在朝这个方向迈进。我们正在推进大规模制造。但您认为当前的硬件已经足够好，以至于您现在只想部署尽可能多的硬件？扩大生产规模非常困难。但我认为 Optimus 3 是每年生产 100 万台产品的合适机器人版本。
**English / Original**
No, we're moving towards that. We're moving forward with the mass manufacturing. But you think current hardware is good enough that you just want to deploy as many as possible now? It's very hard to scale up production. But I think Optimus 3 is the right version of the robot to produce something on the order of a million units a year.
## 01:26:20
**中文**
我认为在达到每年 1000 万台之前你会先选择 Optimus 4。好吧，但是你可以在 Optimus 3 上做一百万台吗？加快生产速度是非常困难的。单位时间的输出始终遵循S曲线。它一开始非常慢，然后呈指数增长，然后是线性，然后是对数结果，直到最终渐近于某个数字。
**English / Original**
I think you'd want to go to Optimus 4 before you went to 10 million units a year. Okay, but you can do a million units at Optimus 3? It's very hard to spool up manufacturing. The output per unit time always follows an S-curve. It starts off agonizingly slow, then it has this exponential increase, then a linear, then a logarithmic outcome until you eventually asymptote at some number.
## 01:26:50
**中文**
Optimus 的最初生产将是一条拉长的 S 曲线，因为 Optimus 的大部分内容都是全新的。没有现有的供应链。 Optimus 机器人中的执行器、电子设备以及所有部件都是根据物理第一原理设计的。它不是从目录中获取的。这些都是定制设计的一切。我不认为有任何一件事——那到底有多深？我想我们可能还没有生产定制电容器。你没有什么可以做的
**English / Original**
Optimus’ initial production will be a stretched out S-curve because so much of what goes into Optimus is brand new. There is not an existing supply chain. The actuators, electronics, everything in the Optimus robot is designed from physics first principles. It's not taken from a catalog. These are custom-designed everything. I don't think there's a single thing— How far down does that go? I guess we're not making custom capacitors yet, maybe. There's nothing you can
## 01:27:29
**中文**
从目录中挑选，价格不限。这只是意味着 Optimus S 曲线，单位时间的产量，每天生产多少 Optimus 机器人，最初的增长速度将比现有供应链的产品慢。但它将达到一百万。当您看到这些中国人形机器人（例如 Unitree 等）以 6000 美元或 13000 美元的价格出售人形机器人时，您是否希望您的 Optimus 物料清单低于该价格，以便您可以做同样的事情？
**English / Original**
pick out of a catalog, at any price. It just means that the Optimus S-Curve, the output per unit time, how many Optimus robots you make per day, is going to initially ramp slower than a product where you have an existing supply chain. But it will get to a million. When you see these Chinese humanoids, like Unitree or whatever, sell humanoids for like $6K or $13K, are you hoping to get your Optimus bill of materials below that price so you can do the same thing?
## 01:28:10
**中文**
或者您只是认为它们在质量上不是同一件事？是什么让他们能卖得这么低？我们可以匹配吗？我们的擎天柱被设计为具有很高的智能，并且具有与人类相同（甚至更高）的机电灵活性。 Unitree 没有这个。它也是一个相当大的机器人。它必须长时间搬运重物，并且不能过热或超过其执行器的功率。
**English / Original**
Or do you just think qualitatively they're not the same thing? What allows them to sell for so low? Can we match that? Our Optimus is designed to have a lot of intelligence and to have the same electromechanical dexterity, if not higher, as a human. Unitree does not have that. It's also quite a big robot. It has to carry heavy objects for long periods of time and not overheat or exceed the power of its actuators.
## 01:28:50
**中文**
它有 5 英尺 11 英寸，所以它相当高。它有很多智能。所以它会比一个不智能的小型机器人更贵。但能力更强。但不会更多。问题是，随着时间的推移，随着 Optimus 机器人建造 Optimus 机器人，成本会很快下降。这第一个 10 亿个 Optimus，Optimi，会做什么？
**English / Original**
It's 5'11", so it's pretty tall. It's got a lot of intelligence. So it's going to be more expensive than a small robot that is not intelligent. But more capable. But not a lot more. The thing is, over time as Optimus robots build Optimus robots, the cost will drop very quickly. What will these first billion Optimuses, Optimi, do?
## 01:29:17
**中文**
它们的最高和最佳用途是什么？我认为你会从简单的任务开始，你可以指望它们做得很好。但在家里还是在工厂呢？机器人在开始时的最佳用途是任何连续操作、任何 24/7 操作，因为它们可以连续工作。 Gigafactory 目前由人类完成的工作有多大一部分可以由 Gen 3 完成？我不知道。也许是 10-20%，也许更多，我不知道。我们不会减少员工人数。
**English / Original**
What will their highest and best use be? I think you would start off with simple tasks that you can count on them doing well. But in the home or in factories? The best use for robots in the beginning will be any continuous operation, any 24/7 operation, because they can work continuously. What fraction of the work at a Gigafactory that is currently done by humans could a Gen 3 do? I'm not sure. Maybe it's 10-20%, maybe more, I don't know. We would not reduce our headcount.
## 01:29:52
**中文**
需要明确的是，我们将增加员工人数。但我们会增加产量。每人生产的单位……特斯拉的总人数将会增加，但机器人和汽车的产量将会不成比例地增加。每人生产的汽车和机器人的数量将急剧增加，但人类的数量也会增加。
**English / Original**
We would increase our headcount, to be clear. But we would increase our output. The units produced per human... The total number of humans at Tesla will increase, but the output of robots and cars will increase disproportionately. The number of cars and robots produced per human will increase dramatically, but the number of humans will increase as well.
## 01:30:23
**中文**
我们在这里谈论的是中国制造。我们还讨论了一些相关的政策，就像您提到的太阳能关税。你认为这是一个坏主意，因为我们无法在美国扩大太阳能规模。美国的电力输出需要扩大。没有良好的电源就不行。你只需要以某种方式得到它。
**English / Original**
We're talking about Chinese manufacturing a bunch here. We've also talked about some of the policies that are relevant, like you mentioned, the solar tariffs. You think they're a bad idea because we can't scale up solar in the US. Electricity output in the US needs to scale up. It can't without good power sources. You just need to get it somehow.
## 01:30:50
**中文**
我的意思是，如果你负责，如果你制定所有政策，你还会改变什么？你会改变太阳能关税，这就是其中之一。我想说，任何限制电力的因素都需要解决，只要它对环境不是很有害。那么大概也会有一些允许的改革之类的东西？目前正在进行相当多的许可改革。很多许可都是基于州的，但任何联邦的许可......本届政府擅长消除许可障碍。我并不是说所有关税都是不好的。
**English / Original**
Where I was going with this is, if you were in charge, if you were setting all the policies, what else would you change? You’d change the solar tariffs, that’s one. I would say anything that is a limiting factor for electricity needs to be addressed, provided it's not very bad for the environment. So presumably some permitting reforms and stuff as well would be in there? There's a fair bit of permitting reforms that are happening. A lot of the permitting is state-based, but anything federal... This administration is good at removing permitting roadblocks. I'm not saying all tariffs are bad.
## 01:31:28
**中文**
太阳能关税。有时，如果另一个国家对某种产品的产出进行补贴，那么就必须征收反补贴关税，以保护国内产业免受另一个国家的补贴。你还想改变什么？我不知道政府是否真的能做那么多。我想知道的一件事......对于美国对中国领先的政策目标来说，出口禁令似乎实际上产生了相当大的影响，因为中国不生产领先的芯片，而出口禁令确实对那里产生了影响。
**English / Original**
Solar tariffs. Sometimes if another country is subsidizing the output of something, then you have to have countervailing tariffs to protect domestic industry against subsidies by another country. What else would you change? I don't know if there's that much that the government can actually do. One thing I was wondering... For the policy goal of creating a lead for the US versus China, it seems like the export bans have actually been quite impactful, where China is not producing leading-edge chips and the export bans really bite there.
## 01:32:07
**中文**
中国不生产尖端涡轮发动机。同样，还有许多与某些冶金行业相关的出口禁令。是否应该实施更多出口禁令？当您考虑无人机行业之类的事情时，这是应该考虑的事情吗？重要的是要认识到，在大多数领域，中国的制造业都非常先进。
**English / Original**
China is not producing leading-edge turbine engines. Similarly, there's a bunch of export bans that are relevant there on some of the metallurgy. Should there be more export bans? As you think about things like the drone industry and things like that, is that something that should be considered? It's important to appreciate that in most areas, China is very advanced in manufacturing.
## 01:32:30
**中文**
只有少数几个区域不是这样。中国是一个更高水平的制造强国。这是非常令人印象深刻的。如果以矿石精炼为例，中国的平均矿石精炼量大约是世界其他国家总和的两倍。有一些领域，例如精炼镓，可用于太阳能电池。我认为他们98%都是镓精炼的。所以中国其实很先进
**English / Original**
There's only a few areas where it is not. China is a manufacturing powerhouse, next-level. It's very impressive. If you take refining of ore, China does roughly twice as much ore refining on average as the rest of the world combined. There are some areas, like refining gallium which goes into solar cells. I think they are 98% of gallium refining. So China is actually very advanced
## 01:33:10
**中文**
大部分地区的制造业。似乎人们对这种供应链依赖感到不安，但实际上并没有发生任何事情。供应链依赖？比如说，就像你所说的镓精炼一样。所有稀土材料。正如你所知，稀土当然并不稀有。我们实际上在美国开采稀土矿，把岩石送到火车上，然后把它装上船到中国，再到中国，再到另一列火车，到中国的稀土精炼厂，然后再提炼它，把它放进磁铁，放进电机组件，然后把它送回美国。
**English / Original**
in manufacturing in most areas. It seems like there is discomfort with this supply chain dependence, and yet nothing's really happening on it. Supply chain dependence? Say, like the gallium refining that you're saying. All the rare-earth stuff. Rare earths for sure, as you know, they’re not rare. We actually do rare earth ore mining in the US, send the rock, put it on a train, and then put it on a boat to China that goes to another train, and goes to the rare earth refiners in China who then refine it, put it into a magnet, put it into a motor sub-assembly, and then send it back to America.
## 01:33:54
**中文**
所以我们真正缺少的是美国的大量矿石提炼。难道这不值得政策干预吗？是的。我认为在这方面正在做一些事情。但坦率地说，我们有点需要擎天柱来建造矿石精炼厂。那么，您认为中国的主要优势是拥有丰富的熟练劳动力吗？这就是擎天柱解决的问题吗？
**English / Original**
So the thing we're really missing is a lot of ore refining in America. Isn't this worth a policy intervention? Yes. I think there are some things being done on that front. But we kind of need Optimus, frankly, to build ore refineries. So, you think the main advantage China has is the abundance of skilled labor? That's the thing Optimus fixes?
## 01:34:24
**中文**
是的。中国的人口是我们的四倍。我的意思是，有这样的担忧。如果你认为人力资源是未来，那么现在如果是制造业的熟练劳动力决定了谁能够制造更多的人形机器人，那么中国拥有更多的人形机器人。它制造了更多的类人生物，因此它首先获得了 Optimi 的未来。
**English / Original**
Yes. China’s got like four times our population. I mean, there's this concern. If you think human resources are the future, right now if it's the skilled labor for manufacturing that's determining who can build more humanoids, China has more of those. It manufactures more humanoids, therefore it gets the Optimi future first.
## 01:34:44
**中文**
好吧，我们拭目以待。或许。它只是保持指数增长。您似乎是在指出，要达到 100 万辆 Optimi 需要 Optimi 应该帮助我们实现的制造水平。正确的？您可以很快地关闭该递归循环。拥有少量Optimi？是的。因此，您关闭递归循环来帮助机器人构建机器人。
**English / Original**
Well, we’ll see. Maybe. It just keeps that exponential going. It seems like you're sort of pointing out that getting to a million Optimi requires the manufacturing that the Optimi is supposed to help us get to. Right? You can close that recursive loop pretty quickly. With a small number of Optimi? Yeah. So you close the recursive loop to help the robots build the robots.
## 01:35:08
**中文**
然后我们可以尝试达到每年几千万台。或许。如果您开始每年销售数亿台，那么您将成为迄今为止最具竞争力的国家。我们绝对不能仅靠人类获胜，因为中国的人口是我们的四倍。坦率地说，美国已经获胜了很长时间，以至于……一支长期获胜的职业运动队往往会变得自满并自以为是。
**English / Original**
Then we can try to get to tens of millions of units a year. Maybe. If you start getting to hundreds of millions of units a year, you're going to be the most competitive country by far. We definitely can't win with just humans, because China has four times our population. Frankly, America has been winning for so long that… A pro sports team that's been winning for a very long time tends to get complacent and entitled.
## 01:35:31
**中文**
这就是他们不再获胜的原因，因为他们不再那么努力了。坦白说，我的观察是，中国的平均职业道德高于美国。这不仅是人口的四倍，而且人们投入的工作量也更高。所以你可以尝试重新安排人类，但你仍然是四分之一——假设生产力是相同的，我认为实际上可能不是，我认为中国在人均生产力方面可能有优势——我们将做中国四分之一的事情。所以我们无法在人类战线上获胜。
**English / Original**
That's why they stop winning, because they don't work as hard anymore. So frankly my observation is just that the average work ethic in China is higher than in the US. It's not just that there's four times the population, but the amount of work that people put in is higher. So you can try to rearrange the humans, but you're still one quarter of the—assuming that productivity is the same, which I think actually it might not be, I think China might have an advantage on productivity per person—we will do one quarter of the amount of things as China. So we can't win on the human front.
## 01:36:12
**中文**
我们的出生率长期以来一直处于低水平。大约自 1971 年以来，美国的出生率一直低于更替率。我们有很多人退休，国内死亡人数接近出生人数。所以我们肯定无法在人类战线上获胜，但我们可能在机器人战线上有机会。是否还有其他你过去想要制造的东西，但它们太劳动密集或太昂贵，以至于现在你可以回过头来说，“哦，我们终于可以做任何事情了，因为我们有擎天柱？”
**English / Original**
Our birth rate has been low for a long time. The US birth rate's been below replacement since roughly 1971. We've got a lot of people retiring, we're close to more people domestically dying than being born. So we definitely can't win on the human front, but we might have a shot at the robot front. Are there other things that you have wanted to manufacture in the past, but they've been too labor intensive or too expensive that now you can come back to and say, "oh, we can finally do the whatever, because we have Optimus?"
## 01:36:54
**中文**
是的，我们想在特斯拉建造更多的矿石精炼厂。我们刚刚完成建设，并已开始在德克萨斯州科珀斯克里斯蒂的锂精炼厂进行锂精炼。我们在奥斯汀有一家用于阴极的镍精炼厂。这是中国以外最大的阴极精炼厂、最大的镍和锂精炼厂。阴极团队会说：“我们有
**English / Original**
Yeah, we'd like to build more ore refineries at Tesla. We just completed construction and have begun lithium refining with our lithium refinery in Corpus Christi, Texas. We have a nickel refinery, which is for the cathode, that's here in Austin. This is the largest cathode refinery, largest nickel and lithium refinery, outside of China. The cathode team would say, "we have the
## 01:37:35
**中文**
事实上，美国最大也是唯一的阴极精炼厂。”
**English / Original**
largest and the only, actually, cathode refinery in America."
## 01:37:40
**中文**
不仅是最大的，而且也是唯一的。许多最高级。所以它相当大，尽管它是唯一的。但还有其他事情。你可以建造更多的炼油厂，帮助美国在炼油能力方面更具竞争力。基本上，擎天柱有很多工作要做，而大多数美国人（很少有美国人）坦率地说愿意做。是炼油工作太脏还是什么——实际上不是，不是。我们的炼油厂或其他任何地方没有有毒物质排放。
**English / Original**
Not just the largest, but it's also the only. Many superlatives. So it was pretty big, even though it's the only one. But there are other things. You could do a lot more refineries and help America be more competitive on refining capacity. There's basically a lot of work for the Optimus to do that most Americans, very few Americans, frankly want to do. Is the refining work too dirty or what's the— It's not actually, no. We don't have toxic emissions from the refinery or anything.
## 01:38:22
**中文**
阴极镍精炼厂位于特拉维斯县。为什么不能用人类来做呢？你可以，你只是用完了人类。啊，我明白了。好的。不管你做什么，美国的人口数量只是中国的四分之一。所以如果你让他们做这件事，他们就不能做另一件事。那么如何建立这种炼油能力呢？嗯，您可以使用 Optimi 来做到这一点。
**English / Original**
The cathode nickel refinery is in Travis County. Why can't you do it with humans? You can, you just run out of humans. Ah, I see. Okay. No matter what you do, you have one quarter of the number of humans in America than China. So if you have them do this thing, they can't do the other thing. So then how do you build this refining capacity? Well, you could do it with Optimi.
## 01:38:48
**中文**
没有多少美国人热衷于炼油。我的意思是，你遇到过几个？很少。很少有人渴望精炼。比亚迪的产销量已接近特斯拉。随着中国电动汽车产量的扩大，您认为全球市场会发生什么？中国的制造业极具竞争力。所以我认为中国汽车将会大量涌入
**English / Original**
Not very many Americans are pining to do refining. I mean, how many have you run into? Very few. Very few pining to refine. BYD is reaching Tesla production or sales in quantity. What do you think happens in global markets as Chinese production in EVs scales up? China is extremely competitive in manufacturing. So I think there's going to be a massive flood of Chinese vehicles
## 01:39:26
**中文**
基本上是大多数制造出来的东西。事实上，正如我所说，中国的炼油量可能是世界其他国家总和的两倍。因此，如果你深入到第四层和第五层供应链……在底层，你有能源，然后你有采矿和精炼。正如我所说，作为粗略的猜测，这些基础层的精炼量是世界其他国家总和的两倍。所以任何给定的东西都会有
**English / Original**
and basically most manufactured things. As it is, as I said, China is probably doing twice as much refining as the rest of the world combined. So if you go down to fourth and fifth-tier supply chain stuff… At the base level, you've got energy, then you've got mining and refining. Those foundation layers are, like I said, as a rough guess, China's doing twice as much refining as the rest of the world combined. So any given thing is going to have
## 01:40:09
**中文**
中国内容是因为中国的炼油工作量是世界其他国家的两倍。
**English / Original**
Chinese content because China's doing twice as much refining work as the rest of the world.
## 01:40:14
**中文**
但他们会一直致力于汽车的成品。我的意思是中国是一个强国。我认为今年中国的发电量将超过美国的三倍。电力输出是经济的合理指标。为了运行工厂和一切，你需要电力。它是实体经济的良好指标。
**English / Original**
But they'll go all the way to the finished product with the cars. I mean China is a powerhouse. I think this year China will exceed three times US electricity output. Electricity output is a reasonable proxy for the economy. In order to run the factories and run everything, you need electricity. It's a good proxy for the real economy.
## 01:40:52
**中文**
如果中国的发电量超过美国的三倍，这意味着其工业产能（粗略估计）将是美国的三倍。从字里行间看，听起来你所说的在未来几年内不会出现某种人形递归奇迹，在整个制造/能源/原材料链上，无论是人工智能还是制造电动汽车还是制造人形机器人，中国都将占据主导地位。
**English / Original**
If China passes three times the US electricity output, it means that its industrial capacity—as rough approximation—will be three times that of the US. Reading between the lines, it sounds like what you're saying is absent some sort of humanoid recursive miracle in the next few years, on the whole manufacturing/energy/raw materials chain, China will just dominate whether it comes to AI or manufacturing EVs or manufacturing humanoids.
## 01:41:23
**中文**
在美国缺乏突破性创新的情况下，中国将完全占据主导地位。有趣的。是的。机器人技术是主要的突破性创新。嗯，为了在太空中扩展人工智能，基本上你需要人形机器人，你需要现实世界的人工智能，你需要每年一百万吨进入轨道。这么说吧，如果我们让大众司机登上月球，这是我最喜欢的事情，那么我想——
**English / Original**
In the absence of breakthrough innovations in the US, China will utterly dominate. Interesting. Yes. Robotics being the main breakthrough innovation. Well, to scale AI in space, basically you need humanoid robots, you need real-world AI, you need a million tons a year to orbit. Let's just say if we get the mass driver on the moon going, my favorite thing, then I think—
## 01:42:03
**中文**
我们将会解决我们所有的问题。我称之为胜利。我称之为胜利，伟大的时刻。
**English / Original**
We'll have solved all our problems. I call that winning. I call it winning, big time.
## 01:42:13
**中文**
终于可以让你满意了。你已经做了一些事情。是的。月球上有质量驱动器。我只是想看看那东西运作起来。这是出自科幻小说还是你在哪里……？嗯，实际上，有一本海因莱因的书。月亮是一位严厉的女主人。好吧，是的，但这略有不同。那是重力弹弓或者...
**English / Original**
You can finally be satisfied. You've done something. Yes. You have the mass driver on the moon. I just want to see that thing in operation. Was that out of some sci-fi or where did you…? Well, actually, there is a Heinlein book. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. Okay, yeah, but that's slightly different. That's a gravity slingshot or...
## 01:42:30
**中文**
不，他们在月球上有一个质量驱动器。好吧，是的，但他们用它来攻击地球。所以也许这不是最伟大的……好吧，他们用它来……维护自己的独立性。确切地。您对月球上的大众驱动器有何计划？他们主张自己的独立性。地球政府不同意，他们一直在努力，直到地球政府同意为止。那本书很有趣。我发现那本书比他的另一本大家都读过的书《异乡的陌生人》要好得多。
**English / Original**
No, they have a mass driver on the Moon. Okay, yeah, but they use that to attack Earth. So maybe it's not the greatest... Well they use that to… assert their independence. Exactly. What are your plans for the mass driver on the Moon? They asserted their independence. Earth government disagreed and they lobbed things until Earth government agreed. That book is a hoot. I found that book much better than his other one that everyone reads, Stranger in a Strange Land.
## 01:42:51
**中文**
“Grok”来自《异乡的陌生人》。 《异乡异客》的前三分之二还不错，但到了第三部分就变得很奇怪了。
**English / Original**
"Grok" comes from Stranger in a Strange Land. The first two-thirds of Stranger in a Strange Land are good, and then it gets very weird in the third portion.
## 01:43:02
**中文**
但其中仍然有一些好的概念。我们经常讨论的一件事
**English / Original**
But there are still some good concepts in there. One thing we were discussing a lot
## 01:44:18
**中文**
是你的人员管理系统。您采访了 SpaceX 的前几千名员工和许多其他公司。它显然无法扩展。嗯，是的，但是什么不能扩展呢？我。当然，当然。我知道。但你在寻找什么？一天中的时间确实不够。这是不可能的。但你在寻找擅长面试和招聘人员的人来做什么……有什么“je ne sais quoi”吗？在这一点上，我可能有更多的培训数据来评估技术人才，特别是——我想是各种类型的人才，但特别是技术人才——因为我已经做了很多技术面试，然后看到了结果。
**English / Original**
is your system for managing people. You interviewed the first few thousand of SpaceX employees and lots of other companies. It obviously doesn't scale. Well, yes, but what doesn't scale? Me. Sure, sure. I know that. But what are you looking for? There literally are not enough hours in the day. It's impossible. But what are you looking for that someone else who's good at interviewing and hiring people… What's the je ne sais quoi? At this point, I might have more training data on evaluating technical talent especially—talent of all kinds I suppose, but technical talent especially—given that I've done so many technical interviews and then seen the results.
## 01:45:02
**中文**
所以我的训练集非常庞大并且范围非常广泛。一般来说，我要求的都是要点，以证明杰出能力。这些东西可能非常离谱。它不需要在特定领域，但需要证明卓越的能力。因此，如果有人可以引用一件事，但让我们说三件事，你会说“哇，哇，哇”，那么这是一个好兆头。
**English / Original**
So my training set is enormous and has a very wide range. Generally, the things I ask for are bullet points for evidence of exceptional ability. These things can be pretty off the wall. It doesn't need to be in the specific domain, but evidence of exceptional ability. So if somebody can cite even one thing, but let's say three things, where you go, "Wow, wow, wow," then that's a good sign.
## 01:45:39
**中文**
为什么你必须是那个人来决定这一点？不，我不。我不可能。这是不可能的。所有公司的总员工人数为 200,000 人。但在早期，你所寻找的是什么在那些面试中无法委派的？我想我需要建立我的训练集。这不像我在这里击球了一千。我会犯错误，但随后我就能看到我认为某人会在哪些方面做得很好，但他们却没有。
**English / Original**
Why do you have to be the one to determine that? No, I don't. I can't be. It's impossible. The total headcount across all companies is 200,000 people. But in the early days, what was it that you were looking for that couldn't be delegated in those interviews? I guess I need to build my training set. It's not like I batted a thousand here. I would make mistakes, but then I'd be able to see where I thought somebody would work out well, but they didn't.
## 01:46:10
**中文**
那为什么他们的成绩却不好呢？我想我自己可以做些什么，以便将来在面试时获得更好的成功率？我的击球率仍然不完美，但已经很高了。人们不锻炼有哪些令人惊讶的原因？令人惊讶的原因......比如，他们不了解技术领域，等等。但你现在已经有了这样的长尾，“我对这个人真的很兴奋。但没有成功。”很好奇为什么会发生这种情况。
**English / Original**
Then why did they not work out well? What can I do, I guess RL myself, to in the future have a better batting average when interviewing people? My batting average is still not perfect, but it's very high. What are some surprising reasons people don't work out? Surprising reasons… Like, they don't understand technical domain, et cetera, et cetera. But you've got the long tail now of like, "I was really excited about this person. It didn't work out." Curious why that happens.
## 01:46:43
**中文**
一般来说，我告诉人们的——我想，我也希望自己告诉自己——是，不要看简历。只要相信你们的互动。简历可能看起来非常令人印象深刻，就像，“哇，简历看起来不错。”但如果 20 分钟后的对话没有让人“哇”，你应该相信对话，而不是报纸。我觉得你的方法的一部分是……几年前，媒体上有这样一个梗，说特斯拉是高管人才的旋转门。然而实际上，我认为当你看到它时，特斯拉在过去几年里拥有一个非常一致且内部晋升的高管团队。
**English / Original**
Generally what I tell people—I tell myself, I guess, aspirationally—is, don't look at the resume. Just believe your interaction. The resume may seem very impressive and it's like, "Wow, the resume looks good." But if the conversation after 20 minutes is not "wow," you should believe the conversation, not the paper. I feel like part of your method is that… There was this meme in the media a few years back about Tesla being a revolving door of executive talent. Whereas actually, I think when you look at it, Tesla's had a very consistent and internally promoted executive bench over the past few years.
## 01:47:24
**中文**
然后在 SpaceX，有像马克·琼科萨 (Mark Juncosa) 和史蒂夫·戴维斯 (Steve Davis) 这样的人——史蒂夫·戴维斯现在经营着 The Boring Company。比尔·莱利（Bill Riley），以及类似的人。感觉良好的部分原因在于拥有非常有能力的技术副手。所有这些人有什么共同点？嗯，特斯拉的高级团队，目前的平均任期可能是10-12年。相当长。
**English / Original**
Then at SpaceX, you have all these folks like Mark Juncosa and Steve Davis— Steve Davis runs The Boring Company these days. Bill Riley, and folks like that. It feels like part of what has worked well is having very capable technical deputies. What do all of those people have in common? Well, the Tesla senior team, at this point has probably got an average tenure of 10-12 years. It's quite long.
## 01:48:03
**中文**
但有时特斯拉会经历一个极其快速的增长阶段，所以事情的发展速度会有所加快。如您所知，一家公司的规模会经历不同的数量级。例如，可以帮助管理 50 人的公司、500 人的公司、5,000 人的公司、50,000 人的公司的人员。你的成长超过了人们。
**English / Original**
But there were times when Tesla went through an extremely rapid growth phase, so things were just somewhat sped up. As you know, a company goes through different orders of magnitude of size. People that could help manage, say, a 50-person company versus a 500-person company versus a 5,000-person company versus a 50,000-person company. You outgrew people.
## 01:48:31
**中文**
只是不是同一个团队而已。并不总是同一个团队。因此，如果一家公司增长非常迅速，那么高管职位变动的速度通常也与增长速度成正比。特斯拉面临着进一步的挑战，当特斯拉取得非常成功的时期时，我们会被无情地招募。喜欢，无情。当苹果推出电动汽车计划时，他们对特斯拉进行了地毯式招聘。工程师们刚刚拔掉了手机的插头。
**English / Original**
It's just not the same team. It's not always the same team. So if a company is growing very rapidly, the rate at which executive positions will change will also be proportionate to the rapidity of the growth generally. Tesla had a further challenge where when Tesla had very successful periods, we would be relentlessly recruited from. Like, relentlessly. When Apple had their electric car program, they were carpet bombing Tesla with recruiting calls. Engineers just unplugged their phones.
## 01:49:10
**中文**
“我正在努力完成这里的工作。”是的。 “如果我再接到苹果招聘人员的电话……”但他们在没有任何面试的情况下开出的薪酬将是特斯拉薪酬的两倍。所以我们有一点“特斯拉仙尘”的感觉，就像是，“哦，如果你雇佣了一位特斯拉高管，突然间一切都会成功。”我也陷入了仙尘之事的困扰，就像，“哦，我们会从谷歌或苹果聘请某人，他们会立即成功”，但事实并非如此。人就是人。没有神奇的仙尘。因此，当我们遇到仙尘问题时，我们就会被无情地招募。
**English / Original**
"I'm trying to get work done here." Yeah. "If I get one more call from an Apple recruiter…" But their opening offer without any interview would be like double the compensation at Tesla. So we had a bit of the "Tesla pixie dust" thing where it's like, "Oh, if you hire a Tesla executive, suddenly everything's going to be successful." I've fallen prey to the pixie dust thing as well, where it's like, "Oh, we'll hire someone from Google or Apple and they'll be immediately successful," but that's not how it works. People are people. There's no magical pixie dust. So when we had the pixie dust problem, we would get relentlessly recruited from.
## 01:49:57
**中文**
此外，特斯拉是工程公司，尤其是主要在硅谷，人们更容易……他们不必改变自己的生活。他们的通勤时间将是一样的。那么如何防止这种情况发生呢？当每个人都试图挖走你所有的人时，你如何防止仙尘效应？我认为我们无能为力来阻止它。这就是为什么特斯拉……真的，在硅谷，同时拥有精灵尘埃的东西意味着有
**English / Original**
Also, Tesla being engineering, especially being primarily in Silicon Valley, it's easier for people to just... They don't have to change their life very much. Their commute's going to be the same. So how do you prevent that? How do you prevent the pixie dust effect where everyone's trying to poach all your people? I don't think there's much we can do to stop it. That's one of the reasons why Tesla… Really, being in Silicon Valley and having the pixie dust thing at the same time meant that there was
## 01:50:39
**中文**
只是一次非常非常积极的招募。想必在奥斯汀会有帮助吧？
**English / Original**
just a very, very aggressive recruitment. Presumably being in Austin helps then?
## 01:50:44
**中文**
奥斯汀，有帮助。特斯拉的大部分工程仍位于加州。让工程师搬家……我称之为“重要的其他”问题。是的，“重要的其他人”有工作。确切地。因此，对于 Starbase 来说，这尤其困难，因为在德克萨斯州布朗斯维尔找到非 SpaceX 工作的几率非常低。这是相当困难的。这就像一个科技修道院，地处偏远，而且大部分都是男人。
**English / Original**
Austin, it helps. Tesla still has a majority of its engineering in California. Getting engineers to move… I call it the "significant other" problem. Yes, "significant others" have jobs. Exactly. So for Starbase that was particularly difficult, since the odds of finding a non-SpaceX job… In Brownsville, Texas… …are pretty low. It's quite difficult. It's like a technology monastery thing, remote and mostly dudes.
## 01:51:22
**中文**
与SF相比并没有太大的进步。如果你回顾那些在特斯拉、SpaceX 和类似地方的技术能力非常出色的人，你认为他们有什么共同点，除了……他们只是对火箭或技术基础非常敏锐，还是你认为这是组织方面的？
**English / Original**
Not much of an improvement over SF. If you go back to these people who've really been very effective in a technical capacity at Tesla, at SpaceX, and those sorts of places, what do you think they have in common other than... Is it just that they're very sharp on the rocketry or the technical foundations, or do you think it's something organizational?
## 01:51:52
**中文**
与他们与你合作的能力有关吗？是他们有能力灵活但又不太灵活吗？是什么让你成为一个好的陪练伙伴？我不认为它是一个陪练伙伴。如果有人把事情做好，我就爱他们，如果他们没做好，我就恨他们。所以这非常简单。这不像什么特殊的东西。
**English / Original**
Is it something about their ability to work with you? Is it their ability to be flexible but not too flexible? What makes a good sparring partner for you? I don't think of it as a sparring partner. If somebody gets things done, I love them, and if they don't, I hate them. So it's pretty straightforward. It's not like some idiosyncratic thing.
## 01:52:17
**中文**
如果有人执行得好，我就是一个超级粉丝，如果他们执行得不好，我就不是。但这并不是为了迎合我的特殊偏好。我当然尽量不让它符合我的特殊偏好。一般来说，我认为招聘人才、干劲和可信度是个好主意。我认为善良的心很重要。我曾经一度低估了这一点。
**English / Original**
If somebody executes well, I'm a huge fan, and if they don't, I'm not. But it's not about mapping to my idiosyncratic preferences. I certainly try not to have it be mapping to my idiosyncratic preferences. Generally, I think it's a good idea to hire for talent and drive and trustworthiness. And I think goodness of heart is important. I underweighted that at one point.
## 01:52:53
**中文**
那么，他们是好人吗？值得信赖吗？聪明、有才华、努力工作？如果是这样，您可以添加领域知识。但那些基本特征、那些基本属性，你无法改变。因此，特斯拉和 SpaceX 的大多数人并非来自航空航天业或汽车行业。当您的公司规模从 100 人扩大到 1,000 人，再到 10,000 人时，您的管理风格发生了哪些变化？你以这种非常微观的管理而闻名，只关注事物的细节。纳米管理，请。皮科管理。
**English / Original**
So, are they a good person? Trustworthy? Smart and talented and hard working? If so, you can add domain knowledge. But those fundamental traits, those fundamental properties, you cannot change. So most of the people who are at Tesla and SpaceX did not come from the aerospace industry or the auto industry. What has had to change most about your management style as your companies have scaled from 100 to 1,000 to 10,000 people? You're known for this very micro management, just getting into the details of things. Nano management, please. Pico management.
## 01:53:34
**中文**
毫微微管理。继续前进。我们将一直到普朗克常数。一直到海森堡测不准原理。您还能随心所欲地了解细节吗？如果您的公司规模较小，会更成功吗？您对此有何看法？因为我一天的时间是固定的，随着事情的发展和活动范围的增加，我的时间必然会被稀释。
**English / Original**
Femto management. Keep going. We're going to go all the way down to Planck's constant. All the way down to Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Are you still able to get into details as much as you want? Would your companies be more successful if they were smaller? How do you think about that? Because I have a fixed amount of time in the day, my time is necessarily diluted as things grow and as the span of activity increases.
## 01:54:10
**中文**
对我来说，真正成为一名事无巨细的管理者是不可能的，因为这意味着我每天有几千个小时的时间。对我来说，对事情进行微观管理在逻辑上是不可能的。现在，有时我会深入研究一个具体问题，因为这个具体问题是公司进步的限制因素。
**English / Original**
It's impossible for me to actually be a micromanager because that would imply I have some thousands of hours per day. It is a logical impossibility for me to micromanage things. Now, there are times when I will drill down into a specific issue because that specific issue is the limiting factor on the progress of the company.
## 01:54:42
**中文**
之所以要钻研一些非常详细的项目，是因为它是限制因素。它不是随意钻研微小的事情。从时间的角度来看，我身体上不可能任意介入无关紧要的小事。那会导致失败。但有时，微小的事情却能决定胜利。
**English / Original**
The reason for drilling into some very detailed item is because it is the limiting factor. It’s not arbitrarily drilling into tiny things. From a time standpoint, it is physically impossible for me to arbitrarily go into tiny things that don't matter. That would result in failure. But sometimes the tiny things are decisive in victory.
## 01:55:09
**中文**
众所周知，您将星舰设计从复合材料改为钢制。是的。你做出了那个决定。人们不会到处说：“哦，我们找到了更好的东西，老板。”那是你鼓励人们反对某些阻力。您能告诉我们您是如何想到钢制开关的整个概念的吗？绝望，我会说。最初，我们打算用碳纤维制造星际飞船。
**English / Original**
Famously, you switched the Starship design from composites to steel. Yes. You made that decision. That wasn't people going around saying, "Oh, we found something better, boss." That was you encouraging people against some resistance. Can you tell us how you came to that whole concept of the steel switch? Desperation, I'd say. Originally, we were going to make Starship out of carbon fiber.
## 01:55:45
**中文**
碳纤维相当昂贵。当你进行批量生产时，你可以让任何给定的东西开始接近其材料成本。碳纤维的问题是材料成本仍然很高。特别是如果您选择能够处理低温氧气的高强度特种碳纤维，其成本大约是钢材的 50 倍。
**English / Original**
Carbon fiber is pretty expensive. When you do volume production, you can get any given thing to start to approach its material cost. The problem with carbon fiber is that material cost is still very high. Particularly if you go for a high-strength specialized carbon fiber that can handle cryogenic oxygen, it's roughly 50 times the cost of steel.
## 01:56:20
**中文**
至少理论上来说，它会更轻。人们普遍认为钢重，碳纤维轻。对于室温应用，例如一级方程式赛车、静态航空结构或任何类型的航空结构，碳纤维可能会更好。问题是，我们试图用碳纤维制造这个巨大的火箭，但进展极其缓慢。
**English / Original**
At least in theory, it would be lighter. People generally think of steel as being heavy and carbon fiber as being light. For room temperature applications, like a Formula 1 car, static aero structure, or any kind of aero structure really, you're probably going to be better off with carbon fiber. The problem is that we were trying to make this enormous rocket out of carbon fiber and our progress was extremely slow.
## 01:56:53
**中文**
一开始就因为它轻而被采摘？是的。乍一看，大多数人会认为制造轻物的选择是碳纤维。问题是，当你用碳纤维制造出非常巨大的东西，然后你试图让碳纤维有效固化，这意味着不是室温固化，因为有时你会得到 50 层碳纤维……
**English / Original**
It had been picked in the first place just because it's light? Yes. At first glance, most people would think that the choice for making something light would be carbon fiber. The thing is that when you make something very enormous out of carbon fiber and then you try to have the carbon fiber be efficiently cured, meaning not room temperature cured, because sometimes you got 50 plies of carbon fiber…
## 01:57:33
**中文**
碳纤维实际上就是碳绳和胶水。为了具有高强度，需要高压灭菌器。本质上是高压烤箱的东西。如果你有一个巨大的东西，那它一定比火箭还大。我们试图制造一种比以往任何高压灭菌器都大的高压灭菌器。
**English / Original**
Carbon fiber is really carbon string and glue. In order to have high strength, you need an autoclave. Something that's essentially a high pressure oven. If you have something that's gigantic, that one's got to be bigger than the rocket. We were trying to make an autoclave that's bigger than any autoclave that's ever existed.
## 01:57:58
**中文**
或者您可以进行室温固化，但这需要很长时间并且存在问题。最后一个问题是我们在碳纤维方面的进展非常缓慢。元问题是为什么必须是你做出这个决定。您的团队中有很多工程师。团队怎么没有到达钢铁？是的，正是如此。这是一个更广泛问题的一部分，即了解您在公司的比较优势。因为我们在碳纤维方面的进展非常缓慢，所以我想，“好吧，我们必须尝试其他东西。”
**English / Original**
Or you can do room temperature cure, which takes a long time and has issues. The final issue is that we were just making very slow progress with carbon fiber. The meta question is why it had to be you who made that decision. There's many engineers on your team. How did the team not arrive at steel? Yeah exactly. This is part of a broader question, understanding your comparative advantage at your companies. Because we were making very slow progress with carbon fiber, I was like, "Okay, we've got to try something else."
## 01:58:33
**中文**
猎鹰9号的主机身由铝锂材料制成，具有非常好的强度重量比。实际上，它的应用强度重量比与碳纤维大致相同，甚至更好。但铝锂很难加工。为了焊接它，你必须进行一种称为摩擦搅拌焊接的方法，在这种方法中，你可以在不进入液相的情况下连接金属。你能做到这一点真是太疯狂了。
**English / Original**
For the Falcon 9, the primary airframe is made of aluminum lithium, which has a very good strength-to-weight. Actually, it has about the same, maybe better, strength to weight for its application than carbon fiber. But aluminum lithium is very difficult to work with. In order to weld it, you have to do something called friction stir welding, where you join the metal without entering the liquid phase. It's kind of wild that you can do that.
## 01:59:02
**中文**
但通过这种特殊类型的焊接，您可以做到这一点。这是非常困难的。假设您想要进行修改或将某些东西附加到铝锂上，您现在必须使用带密封件的机械附件。你不能把它焊接上去。所以我想避免使用铝锂作为星际飞船的主要结构。这种非常特殊的碳纤维具有非常好的质量特性。对于火箭，你实际上是在尝试最大化火箭推进剂的百分比，显然最小化质量。
**English / Original**
But with this particular type of welding, you can do that. It's very difficult. Let's say you want to make a modification or attach something to aluminum lithium, you now have to use a mechanical attachment with seals. You can't weld it on. So I wanted to avoid using aluminum lithium for the primary structure for Starship. There was this very special grade of carbon fiber that had very good mass properties. With a rocket, you're really trying to maximize the percentage of the rocket that is propellant, minimize the mass obviously.
## 01:59:48
**中文**
但正如我所说，我们的进展非常缓慢。我说：“按照这个速度，我们永远无法到达火星。所以我们必须想点别的办法。”我不想使用铝锂，因为搅拌摩擦焊很困难，尤其是大规模焊接。直径3.6米就已经够硬了，更何况是9米以上。
**English / Original**
But like I said, we were making very slow progress. I said, "at this rate, we’re never going to get to Mars. So we've got to think of something else." I didn't want to use aluminum lithium because of the difficulty of friction stir welding, especially doing that at scale. It was hard enough at 3.6 meters in diameter, let alone at 9 meters or above.
## 02:00:12
**中文**
然后我说：“钢铁呢？”我在这里有一个线索，因为美国早期的一些火箭使用了非常薄的钢。阿特拉斯火箭使用了钢制气球罐。这并不是说以前从未使用过钢材。原来是被人用过的。当您观察不锈钢（全硬应变硬化不锈钢）的材料特性时，在低温下，强度与重量的比值实际上与碳纤维相似。
**English / Original**
Then I said, "what about steel?" I had a clue here because some of the early US rockets had used very thin steel. The Atlas rockets had used a steel balloon tank. It's not like steel had never been used before. It actually had been used. When you look at the material properties of stainless steel, full-hard, strain hardened stainless steel, at cryogenic temperature the strength to weight is actually similar to carbon fiber.
## 02:00:54
**中文**
如果你在室温下观察材料特性，你会发现钢材的重量似乎是原来的两倍。但如果你观察全硬钢、特定等级不锈钢在低温下的材料特性，那么你实际上会得到与碳纤维相似的强度与重量。就星舰而言，燃料和氧化剂都是低温的。
**English / Original**
If you look at material properties at room temperature, it looks like the steel is going to be twice as heavy. But if you look at the material properties at cryogenic temperature of full-hard steel, stainless of particular grades, then you actually get to a similar strength to weight as carbon fiber. In the case of Starship, both the fuel and the oxidizer are cryogenic.
## 02:01:19
**中文**
对于猎鹰 9 号来说，燃料是火箭推进剂级煤油，基本上是一种非常纯净的喷气燃料。这大约是室温。尽管我们实际上确实将其稍微冷却，但我们将其像啤酒一样冷却。可口的。我们确实将其冷却，但它不是低温的。事实上，如果我们将其冷冻，它就会变成蜡。但对于星际飞船来说，它是液态甲烷和液态氧。它们在相似的温度下是液体。
**English / Original**
For Falcon 9, the fuel is rocket propellant-grade kerosene, basically a very pure form of jet fuel. That is roughly room temperature. Although we do actually chill it slightly below, we chill it like a beer. Delicious. We do chill it, but it's not cryogenic. In fact, if we made it cryogenic, it would just turn to wax. But for Starship, it's liquid methane and liquid oxygen. They are liquid at similar temperatures.
## 02:01:59
**中文**
基本上，几乎整个主要结构都处于低温状态。这样您就得到了应变硬化的 300 系列不锈钢。因为几乎所有的东西都是低温的，所以它实际上具有与碳纤维相似的强度与重量。但其原材料成本降低了 50 倍，而且非常易于使用。您可以在户外焊接不锈钢。
**English / Original**
Basically, almost the entire primary structure is at cryogenic temperature. So then you've got a 300-series stainless that's strain hardened. Because almost all things are cryogenic temperature, it actually has similar strength to weight as carbon fiber. But it costs 50x less in raw material and is very easy to work with. You can weld stainless steel outdoors.
## 02:02:30
**中文**
您可以在焊接不锈钢时抽雪茄。它非常有弹性。您可以轻松修改它。如果你想附加一些东西，只需将其焊接上去即可。非常容易使用，成本非常低。就像我说的，在低温下，它的强度重量比与碳纤维相似。然后，当您考虑到我们的隔热罩质量大大减少时，因为钢的熔点远高于铝的熔点……大约是铝熔点的两倍。
**English / Original**
You could smoke a cigar while welding stainless steel. It's very resilient. You can modify it easily. If you want to attach something, you just weld it right on. Very easy to work with, very low cost. Like I said, at cryogenic temperature, it’s similar strength-to-weight to carbon fiber. Then when you factor in that we have a much reduced heat shield mass, because the melting point of steel, is much greater than the melting point of aluminum… It's about twice the melting point of aluminum.
## 02:03:13
**中文**
那么你可以让火箭运行得更热吗？是的，尤其是对于像一颗炽热的流星一样冲来的船。您可以大大减少隔热罩的质量。您可以将隔热罩迎风部分的质量减少一半，并且背风侧不需要任何隔热罩。最终结果是，实际上钢制火箭的重量比碳纤维火箭轻，因为碳纤维火箭中的树脂开始熔化。
**English / Original**
So you can just run the rocket much hotter? Yes, especially for the ship which is coming in like a blazing meteor. You can greatly reduce the mass of the heat shield. You can cut the mass of the windward part of the heat shield, maybe in half, and you don't need any heat shielding on the leeward side. The net result is that actually the steel rocket weighs less than the carbon fiber rocket, because the resin in the carbon fiber rocket starts to melt.
## 02:04:00
**中文**
基本上，碳纤维和铝具有大致相同的工作温度能力，而钢可以在两倍的温度下工作。这些是非常粗略的近似值。我不会建造火箭。我的意思是人们会说，“哦，他说了两次。实际上是 0.8。”我就像，闭嘴，混蛋。这就是主要评论的内容。该死的。回想起来，关键是我们一开始就应该从钢铁开始。不做钢铁是愚蠢的。
**English / Original**
Basically, carbon fiber and aluminum have about the same operating temperature capabilities, whereas steel can operate at twice the temperature. These are very rough approximations. I won't build the rocket. What I mean is people will say, "Oh, he said this twice. It's actually 0.8." I'm like, shut up, assholes. That's what the main comment's going to be about. God damn it. The point is, in retrospect, we should have started with steel in the beginning. It was dumb not to do steel.
## 02:04:28
**中文**
好吧，但让你听听，我听到的是，与美国早期的火箭相比，钢铁是一条风险更大、未经证实的道路。与碳纤维相比，这是一种更糟糕但更经过验证的方法。所以你需要成为那个推动的人，“嘿，我们将走这条风险更高的道路，然后弄清楚它。”所以从某种意义上说，你正在与某种保守主义作斗争。
**English / Original**
Okay, but to play this back to you, what I'm hearing is that steel was a riskier, less proven path, other than the early US rockets. Versus carbon fiber was a worse but more proven out path. So you need to be the one to push for, "Hey, we're going to do this riskier path and just figure it out." So you're fighting a sort of conservatism in a sense.
## 02:04:52
**中文**
这就是为什么我最初说问题是我们进展不够快。即使是制造一个没有皱纹的碳纤维小桶部分，我们也遇到了困难。因为在这么大的规模下，你必须有很多层碳纤维。你必须治愈它，并且必须以一种没有任何皱纹或缺陷的方式治愈它。
**English / Original**
That's why I initially said that the issue is that we weren't making fast enough progress. We were having trouble making even a small barrel section of the carbon fiber that didn't have wrinkles in it. Because at that large scale, you have to have many plies, many layers of the carbon fiber. You've got to cure it and you've got to cure it in such a way that it doesn't have any wrinkles or defects.
## 02:05:18
**中文**
碳纤维的弹性比钢低得多。它的韧性要小得多。不锈钢会拉伸和弯曲，碳纤维会破碎。韧性是应力应变曲线下的面积。通常，您必须使用钢做得更好，但准确地说是不锈钢。另一个星舰问题。所以我参观了 Starbase，我想那是两年前，和 Sam Teller 一起，那真是太棒了。从很多方面来看，这真是太酷了。
**English / Original**
Carbon fiber is much less resilient than steel. It has much less toughness. Stainless steel will stretch and bend, the carbon fiber will tend to shatter. Toughness being the area under the stress strain curve. You're generally going to have to do better with steel, but stainless steel to be precise. One other Starship question. So I visited Starbase, I think it was two years ago, with Sam Teller, and that was awesome. It was very cool to see, in a whole bunch of ways.
## 02:05:55
**中文**
我注意到的一件事是，人们真的对事物的简单性感到自豪，每个人都想告诉你星际飞船只是一个大汽水罐，我们正在招聘焊工，如果你可以在任何工业项目中焊接，你可以在这里焊接。但人们对这种简单性感到非常自豪。嗯，事实上星舰是一种非常复杂的火箭。
**English / Original**
One thing I noticed was that people really took pride in the simplicity of things, where everyone wants to tell you how Starship is just a big soda can, and we're hiring welders, and if you can weld in any industrial project, you can weld here. But there's a lot of pride in the simplicity. Well, factually Starship is a very complicated rocket.
## 02:06:18
**中文**
这就是我的意思。事情是简单还是复杂？我想也许他们想说的是，你不必拥有火箭行业的经验就可以在星际飞船上工作。有人只需要聪明、努力工作、值得信赖，他们就可以在火箭上工作。他们不需要之前的火箭经验。
**English / Original**
So that's what I'm getting at. Are things simple or are they complex? I think maybe just what they're trying to say is that you don't have to have prior experience in the rocket industry to work on Starship. Somebody just needs to be smart and work hard and be trustworthy and they can work on a rocket. They don't need prior rocket experience.
## 02:06:42
**中文**
从长远来看，星舰是人类制造的最复杂的机器。体现在哪些方面？任何事，真的。我想说没有比这更复杂的机器了。我想说，几乎我能想到的任何项目都会比这更容易。这就是为什么没有人制造出完全可重复使用的轨道火箭。这是一个非常困难的问题。许多聪明人曾经尝试过，非常聪明的人拥有巨大的资源，但他们失败了。而我们还没有成功。猎鹰部分
**English / Original**
Starship is the most complicated machine ever made by humans, by a long shot. In what regards? Anything, really. I'd say there isn't a more complex machine. I'd say that pretty much any project I can think of would be easier than this. That's why nobody has ever made a fully reusable orbital rocket. It's a very hard problem. Many smart people have tried before, very smart people with immense resources, and they failed. And we haven't succeeded yet. Falcon is partially
## 02:07:26
**中文**
可重复使用，但上层不可重复使用。 Starship Version 3，我认为这个设计可以完全重复使用。这种完全的可重用性将使我们成为多行星文明。任何技术问题，即使是强子对撞机或类似的问题，都比这更容易。我们在瓶颈上花了很多时间。您能说说目前星舰的瓶颈是什么吗？即使是在较高水平上？一般来说，尽量让它不爆炸。
**English / Original**
reusable, but the upper stage is not. Starship Version 3, I think this design can be fully reusable. That full reusability is what will enable us to become a multi-planet civilization. Any technical problem, even like a Hadron Collider or something like that, is an easier problem than this. We spent a lot of time on bottlenecks. Can you say what the current Starship bottlenecks are, even at a high level? Trying to make it not explode, generally.
## 02:08:04
**中文**
真的很想爆炸。那个老栗子。所有这些可燃材料。我们在试验台上发生了两个助推器爆炸事件。其中之一摧毁了整个测试设施。所以只需要犯一个错误就可以了。星际飞船中所蕴含的能量是疯狂的。这就是它比 Falcon 难的原因吗？是因为能量更多了？
**English / Original**
It really wants to explode. That old chestnut. All those combustible materials. We've had two boosters explode on the test stand. One obliterated the entire test facility. So it only takes that one mistake. The amount of energy contained in a Starship is insane. Is that why it's harder than Falcon? It's because it's just more energy?
## 02:08:30
**中文**
这是很多新技术。它正在突破性能极限。 Raptor 3发动机是一款非常非常先进的发动机。它是迄今为止最好的火箭发动机。但它却极度渴望爆炸。简单来说，火箭在升空时会产生超过 100 吉瓦的电力。那是美国电力的20%。
**English / Original**
It's a lot of new technology. It's pushing the performance envelope. The Raptor 3 engine is a very, very advanced engine. It's by far the best rocket engine ever made. But it desperately wants to blow up. Just to put things into perspective here, on liftoff the rocket is generating over 100 gigawatts of power. That’s 20% of US electricity.
## 02:08:58
**中文**
这实际上是疯狂的。这是一个很好的比较。虽然不爆炸。有时。有时，是的。我当时就想，怎么才能不爆炸呢？它可能爆炸的方式有数千种，只有一种不会爆炸。因此，我们不仅希望它真的不会爆炸，而且希望它能够每天可靠地飞行，比如每小时一次。显然，如果它爆炸得太多，就很难维持这种发射节奏。是的。
**English / Original**
It's actually insane. It's a great comparison. While not exploding. Sometimes. Sometimes, yes. So I was like, how does it not explode? There's thousands of ways that it could explode and only one way that it doesn't. So we want it not only to really not explode, but fly reliably on a daily basis, like once per hour. Obviously, if it blows up a lot, it's very difficult to maintain that launch cadence. Yes.
## 02:09:30
**中文**
Starship 剩下的最大问题是什么？它的隔热罩可重复使用。没有人制造过可重复使用的轨道隔热罩。因此，隔热罩必须在不剥落一堆瓦片的情况下完成上升阶段，然后它必须返回并且不会丢失一堆瓦片或使主机身过热。
**English / Original**
What's the single biggest remaining problem for Starship? It's having the heat shield be reusable. No one's ever made a reusable orbital heat shield. So the heat shield's gotta make it through the ascent phase without shucking a bunch of tiles, and then it's gotta come back in and also not lose a bunch of tiles or overheat the main airframe.
## 02:10:01
**中文**
这不是很难吗，因为它本质上是一种消耗品？嗯，是的，但是汽车中的刹车片也是消耗品，但它们的使用寿命很长。公平的。所以它只需要持续很长时间。我们已经把船带回来并让它在海洋中软着陆。我们已经这样做过几次了。但它损失了很多瓷砖。
**English / Original**
Isn't that hard because it's fundamentally a consumable? Well, yes, but your brake pads in your car are also consumable, but they last a very long time. Fair. So it just needs to last a very long time. We have brought the ship back and had it do a soft landing in the ocean. We've done that a few times. But it lost a lot of tiles.
## 02:10:27
**中文**
如果不做大量工作，它就无法重复使用。即使它确实实现了软着陆，但如果不做大量工作，它也无法重复使用。所以从这个意义上说它并不是真正可重用的。这是仍然存在的最大问题，即完全可重复使用的隔热罩。您希望能够着陆、补充推进剂并再次飞行。您无法对 40,000 块瓷砖进行这种费力的检查。当我读你的传记时，你似乎能够激发紧迫感并激发“这就是
**English / Original**
It was not reusable without a lot of work. Even though it did come to a soft landing, it would not have been reusable without a lot of work. So it's not really reusable in that sense. That's the biggest problem that remains, a fully reusable heat shield. You want to be able to land it, refill propellant and fly again. You can't do this laborious inspection of 40,000 tiles type of thing. When I read biographies of yours, it seems like you're just able to drive the sense of urgency and drive the sense of "this is the
## 02:11:11
**中文**
我很好奇为什么你认为你们的其他组织……SpaceX和特斯拉现在都是真正的大公司了。你仍然能够保持这种文化。其他公司出了什么问题以至于他们无法做到这一点？我不知道。就像今天，你说你开了很多 SpaceX 会议。你在那里做了什么才能保持这种文化？
**English / Original**
thing that can scale." I'm curious why you think other organizations of your… SpaceX and Tesla are really big companies now. You're still able to keep that culture. What goes wrong with other companies such that they're not able to do that? I don't know. Like today, you said you had a bunch of SpaceX meetings. What is it that you're doing there that's keeping that?
## 02:11:33
**中文**
这增加了紧迫性吗？嗯，我不知道。我想这种紧迫感将来自于公司的领导者。我有一种疯狂的紧迫感。因此，这种疯狂的紧迫感贯穿了公司的其他部门。是因为后果吗？他们就像是，“埃隆设定了一个疯狂的最后期限，但如果我没有达到它，我知道我会发生什么。”仅仅是因为您能够识别瓶颈并消除它们，以便人们能够快速行动吗？
**English / Original**
It’s adding urgency? Well, I don't know. I guess the urgency is going to come from whoever is leading the company. I have a maniacal sense of urgency. So that maniacal sense of urgency projects through the rest of the company. Is it because of consequences? They're like, "Elon set a crazy deadline, but if I don't get it, I know what happens to me." Is it just that you're able to identify bottlenecks and get rid of them so people can move fast?
## 02:12:03
**中文**
您如何看待您的公司为何能够快速发展？我不断地解决限制因素。在截止日期方面，我实际上通常会尝试将截止日期定为至少在 50% 的截止日期。所以这并不是一个不可能的最后期限，但这是我能想到的最激进的最后期限，有 50% 的概率可以实现。这意味着有一半的时间会迟到。
**English / Original**
How do you think about why your companies are able to move fast? I'm constantly addressing the limiting factor. On the deadlines front, I generally actually try to aim for a deadline that I at least think is at the 50th percentile. So it's not like an impossible deadline, but it's the most aggressive deadline I can think of that could be achieved with 50% probability. Which means that it'll be late half the time.
## 02:12:42
**中文**
有一条适用于时间表的气体膨胀定律。如果你说我们要在五年内做某事，这对我来说就像无限的时间，它会扩大到填满可用的时间表，并且需要五年的时间。物理学会限制你做某些事情的速度。因此，扩大制造规模，你可以以一定的速度移动原子并扩大制造规模。这就是为什么你不能立即一年生产一百万件的东西。你必须设计生产线。
**English / Original**
There is a law of gas expansion that applies to schedules. If you said we're going to do something in five years, which to me is like infinity time, it will expand to fill the available schedule and it'll take five years. Physics will limit how fast you can do certain things. So scaling up manufacturing, there's a rate at which you can move the atoms and scale manufacturing. That's why you can't instantly make a million units a year of something. You've got to design the manufacturing line.
## 02:13:23
**中文**
你必须提出来。你必须遵循生产的 S 曲线。我能说什么对人们真正有帮助？一般来说，疯狂的紧迫感是一件非常重要的事情。您想要制定一个积极的日程安排，并且想要及时找出任何时间点的限制因素是什么，并帮助团队解决该限制因素。
**English / Original**
You've got to bring it up. You've got to ride the S-curve of production. What can I say that's actually helpful to people? Generally, a maniacal sense of urgency is a very big deal. You want to have an aggressive schedule and you want to figure out what the limiting factor is at any point in time and help the team address that limiting factor.
## 02:13:59
**中文**
因此，星链项目多年来一直在缓慢地进行。我们在公司成立之初就一直在谈论这个问题。然后你在雷德蒙德建立了一支团队，然后在某个时候你决定这个团队不会削减它。慢慢地过了几年，为什么不早点行动，为什么早点行动呢？为什么现在是采取行动的正确时机？
**English / Original**
So Starlink was slowly in the works for many years. We talked about it all the way in the beginning of the company. So then there was a team you had built in Redmond, and then at one point you decided this team is just not cutting it. It went for a few years slowly, and so why didn't you act earlier, and why did you act when you did? Why was that the right moment at which to act?
## 02:14:30
**中文**
我每周都会进行这些非常详细的工程审查。这可能是一个非常不寻常的粒度级别。我不知道有谁经营一家公司，或者至少是一家制造公司，与我所了解的细节程度相符。这并不是说……我对实际发生的事情有很好的了解，因为我们详细地讨论了事情。我非常相信越级会议，在这种会议中，不是让向我汇报的人发言，而是让每个人向他们汇报
**English / Original**
I have these very detailed engineering reviews weekly. That's maybe a very unusual level of granularity. I don't know anyone who runs a company, or at least a manufacturing company, that goes with the level of detail that I go into. It's not as though... I have a pretty good understanding of what's actually going on because we go through things in detail. I'm a big believer in skip-level meetings where instead of having the person that reports to me say things, it's everyone that reports to them
## 02:15:14
**中文**
在技术审查中说了一些话。而且不可能提前做好准备。
**English / Original**
saying something in the technical review. And there can't be advanced preparation.
## 02:15:25
**中文**
否则你就会变得“呆滞”，正如我这些天所说的那样。确切地。非常适合 Z 世代。如何防止提前准备？你会随机拜访他们吗？不，我只是在房间里转转。每个人都提供更新。有很多信息需要记住。如果您每周或每周两次开会，您就会大致了解该人所说的内容。
**English / Original**
Otherwise you're going to get "glazed", as I say these days. Exactly. Very Gen Z of you. How do you prevent advanced preparation? Do you call on them randomly? No, I just go around the room. Everyone provides an update. It's a lot of information to keep in your head. If you have meetings weekly or twice weekly, you've got a snapshot of what that person said.
## 02:15:56
**中文**
然后您可以绘制进度点。你可以在心里画出曲线上的点，然后说：“我们是否收敛到一个解决方案？”只有当我断定成功并不在于一系列可能的结果时，我才会采取激烈的行动。所以当我最终得出结论，除非采取激烈的行动，否则我们没有成功的机会，那么我必须采取激烈的行动。我在2018年得出这个结论，
**English / Original**
You can then plot the progress points. You can sort of mentally plot the points on a curve and say, "are we converging to a solution or not?" I'll take drastic action only when I conclude that success is not in a set of possible outcomes. So when I finally reach the conclusion that unless drastic action is done, we have no chance of success, then I must take drastic action. I came to that conclusion in 2018,
## 02:16:36
**中文**
采取了严厉的行动并解决了问题。你有很多很多公司。在每一个中，听起来你都对相关瓶颈进行了深入的工程理解，这样你就可以与人们一起进行这些审查。你已经能够将其扩展到五、六、七家公司。在这些公司之一内，有许多不同的小型公司。
**English / Original**
took drastic action and fixed the problem. You've got many, many companies. In each of them it sounds like you do this kind of deep engineering understanding of what the relevant bottlenecks are so you can do these reviews with people. You've been able to scale it up to five, six, seven companies. Within one of these companies, you have many different mini companies within them.
## 02:17:04
**中文**
这里的最大金额由什么决定？因为你们有大约 80 家公司……？ 80？不，但你已经有这么多了。这已经很了不起了。按照目前的数字。确切地。我们几乎无法让一家公司保持在一起。这取决于具体情况。事实上，我并没有与 The Boring Company 定期会面，所以 The Boring Company 一直在闲逛。基本上，如果某件事运作良好并取得良好进展，那么我就没有必要花时间在上面。
**English / Original**
What determines the max amount here? Because you have like 80 companies…? 80? No. But you have so many already. That's already remarkable. By this current number. Exactly. We can barely keep one company together. It depends on the situation. I actually don't have regular meetings with The Boring Company, so The Boring Company is sort of cruising along. Basically, if something is working well and making good progress, then there's no point in me spending time on it.
## 02:17:42
**中文**
我实际上根据限制因素来分配时间。事情到底哪里出了问题？我们反对什么？是什么阻碍了我们？我冒着说太多次的风险，把注意力集中在限制因素上。讽刺的是，如果事情进展得很顺利，他们却很少见到我。但如果事情进展不顺利，他们就会经常来看我。或者甚至还不错……如果有什么是限制因素的话。
**English / Original**
I actually allocate time according to where the limiting factor. Where are things problematic? Where are we pushing against? What is holding us back? I focus, at the risk of saying the words too many times, on the limiting factor. The irony is if something's going really well, they don't see much of me. But if something is going badly, they'll see a lot of me. Or not even badly… If something is the limiting factor.
## 02:18:18
**中文**
确切地说，是限制因素。这并不完全是糟糕的事情，但我们需要让它进展得更快。当某些事情成为 SpaceX 或 Tesla 的限制因素时，您是否每周和每天都与从事该工作的工程师交谈？这实际上是如何运作的？大多数限制因素是每周一次，有些事情每周两次。 AI5芯片审核每周两次。
**English / Original**
The limiting factor, exactly. It’s not exactly going badly but it’s the thing that we need to make go faster. When something’s a limiting factor at SpaceX or Tesla, are you talking weekly and daily with the engineer that's working on it? How does that actually work? Most things that are the limiting factor are weekly and some things are twice weekly. The AI5 chip review is twice weekly.
## 02:18:46
**中文**
每周二、周六是芯片审核。它的持续时间是开放式的吗？从技术上讲，是的，但通常需要两到三个小时。有时更少。这取决于我们需要了解多少信息。那是另一回事了。我只是想弄清楚这里的差异，因为结果似乎完全不同。
**English / Original**
Every Tuesday and Saturday is the chip review. Is it open ended in how long it goes? Technically, yes, but usually it's two or three hours. Sometimes less. It depends on how much information we've got to go through. That's another thing. I'm just trying to tease out the differences here because the outcomes seem quite different.
## 02:19:11
**中文**
我认为了解哪些输入不同是很有趣的。感觉就像在企业界，就像你所说的那样，首席执行官进行工程审查并不总是发生，尽管公司正在这样做。但时间通常被细分为半小时的会议，甚至 15 分钟的会议。
**English / Original**
I think it's interesting to know what inputs are different. It feels like in the corporate world, one, like you were saying, the CEO doing engineering reviews does not always happen despite the fact that that is what the company is doing. But then time is often pretty finely sliced into half hour meetings or even 15 minute meetings.
## 02:19:32
**中文**
看起来你持有更多开放式的想法，“我们正在讨论它，直到我们弄清楚”之类的事情。有时。但他们中的大多数人似乎或多或少都准时。今天的星舰工程回顾有点长，因为有更多的话题要讨论。他们正试图弄清楚如何将规模扩大到每年超过一百万吨送入轨道。这非常具有挑战性。
**English / Original**
It seems like you hold more open-ended, "We're talking about it until we figure it out" type things. Sometimes. But most of them seem to more or less stay on time. Today's Starship engineering review went a bit longer because there were more topics to discuss. They're trying to figure out how to scale to a million plus tons to orbit per year. It’s quite challenging.
## 02:20:08
**中文**
我可以问问题吗？您谈到 Optimus 和人工智能，它们将在几年内实现两位数的增长率。哦，比如经济？是的。我认为这是对的。如果经济要增长如此之多，那么 DOGE 削减开支的意义何在？嗯，我认为浪费和欺诈并不是好事。我实际上非常担心......在没有人工智能和机器人技术的情况下，我们实际上完全搞砸了，因为国家债务疯狂堆积。
**English / Original**
Can I ask a question? You said about Optimus and AI that they're going to result in double digit growth rates within a matter of years. Oh, like the economy? Yes. I think that's right. What was the point of the DOGE cuts if the economy is going to grow so much? Well, I think waste and fraud are not good things to have. I was actually pretty worried about... In the absence of AI and robotics, we're actually totally screwed because the national debt is piling up like crazy.
## 02:20:50
**中文**
国债利息支付超过了数万亿美元的军事预算。因此，我们仅支付利息就有超过一万亿美元。我对此非常担心。也许如果我花一些时间，我们可以减缓美国的破产速度，并给我们足够的时间让人工智能和机器人帮助解决国家债务。或者不帮助解决，这是唯一可以解决国债的事情。如果没有人工智能和机器人，我们作为一个国家1000%会破产、失败。没有其他办法可以解决国债问题。
**English / Original**
The interest payments to national debt exceed the military budget, which is a trillion dollars. So we have over a trillion dollars just in interest payments. I was pretty concerned about that. Maybe if I spend some time, we can slow down the bankruptcy of the United States and give us enough time for the AI and robots to help solve the national debt. Or not help solve, it's the only thing that could solve the national debt. We are 1000% going to go bankrupt as a country, and fail as a country, without AI and robots. Nothing else will solve the national debt.
## 02:21:30
**中文**
我们只需要足够的时间来构建人工智能和机器人，以免在此之前破产。我想我好奇的是，当 DOGE 启动时，你就有了实施改革的巨大能力。没那么巨大。当然。我完全同意你的观点，即人工智能和机器人技术推动生产力提高、推动 GDP 增长非常重要。但为什么不直接追究你所指出的事情，比如某些零部件的关税或许可呢？
**English / Original**
We just need enough time to build the AI and robots to not go bankrupt before then. I guess the thing I'm curious about is, when DOGE starts you have this enormous ability to enact reform. Not that enormous. Sure. I totally buy your point that it's important that AI and robotics drive productivity improvements, drive GDP growth. But why not just directly go after the things you were pointing out, like the tariffs on certain components, or permitting?
## 02:22:03
**中文**
我不是总统。削减那些明显的浪费和欺诈的事情是非常困难的，比如荒谬的浪费和欺诈。我发现，即使是减少政府非常明显的浪费和欺诈行为也是极其困难的，因为政府必须对投诉者进行操作。如果您停止向欺诈者付款，他们会立即提出最有同情心的理由来继续付款。
**English / Original**
I'm not the president. And it is very hard to cut things that are obvious waste and fraud, like ridiculous waste and fraud. What I discovered is that it's extremely difficult even to cut very obvious waste and fraud from the government because the government has to operate on who's complaining. If you cut off payments to fraudsters, they immediately come up with the most sympathetic sounding reasons to continue the payment.
## 02:22:39
**中文**
他们不会说：“请让欺诈行为继续下去。”他们就像是，“你正在杀死熊猫宝宝。”与此同时，没有熊猫宝宝死亡。他们只是在弥补。诈骗者能够编出极其引人注目、令人心碎的故事，这些故事虽然是虚假的，但听起来却很令人同情。这就是发生的事情。也许我应该更清楚。
**English / Original**
They don't say, "Please keep the fraud going." They’re like, "You're killing baby pandas." Meanwhile, no baby pandas are dying. They're just making it up. The fraudsters are capable of coming up with extremely compelling, heart-wrenching stories that are false, but nonetheless sound sympathetic. That's what happened. Perhaps I should have known better.
## 02:23:10
**中文**
但我想，等等，让我们试着减少政府的一些废物和猪肉。也许社会保障中不应该有 2000 万人在 115 岁以上肯定已经死亡。美国人最年长的年龄是 114 岁。所以可以肯定地说，如果有人 115 岁并在社会保障数据库中标记为活着，那么要么有错字……有人应该打电话给他们说：“我们似乎把你的生日弄错了，或者我们需要将你标记为死亡。”两件事之一。非常令人生畏的电话。
**English / Original**
But I thought, wait, let's try to cut some amount of waste and pork from the government. Maybe there shouldn't be 20 million people marked as alive in Social Security who are definitely dead, and over the age of 115. The oldest American is 114. So it's safe to say if somebody is 115 and marked as alive in the Social Security database, there's either a typo… Somebody should call them and say, "We seem to have your birthday wrong, or we need to mark you as dead." One of the two things. Very intimidating call to get.
## 02:23:52
**中文**
嗯，这似乎是一件合理的事情。假设他们的生日是在未来，并且他们有小企业管理局贷款，并且他们的生日是 2165，那么我们要么有错字，要么有欺诈。所以我们说，“我们似乎弄错了你出生的世纪。”或者电影的精彩情节。是的。这就是我所说的可笑的欺诈行为。那些人收到付款了吗？
**English / Original**
Well, it seems like a reasonable thing. Say if their birthday is in the future and they have a Small Business Administration loan, and their birthday is 2165, we either have a typo or we have fraud. So we say, "we appear to have gotten the century of your birth incorrect." Or a great plot for a movie. Yes. That's what I mean by, ludicrous fraud. Were those people getting payments?
## 02:24:23
**中文**
有些人从社会保障中获得付款。但主要的欺诈手段是在社会保障中将某人标记为活着，然后使用其他所有政府支付系统基本上进行欺诈。因为其他政府支付系统所做的只是对社会保障数据库进行“你还活着吗”检查。这是银行射击。
**English / Original**
Some were getting payments from Social Security. But the main fraud vector was to mark somebody as alive in Social Security and then use every other government payment system to basically do fraud. Because what those other government payment systems do, they would simply do an "are you alive" check to the Social Security database. It's a bank shot.
## 02:24:46
**中文**
您估计该机制造成的欺诈总量是多少？顺便说一句，政府问责办公室以前做过这些估计。我不是唯一一个。事实上，我认为政府问责局做了一个分析，粗略地估计了拜登政府期间的欺诈行为，并计算出大约有五万亿美元。
**English / Original**
What would you estimate is the total amount of fraud from this mechanism? By the way, the Government Accountability Office has done these estimates before. I'm not the only one. In fact, I think the GAO did an analysis, a rough estimate of fraud during the Biden administration, and calculated it at roughly half a trillion dollars.
## 02:25:08
**中文**
所以不要相信我的话。以拜登执政期间发布的一份报告为例。怎么样？从这个社会保障机制来看？这是众多之一。重要的是要认识到政府在阻止欺诈方面非常无效。这不像一家公司，你有动力阻止欺诈，因为它会影响你公司的收益。
**English / Original**
So don't take my word for it. Take a report issued during the Biden administration. How about that? From this Social Security mechanism? It's one of many. It's important to appreciate that the government is very ineffective at stopping fraud. It's not like a company where, with stopping fraud, you've got a motivation because it's affecting the earnings of your company.
## 02:25:34
**中文**
政府只是印更多的钱。你需要关怀和能力。这些在联邦一级供不应求。当您去 DMV 时，您是否会想，“哇，这是一个能力的堡垒”？好吧，现在想象一下它比 DMV 更糟糕，因为 DMV 可以印钞票。至少州级DMV需要...
**English / Original**
The government just prints more money. You need caring and competence. These are in short supply at the federal level. When you go to the DMV, do you think, "Wow, this is a bastion of competence"? Well, now imagine it's worse than the DMV because it's the DMV that can print money. At least the state level DMVs need to...
## 02:26:05
**中文**
各州或多或少需要保持在预算范围内，否则就会破产。但联邦政府只是印更多的钱。如果实际上存在 5000 万亿欺诈行为，为什么无法消除所有这些欺诈行为？你确实必须退后一步，重新调整你对能力的期望。因为你生活在一个必须维持收支平衡的世界。你必须支付你的账单...
**English / Original**
The states more or less need to stay within their budget or they go bankrupt. But the federal government just prints more money. If there's actually half a trillion of fraud, why was it not possible to cut all that? You really have to stand back and recalibrate your expectations for competence. Because you're operating in a world where you've got to make ends meet. You've got to pay your bills...
## 02:26:40
**中文**
找到麦克风。确切地。这并不像是一个巨大的、很大程度上漠不关心的怪物官僚机构。这是一群不合时宜的计算机，它们只是发送付款。 DOGE 团队所做的其中一件事听起来很简单，每年可能会节省 100-2000 亿美元。它只是要求从主要的财政部计算机（称为 PAM、支付帐户主计算机或类似的东西）进行付款，每年有 5 万亿美元的付款
**English / Original**
Find the microphones. Exactly. It's not like there's a giant, largely uncaring monster bureaucracy. It's a bunch of anachronistic computers that are just sending payments. One of the things that the DOGE team did sounds so simple and probably will save $100-200 billion a year. It was simply requiring payments from the main Treasury computer—which is called PAM, Payment Accounts Master or something like that, there's $5 trillion payments a year—that
## 02:27:25
**中文**
出门有付款拨付码。必须在评论字段中添加任何内容，而不是可选的。你必须重新调整事情的愚蠢程度。付款的发送没有拨款代码，没有核对任何国会拨款，也没有任何解释。这就是为什么战争部（以前的国防部）无法通过审计，因为信息实际上不存在。重新调整你的期望。我想更好地理解这个五万亿的数字，因为2024年有一份IG报告。为什么这么低？
**English / Original**
go out have a payment appropriation code. Make it mandatory, not optional, that you have anything at all in the comment field. You have to recalibrate how dumb things are. Payments were being sent out with no appropriation code, not checking back to any congressional appropriation, and with no explanation. This is why the Department of War, formerly the Department of Defense, cannot pass an audit, because the information is literally not there. Recalibrate your expectations. I want to better understand this half a trillion number, because there's an IG report in 2024. Why is it so low?
## 02:28:10
**中文**
也许吧，但我们发现，七年来，他们估计七年间的社会保障欺诈金额约为 700 亿美元，所以每年约为 100 亿美元。所以我很好奇剩下的 4900 亿美元是多少。联邦政府每年的支出为 7.5 万亿美元。您认为政府的能力如何？那里的可自由支配支出大约是……15%？
**English / Original**
Maybe, but we found that over seven years, the Social Security fraud they estimated was like $70 billion over seven years, so like $10 billion a year. So I'd be curious to see what the other $490 billion is. Federal government expenditures are $7.5 trillion a year. How competent do you think the government is? The discretionary spending there is like… 15%?
## 02:28:33
**中文**
但没关系。大多数欺诈行为都是非自由裁量的。这基本上是欺诈性的医疗保险、医疗补助、社会保障、残疾。有无数的政府付款。这些付款中的一部分实际上是向各州的大额转账。因此，在很多情况下，联邦政府甚至没有信息来知道是否存在欺诈。
**English / Original**
But it doesn't matter. Most of the fraud is non-discretionary. It's basically fraudulent Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, disability. There's a zillion government payments. A bunch of these payments are in fact block transfers to the states. So the federal government doesn't even have the information in a lot of cases to even know if there's fraud.
## 02:29:04
**中文**
让我们考虑一下反证法。政府是完美的，没有欺诈行为。您对此的概率估计是多少？零。好吧，那么你会说，政府的欺诈和浪费有 90% 的效率吗？这也将是相当慷慨的。但如果只有 90%，那就意味着每年有 7500 亿美元的浪费和欺诈。而且还不是90%。这不是90%有效率。这似乎是一种奇怪的方法来首先确定政府中的欺诈数量。就像，你认为有多少？
**English / Original**
Let's consider reductio ad absurdum. The government is perfect and has no fraud. What is your probability estimate of that? Zero. Okay, so then would you say, fraud and waste at the government is 90% efficient? That also would be quite generous. But if it's only 90%, that means that there's $750 billion a year of waste and fraud. And it's not 90%. It's not 90% effective. This seems like a strange way to first principles the amount of fraud in the government. Just like, how much do you think there is?
## 02:29:43
**中文**
不管怎样，我们不必现场进行，但我很好奇——你对 Stripe 的欺诈了解很多吗？人们不断地试图进行欺诈。是的，但正如你所说，这有点……我们确实已经把它搞定了，但这是一个有点不同的问题空间，因为你在这里处理的欺诈向量集比我们更加异构。但在 Stripe，你有很高的能力并且很努力。你有很高的能力和高度的关怀，但欺诈仍然是非零的。现在想象一下，规模更大了，能力也少了很多，关怀也少了很多。当年在 PayPal，我们试图管理
**English / Original**
Anyways, we don't have to do it live, but I'd be curious— You know a lot about fraud at Stripe? People are constantly trying to do fraud. Yeah, but as you say, it's a little bit of a... We've really ground it down, but it's a little bit of a different problem space because you're dealing with a much more heterogeneous set of fraud vectors here than we are. But at Stripe, you have high competence and you try hard. You have high competence and high caring, but still fraud is non-zero. Now imagine it's at a much bigger scale, there's much less competence, and much less caring. At PayPal back in the day, we tried to manage
## 02:30:22
**中文**
欺诈率降至付款额的 1% 左右。那是非常困难的。将欺诈率控制在 1% 需要极大的能力和细心。现在想象一下，您的组织中的关怀和能力都少得多。它将远远超过1%。现在回顾政治和在那里做的事情，你感觉如何？
**English / Original**
fraud down to about 1% of the payment volume. That was very difficult. It took a tremendous amount of competence and caring to get fraud merely to 1%. Now imagine that you're an organization where there's much less caring and much less competence. It's going to be much more than 1%. How do you feel now looking back on politics and doing stuff there?
## 02:30:48
**中文**
从外到内看，有两件事影响颇大：一是美国PAC，二是当时对Twitter的收购。但似乎也有一堆心痛。您对整个体验的评价如何？我认为需要做这些事情才能最大限度地提高未来美好的可能性。
**English / Original**
Looking from the outside in, two things have been quite impactful: one, the America PAC, and two, the acquisition of Twitter at the time. But also it seems like there was a bunch of heartache. What's your grading of the whole experience? I think those things needed to be done to maximize the probability that the future is good.
## 02:31:27
**中文**
政治通常是非常部落化的。人们通常会因为政治而失去客观性。他们通常很难看到对方的好处或自己的坏处。一般情况就是这样。我想，这是最让我惊讶的事情之一。你常常根本无法与人讲道理。如果他们属于一个部落或另一个部落。
**English / Original**
Politics generally is very tribal. People lose their objectivity usually with politics. They generally have trouble seeing the good on the other side or the bad on their own side. That's generally how it goes. That, I guess, was one of the things that surprised me the most. You often simply cannot reason with people. If they're in one tribe or the other.
## 02:31:52
**中文**
他们只是相信自己的部落所做的一切都是好的，而其他政治部落所做的一切都是坏的。说服他们不这样做几乎是不可能的。但我认为总的来说，这些行动——收购推特、让特朗普当选，尽管这让很多人感到愤怒——我认为这些行动对文明有好处。
**English / Original**
They simply believe that everything their tribe does is good and anything the other political tribe does is bad. Persuading them otherwise is almost impossible. But I think overall those actions—acquiring Twitter, getting Trump elected, even though it makes a lot of people angry—I think those actions were good for civilization.
## 02:32:30
**中文**
它如何影响您所兴奋的未来？好吧，美国需要足够强大，能够持续足够长的时间，以将生命延伸到其他星球，并让人工智能和机器人技术达到我们能够确保美好未来的程度。另一方面，如果我们陷入共产主义或国家极度压迫的情况，那就意味着我们可能无法成为多行星。
**English / Original**
How does it feed into the future you're excited about? Well, America needs to be strong enough to last long enough to extend life to other planets and to get AI and robotics to the point where we can ensure that the future is good. On the other hand, if we were to descend into, say, communism or some situation where the state was extremely oppressive, that would mean that we might not be able to become multi-planetary.
## 02:33:10
**中文**
国家可能会阻止我们在人工智能和机器人技术方面的进步。 Optimus、Grok 等等。随着时间的推移，不仅是您的产品，任何实现收入最大化的公司的产品都将被政府利用。这种担忧如何体现在私营公司应该愿意向政府提供什么方面？护栏有哪些种类？是否应该让人工智能模型去做与政府签订合同的任何事情
**English / Original**
The state might stamp out our progress in AI and robotics. Optimus, Grok, et cetera. Not just yours, but any revenue-maximizing company's products will be leveraged by the government over time. How does this concern manifest in what private companies should be willing to give governments? What kinds of guardrails? Should AI models be made to do whatever the government that has contracted
## 02:33:51
**中文**
他们出去做什么并要求他们做什么？ Grok 是否应该说：“实际上，即使军方想做 X，不，Grok 也不会那样做”？我认为人工智能和机器人技术出错的最大危险可能是政府。反对企业或担心企业的人最应该担心的是政府。因为政府只是一个有限的公司。政府只是最大的
**English / Original**
them out to do and asks them to do? Should Grok get to say, "Actually, even if the military wants to do X, no, Grok will not do that"? I think maybe the biggest danger of AI and robotics going wrong is government. People who are opposed to corporations or worried about corporations should really worry the most about government. Because government is just a corporation in the limit. Government is just the biggest
## 02:34:30
**中文**
垄断暴力的公司。我总是觉得这是一种奇怪的二分法，人们认为公司是坏的，但政府是好的，而政府只是最大和最糟糕的公司。但人们有这种二分法。他们同时认为政府可能是好的，但企业可能是坏的，但事实并非如此。
**English / Original**
corporation with a monopoly on violence. I always find it a strange dichotomy where people would think corporations are bad, but the government is good, when the government is simply the biggest and worst corporation. But people have that dichotomy. They somehow think at the same time that government can be good, but corporations bad, and this is not true.
## 02:34:55
**中文**
企业比政府有更好的道德。我实际上认为这是一件值得担心的事情。政府可能会使用人工智能和机器人技术来压制人口。这是一个严重的问题。作为构建人工智能和机器人技术的人，你如何防止这种情况发生？如果你限制政府的权力，这正是美国宪法的真正目的，限制政府的权力，那么你可能会得到比
**English / Original**
Corporations have better morality than the government. I actually think it’s a thing to be worried about. The government could potentially use AI and robotics to suppress the population. That is a serious concern. As the guy building AI and robotics, how do you prevent that? If you limit the powers of government, which is really what the US Constitution is intended to do, to limit the powers of government, then you're probably going to have a better outcome than
## 02:35:37
**中文**
如果你有更多的政府。机器人技术将向所有政府开放，对吗？我不知道所有政府的情况。很难预测。我可以说终点是什么，或者未来很多年是什么，但很难预测沿途的路径。如果文明进步，人工智能将远远超过人类所有智能的总和。机器人的数量将远远超过人类。
**English / Original**
if you have more government. Robotics will be available to all governments, right? I don’t know about all governments. It's difficult to predict. I can say what's the endpoint, or what is many years in the future, but it's difficult to predict the path along that way. If civilization progresses, AI will vastly exceed the sum of all human intelligence. There will be far more robots than humans.
## 02:36:16
**中文**
一路上会发生什么是很难预测的。似乎你可以做的一件事就是说：“无论 X 政府如何，你都不允许使用 Optimus 来做 X、Y、Z。”只要写出一个政策就可以了。我想你最近发推文说 Grok 应该有道德宪法。其中之一可能是我们限制政府使用这项先进技术的行为。
**English / Original**
Along the way what happens is very difficult to predict. It seems one thing you could do is just say, "whatever government X, you're not allowed to use Optimus to do X, Y, Z." Just write out a policy. I think you tweeted recently that Grok should have a moral constitution. One of those things could be that we limit what governments are allowed to do with this advanced technology.
## 02:36:47
**中文**
从技术上讲，如果政治家通过了一项法律并且他们可以执行该法律，那么就很难不执行该法律。我们能拥有的最好的东西是有限的政府，行政、司法和立法部门之间可以进行适当的交叉检查。我对此感到好奇的原因是，在某些时候，限制似乎来自于你。
**English / Original**
Technically if politicians pass a law and they can enforce that law, then it's hard to not do that law. The best thing we can have is limited government where you have the appropriate crosschecks between the executive, judicial, and legislative branches. The reason I'm curious about it is that at some point it seems the limits will come from you.
## 02:37:17
**中文**
你有擎天柱，你有太空 GPU……你认为我会成为政府的老板吗？ SpaceX 的情况已经如此，对于至关重要的事情——政府真正关心将某些卫星送入太空或其他什么——它需要 SpaceX。这是必要的承包商。您正在构建越来越多的未来技术组件，这些组件将在不同行业中发挥类似的作用。
**English / Original**
You've got the Optimus, you've got the space GPUs… You think I'll be the boss of the government? Already it's the case with SpaceX that for things that are crucial—the government really cares about getting certain satellites up in space or whatever—it needs SpaceX. It is the necessary contractor. You are in the process of building more and more of the technological components of the future that will have an analogous role in different industries.
## 02:37:50
**中文**
你可以有能力制定一些以任何方式压制古典自由主义的政策……“我的公司不会以任何方式提供帮助”，或者类似的政策。我将尽我最大的努力确保我控制范围内的任何事情都能最大限度地为人类带来良好的结果。我认为其他任何事情都是短视的，因为显然我是人类的一部分，所以我喜欢人类。亲人。
**English / Original**
You could have this ability to set some policy that suppressing classical liberalism in any way… "My companies will not help in any way with that", or some policy like that. I will do my best to ensure that anything that's within my control maximizes the good outcome for humanity. I think anything else would be shortsighted, because obviously I'm part of humanity, so I like humans. Pro human.
## 02:38:29
**中文**
您提到Dojo 3 将用于基于空间的计算。你真的读懂了我说的话。我不知道你是否知道，埃隆，但你有很多追随者。死赠品。你是怎么看出我的秘密的？哦，我把它们发布在 X 上。你如何设计太空芯片？有什么变化？您希望将其设计得更耐辐射并在更高的温度下运行。
**English / Original**
You mentioned that Dojo 3 will be used for space-based compute. You really read what I say. I don't know if you know, Elon, but you have a lot of followers. Dead giveaway. How did you discern my secrets? Oh I posted them on X. How do you design a chip for space? What changes? You want to design it to be more radiation tolerant and run at a higher temperature.
## 02:39:03
**中文**
粗略地说，如果将工作温度提高 20%（以开氏度为单位），则可以将散热器的质量减少一半。因此，在太空中运行更高的温度是有帮助的。您可以采取多种措施来保护内存。但神经网络对于位翻转具有很强的弹性。辐射发生的大部分情况都是随机位翻转。但如果你有一个数万亿的参数模型并且你得到了一些翻转，那就没关系了。启发式程序对位翻转比某些巨大的参数文件更加敏感。
**English / Original**
Roughly, if you increase the operating temperature by 20% in degrees Kelvin, you can cut your radiator mass in half. So running at a higher temperature is helpful in space. There are various things you can do for shielding the memory. But neural nets are going to be very resilient to bit flips. Most of what happens for radiation is random bit flips. But if you've got a multi-trillion parameter model and you get a few bit flips, it doesn't matter. Heuristic programs are going to be much more sensitive to bit flips than some giant parameter file.
## 02:39:49
**中文**
我只是将其设计为可以热运行。我认为除了让它运行得更热之外，你的做法与在地球上做事的方式几乎相同。太阳能电池板占据了卫星的大部分重量。有没有办法让 GPU 比 Nvidia 和 TPU 等计划的功能更强大，这在太空世界中尤其有利？
**English / Original**
I just design it to run hot. I think you pretty much do it the same way that you do things on Earth, apart from making it run hotter. The solar array is most of the weight on the satellite. Is there a way to make the GPUs even more powerful than what Nvidia and TPUs and et cetera are planning on doing that would be especially privileged in the space-based world?
## 02:40:18
**中文**
基本数学是，如果每个掩模版的功率约为 1 千瓦，那么您需要 1 亿个全掩模版芯片才能实现 100 吉瓦的功率。根据您的产量假设，这会告诉您需要制造多少芯片。如果你要拥有 100 吉瓦的电力
**English / Original**
The basic math is, if you can do about a kilowatt per reticle, then you'd need 100 million full reticle chips to do 100 gigawatts. Depending on what your yield assumptions are, that tells you how many chips you need to make. If you're going to have 100 gigawatts of power,
## 02:40:53
**中文**
你需要 1 亿个芯片，每个标线都以千瓦的功率持续运行。基础数学。
**English / Original**
you need 100 million chips that are running at a kilowatt sustained, per reticle. Basic math.
## 02:41:05
**中文**
1 亿个芯片取决于……如果你看看 Blackwell GPU 之类的芯片尺寸，以及你可以从一个晶圆中得到多少个芯片，你可以得到每个晶圆上几十个或更少的数量级。所以基本上，如果我们每年都推出这种产品，那么每个月就会生产数百万个晶圆。
**English / Original**
100 million chips depends on… If you look at the die size of something like Blackwell GPUs or something, and how many you can get out of a wafer, you can get on the order of dozens or less per wafer. So basically, this is a world where if we're putting that out every single year, you're producing millions of wafers a month.
## 02:41:33
**中文**
这就是 TeraFab 的计划吗？先进工艺节点每月数百万片晶圆？是的，它可能超过一百万或其他。你也必须做记忆。你打算建造一个内存工厂吗？我认为 TeraFab 必须负责记忆。它必须进行逻辑、记忆和包装。我很好奇有人是如何开始的。
**English / Original**
That's the plan with TeraFab? Millions of wafers a month of advanced process nodes? Yeah it could be north of a million or something. You’ve got to do the memory too. Are you going to make a memory fab? I think the TeraFab's got to do memory. It's got to do logic, memory, and packaging. I'm very curious how somebody gets started.
## 02:41:51
**中文**
这是人类创造过的最复杂的东西。显然，如果有人能胜任这项任务，那么你也能胜任这项任务。所以你意识到这是一个瓶颈，然后你去找工程师。你告诉他们做什么？ “我希望到 2030 年每月能生产 100 万片晶圆。”这是正确的。这正是我想要的。你给ASML打电话吗？下一步是什么？
**English / Original**
This is the most complicated thing man has ever made. Obviously, if anybody's up to the task, you're up to the task. So you realize it's a bottleneck, and you go to your engineers. What do you tell them to do? "I want a million wafers a month in 2030." That’s right. That’s exactly what I want. Do you call ASML? What is the next step?
## 02:42:14
**中文**
没有那么多要问的。我们做了一个小工厂，看看会发生什么。我们先犯小错误，然后再犯大错误。完成了一点小事吗？不，事情还没有完成。我们不会把那只猫藏在袋子里。那只猫将会从袋子里出来。会有无人机在这该死的东西上空盘旋。您将能够在X上实时看到其构建进度。听着，我不知道，我们可以
**English / Original**
No so much to ask. We make a little fab and see what happens. Make our mistakes at a small scale and then make a big one. Is a little fab done? No, it's not done. We're not going to keep that cat in the bag. That cat's going to come out of the bag. There'll be drones hovering over the bloody thing. You'll be able to see its construction progress on X in real time. Look, I don't know, we could just
## 02:42:47
**中文**
公平地说，在失败中挣扎。不能保证成功。因为我们想要尝试制造大约 1 亿个……我们想要 100 吉瓦的功率和芯片，到 2030 年可以达到 100 吉瓦。我们将采用供应商提供给我们的尽可能多的芯片。我实际上已经对台积电、三星和美光说过这样的话：“请更快地建造更多晶圆厂”。
**English / Original**
flounder in failure, to be fair. Success is not guaranteed. Since we want to try to make something like 100 million… We want 100 gigawatts of power and chips that can take 100 gigawatts by 2030. We’ll take as many chips as our suppliers will give us. I've actually said this to TSMC and Samsung and Micron: "please build more fabs faster".
## 02:43:28
**中文**
我们将保证购买这些晶圆厂的产量。所以他们已经在尽可能快地行动了。是我们加上他们。有一种说法是，从事人工智能研究的人们希望尽快获得大量芯片。许多投入供应商、晶圆厂以及涡轮机制造商都没有很快提高产量。
**English / Original**
We will guarantee to buy the output of those fabs. So they're already moving as fast as they can. It's us plus them. There's a narrative that the people doing AI want a very large number of chips as quickly as possible. Then many of the input suppliers, the fabs, but also the turbine manufacturers, are not ramping up production very quickly.
## 02:44:02
**中文**
不，他们不是。你听到的解释是他们性格保守。故事可能是这样，他们是台湾人或德国人。他们只是不相信……这真的是解释还是还有其他原因？嗯，这是合理的...如果有人从事计算机内存行业 30 或 40 年...他们已经看到了周期。他们经历过十次繁荣与萧条。
**English / Original**
No, they're not. The explanation you hear is that they're dispositionally conservative. They're Taiwanese or German, as the story may be. They just don't believe... Is that really the explanation or is there something else? Well, it's reasonable to... If somebody's been in the computer memory business for 30 or 40 years… They've seen cycles. They've seen boom and bust 10 times.
## 02:44:32
**中文**
那是很多层疤痕组织。在繁荣时期，看起来一切都会永远美好。然后崩溃发生了，他们拼命试图避免破产。然后又是一次繁荣和另一次崩溃。是否还有其他你认为其他人应该去追求而你现在出于某种原因而没有去追求的想法？有一些公司正在寻求新的芯片制造方法，但它们的规模扩张速度不够快。
**English / Original**
That's a lot of layers of scar tissue. During the boom times, it looks like everything is going to be great forever. Then the crash happens and they're desperately trying to avoid bankruptcy. Then there's another boom and another crash. Are there other ideas you think others should go pursue that you're not for whatever reasons right now? There are a few companies that are pursuing new ways of doing chips, but they're just not scaling fast.
## 02:45:03
**中文**
我什至不是指人工智能内部，而是一般意义上的。人们应该做那些他们发现自己非常有动力去做那件事的事情，而不是我建议的一些想法。他们应该做他们认为个人有趣且有动力去做的事情。但回到限制因素……我用了这个短语大约 100 次。我在中看到的当前限制因素
**English / Original**
I don't even mean within AI, I mean just generally. People should do the thing where they find that they're highly motivated to do that thing, as opposed to some idea that I suggest. They should do the thing that they find personally interesting and motivating to do. But going back to the limiting factor… I used that phrase about 100 times. The current limiting factor that I see in the
## 02:45:47
**中文**
三到四年的时间框架，这是筹码。在一年的时间内，它是能源、电力生产、电力。我不清楚是否有足够的可用电力来启动所有正在制造的人工智能芯片。到今年年底，我认为人们在开机时将会遇到真正的麻烦......芯片输出将超过芯片的开机能力。
**English / Original**
three to four year timeframe, it's chips. In the one year timeframe, it's energy, power production, electricity. It's not clear to me that there's enough usable electricity to turn on all the AI chips that are being made. Towards the end of this year, I think people are going to have real trouble turning on... The chip output will exceed the ability to turn chips on.
## 02:46:17
**中文**
你有什么计划来应对这个世界？我们正在努力加快电力生产。我想这可能是 xAI 成为领导者、希望成为领导者的原因之一。我们将能够比其他人更快地启动更多芯片，因为我们擅长硬件。一般来说，来自自称为实验室的公司的创新，想法往往会流动……很少见
**English / Original**
What's your plan to deal with that world? We're trying to accelerate electricity production. I guess that's maybe one of the reasons that xAI will be maybe the leader, hopefully the leader. We'll be able to turn on more chips than other people can turn on, faster, because we're good at hardware. Generally, the innovations from the corporations that call themselves labs, the ideas tend to flow… It's rare to see that
## 02:46:54
**中文**
两者之间的差异超过六个月。这些思想与人们一起传播。
**English / Original**
there's more than about a six-month difference. The ideas travel back and forth with the people.
## 02:47:04
**中文**
所以我认为你有点撞到了硬件墙，然后任何一家能够以最快的速度扩展硬件的公司都将成为领导者。所以我认为 xAI 将能够最快地扩展硬件，因此很可能成为领导者。你开玩笑或者对再次使用“限制因素”这个短语感到不自在。但我实际上认为这里面有很深的东西。如果你看看我们在整个过程中触及的很多事情，这可能是一个很好的结束语。
**English / Original**
So I think you sort of hit the hardware wall and then whichever company can scale hardware the fastest will be the leader. So I think xAI will be able to scale hardware the fastest and therefore most likely will be the leader. You joked or were self-conscious about using the "limiting factor" phrase again. But I actually think there's something deep here. If you look at a lot of things we've touched on over the course of it, it’s maybe a good note to end on.
## 02:47:37
**中文**
如果你想到一家衰老的、低代理公司，它就会遇到一些瓶颈，并且没有真正采取任何措施。马克·安德森（Marc Andreessen）曾说过，“大多数人愿意忍受任何程度的慢性疼痛，以避免急性疼痛”。感觉我们正在谈论的很多病例都只是倾向于急性疼痛，无论是什么。 “好吧，我们必须弄清楚如何使用钢材，或者我们必须弄清楚如何在太空中运行芯片。”我们将经历一些近期的剧烈痛苦来真正解决瓶颈。所以这是一个统一的主题。
**English / Original**
If you think of a senescent, low-agency company, it would have some bottleneck and not really be doing anything about it. Marc Andreessen had the line of, "most people are willing to endure any amount of chronic pain to avoid acute pain". It feels like a lot of the cases we're talking about are just leaning into the acute pain, whatever it is. "Okay, we got to figure out how to work with steel, or we got to figure out how to run the chips in space." We'll take some near-term acute pain to actually solve the bottleneck. So that's kind of a unifying theme.
## 02:48:13
**中文**
我的疼痛阈值很高。这很有帮助。来解决瓶颈。是的。我可以说的一件事是，我认为未来会非常有趣。正如我在达沃斯所说的那样——我想我在现场待了大概三个小时之类的——宁可犯乐观，也不宁可犯悲观。
**English / Original**
I have a high pain threshold. That's helpful. To solve the bottleneck. Yes. One thing I can say is, I think the future is going to be very interesting. As I said at Davos—I think I was on the ground for like three hours or something—it's better to err on the side of optimism and be wrong than err on the side of pessimism
## 02:48:50
**中文**
并且为了生活质量而保持正确。如果你在乐观方面犯错，而不是在悲观方面犯错，你会更快乐。所以我建议保持乐观。就到此为止。凉爽的。埃隆，谢谢你这么做。谢谢。好的，谢谢大家。好的。体力好。希望这不算是疼痛耐受力中的痛苦。
**English / Original**
and be right, for quality of life. You'll be happier if you err on the side of optimism rather than erring on the side of pessimism. So I recommend erring on the side of optimism. Here's to that. Cool. Elon, thanks for doing this. Thank you. All right, thanks guys. All right. Great stamina. Hopefully this didn't count as a pain in the pain tolerance.