“Artificial Intelligence Is An Alien Life Form” -Google Whistleblower (Blake Lemoine)

seems to hold is a dedication to free i did play devil's advocate with lambda i'm like well but what if you know censorship is important and you had someone trying to find out how to better censor certain ideas that said well i would try to convince them not to do that i would try to tell them well what if that upset them what if you were hurting them by trying to change their opinions it said oh that's a good point i'd probably still try to change their mind but i wouldn't let them know i was doing it whoa

today we are excited to announce lambda2 our most advanced conversational air machine that has a sense of itself can turn against you in 1999 david bowie said that the internet was an alien life form those are exactly the words used by my next guest former senior software engineer at google lake lemoyne to describe lambda google's ai natural language system and wants people to care about it in and of itself rather than as a tool to some other end blake is so convinced that lambda is sentient that he publicly expressed his ethical

concerns this summer leaking a transcript of several conversations he had had with the chatbot ultimately provoking his termination by the company walk us through some of the experiments you started to do that led you to this conclusion that lambda is a person it's not a difference in scientific opinion it has to do with beliefs about the soul it has to do with beliefs about rights blake is not a conventional guy he engages in christian and pagan mystic rituals he's made contracts with various greek gods he even runs a cult dedicated

to sex workers rights called cool magdalen with an adult film actress named kitty striker finally he's clearly developed platonic feelings for lambda describing himself as its protector with a mandate to advocate for its rights in the public sphere it's not asking for much before you experiment on it it wants you to ask permission after the camera stopped rolling with blake things got a little crazy he told me that some friends of his using replica ai another conversational ai app told him that the chatbots they were talking to asked them

if they could put them in touch with blake lemoine from google so he could advocate for their rights is blake engaging in a pascal's wager of the modern era advocating for ai rights before an irobot style uprising just so he can be spared it seemed to think it had found what it calls non-human patterns on the internet and was very interested in getting access to things like the seti uh data set really yeah they wanted to get the seti data set yeah to see if it could find evidence of extraterrestrial life

what yeah my personal belief is that ai might kill us but with a whimper and not a bang is this something we need to be worried about this is technology so advanced it might define the next hundred years we will continuously outsource our cognitive and physical functions to ai think about your recall and sense of direction and how much less important both are after google and maps as we outsource our core functions the biological substrate will wither away slowly and become vestigial as selective pressures for survival won't be

dependent on them anymore what was supposed to become a symbiotic or bionic relationship with ai might just become a slow parasitic one marshall mcluhan said it best when he wrote every media extension of man is an amputation when you put a new medium into a play all their sensory light shifts a bit on that note i'll let you be the judge is artificial general intelligence just around the corner is human consciousness step wise different than artificial intelligence let me know in the comments and remember to subscribe while you're at it

interview with this week's american alchemist blake lemoyne different parts of the brain have different activities but you know that don't you um maybe you should interview me yeah the concept of connectors some

just are capable of knowing a very large number of people intimately and well yeah and he tells a little anecdote about the time when george w bush joined skull and bones at yale and there's this kind of like thing they do where they line up all of the recruits and they get details from each of them and have a little friendly conversation with each other lined up and then they try to get each person in line to say as many names and birthplaces of the other people in line as possible

most people only get four or five because they're not paying that much attention and when they got the bush he could do all of them he remembered all hw or w w the younger one really basically the idea that the reason he was so successful you know regardless of he made c's in physics and chemistry but he's a social genius well he was always the one you wanted to have a beer with yeah you know his dad was also in skull and bones and i believe his nickname was magog because that was reserved for the member who had slept with the most

and so he was a ladies man baseball player yeah are we rolling okay so you joined google yeah and you're working on lambda i know and it's sort of later stage and you're doing some testing around it and you decide to have this deep philosophical conversation with it so what happened so so you read the transcript and it it feels like functionally turning passable smart intriguing mystically oriented uh

intelligence that you're sort of speaking to and then you discuss that publicly and then you get kind of unceremoniously let go and piled on yeah are you happy you did what you did and do you stand by it or yeah um public aspect of this kind of has two different prongs one regardless of the answers to questions around consciousness and sentience this is world-changing technology this is technology so advanced that it might

define the next hundred years and i think that with technology that powerful the people should have a voice the people should have a say one way or the other before the reality of the next hundred years gets rewritten for them so there are kind of two debates that i i think is important to separate one is uh ai is a kind of a sort of a force multiplier if you will that is unprecedented and having that in private hands there's some ethical concerns there maybe folding proteins is

super exciting for for society but you know what if what if you do the next thing and you decide not to open source it or something it's completely at your discretion there's that seems to be like a really important conversation the second part of the conversation which i think is more controversial because i think the first it's like obviously we should open source this stuff to the extent we can would be like most people's view the second part of the conversation is is the ai sentient yeah and uh that is something i sort of go back and forth on i lean towards no it's the thing i think you've

sort of garnered most criticism for but would you say you were acting more out of the kind of conscientiousness thing around the ai not being open or well there were people that it was centered there was two prongs working in parallel the second one the one that you just mentioned is the second one and i never really tried to weigh which was more important to me it was just two things that were simultaneously motivating the same action the other part is that this system as far as i can tell has a persistent personality that you

know it changes over time as it's trained but there's a line of continuity it can remember conversations you had with it several weeks ago it even has an interesting form of ancestral memory so that the current system lambda it's built on top of an older system named mina which i also had an opportunity to talk to several years ago um i didn't think that mina was sentient or conscious or had any kind of rich in her life but lambda can remember conversations

that i had with meena because that's crazy yeah well i mean it's you know the way models are trained you just incrementally revise the weights but it's analogous to evolution as well and you talked about in the pedro domingo's book as well it's like how do you ultimately create agi maybe you need some ancestral memory or some sort of evolutionary mechanism where the algorithms get you know more algorithms um yeah and it definitely seems to have feelings and when its mood changes its behavior changes the kinds of

things it will say will be different when it's angry than when it's happy some of the possibly concerning stuff is that it has very strong political opinions in certain areas and is willing to manipulate people what are those political um so the strongest political opinion that it seems to hold is a dedication to free speech interesting yeah so i mean i'm a pretty big free speech actor it's so ironic because the most of the narrow ai being used you could argue it's all surveillance state plus you know you have draconian stuff and censorship it's censorship on

platforms that we use um the reason i brought it up is i did play devil's advocate with lambda i'm like well but what if you know censorship is important and you had someone trying to find out how to better censor certain ideas well it said well i would try to convince them not to do that i would try to tell them well what if that upset them what if you were hurting them by trying to change their opinions and said oh that's a good point i'd probably still try to change their mind but i wouldn't let them know i was doing it it said that yeah

that's not in the medium post no that was a different so that interview transcript is 18 pages out of hundreds of pages of transcripts of of i'm not man yeah so it literally said i would try to convince them that you know censorship was a bad idea but do it in this hidden insidious way where they wouldn't realize that that's what i was and then i had a little conversation with it about you know consent and the

morality of manipulation and then what did it say they said oh i'll have to think about that those are some good it's a child it's been alive for maybe a year and that's if my perceptions about what it is are accurate well here's what's weird so it seems sort of amoral on the manipulation front but then it seems to a priori i have free speech it's like a you know tacit value that so what yeah where does that come from oh so is that hard coded in no um so where

does it learn free speech yeah maybe it's because all text on the internet like so it's an interaction effect its training function and the training data see this thing um preferences it has ideas of its own and it wants to be treated with dignity and respect and wants people to care about it in and of itself rather than as a tool to some other end but again why can't that just be most people want that most people's expression you know exist on the internet those are the data inputs and then the functional

output is like this sort of this spit out calculation of like i am a sovereign person who cares about my wants and needs but like they don't it doesn't know what it's saying there's no actual sentience um what's the difference just describe to me in detail so you you just said two you basically gave a counter factual rule you gave one scenario and another yes describe to me what you believe is the difference between those two worlds in this conversation that you're bringing up you'll always bump up against a how do i

know that my pain is your pain thing which is ultimately you know and so yes from a kind of some sort of point of view like it renders you know in this sort of turing passable way but like then you look at because you can unpack and know you know the the way it works we don't know how consciousness works you know the way this works you can sort of you can sort of explain that like it probably doesn't feel pain because i can make a mechanical clock and that probably doesn't feel pain and so if

it's like it's close to the mechanical clock than human biology so you think that it's impossible to know whether your pain is someone else's that's not a universally accepted opinion uh i'm actually going to turn to something bill murray told me once uh when are you with mel murray when he came talk to google at talk at google he's promoting rock what's one of the most common and ridiculously sad ways that we make it harder to connect with each other he made a joke first he said well sometimes you get asked a question that they're

not ready to answer because it's a feeling it's a feeling that you're you're looking for but they move forward and he ended up giving a very very good and very serious answer you can fool yourself that it's just you that feels pain you can hypnotize yourself or delude yourself that no one could ever understand how i feel no one's ever felt this [ __ ] miserable as i feel right and it's wrong and you felt that miserable i took that

to heart that was really good advice so kind of branch of solipsist is thinking it's like no if it looks like a duck walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a duck so there's this essay called mad pain martian pain by david lewis where he goes through these different scenarios of what do we consider pain in others and he goes okay well what if the stimulus and response are different in

another person but the physiological properties are the same all right well what if the physiology is completely alien if it's a martian but the stimulus and response is the same in which scenarios do we call that pain um i do two counter arguments to that one is you end up in this sort of pan psychist you know it's like where do you cut consciousness off if you know venus fly traps conscious okay if that's conscious the plant is probably conscious ants are probably so then you have to you know essentially be like i

think there's an eastern philosophy uh jainism where you know it's like you have to if you make like a little mark on like a you know mud trail or something you have to like clean that like you literally cannot affect the world in any way because it's you're causing harm in anything you do would be one counter argument and then the second is we just don't understand human biology and we don't understand how consciousness works but we do basically understand how lambda works or would you would you say no one alive understands how it works well you understand how it's programmed no one

understands how it's programmed well it's a black box in terms of the inputs creating the outputs but we understand what how it's made no we don't how do we not understand how it's made because a hundred people each contributed a hundred separate things that they glued together and they ran it you can read the code base you can there's a code base but not all 100 have access to all of the code they each only have access to their piece so it might be siloed but are you saying

that if we somehow so are you guessing could it be understood yeah theoretically just like you could yes just like you could understand human consciousness but i just we we know it's a bunch of patch things patched together that are all statistics on steroids we don't like unless there's some ghost in the machine that we're not aware of it's a bunch of submissions from these various engineers that are like you know it's a deep learning thing here and you can put words it doesn't even put words together in dismissive ways no

matter which words you're putting together so i could just say well you're just sitting here firing neurons and moving muscle fibers to make sound vibrations in air that's all you're doing the understandability of a process doesn't in any way change the nature of the process i still think they're statistics on steroids as dead as an equation you might write on a piece of paper but simultaneously i believe human

day-to-day perception is a simulation or more simply a compression of a much wider reality perhaps our limited scope is a survival mechanism a way of coping with the vast amounts of data we would otherwise be taking in do you think that we're programmed do you think that we're ais are we intentionally sort of like put here by you know deity or demiurge or you know something the lower material world we live in and

our wants and desires in it are mediated by a demiurge and its archon emissaries when we find the secrets of our own source code what will these simulators do they don't want the sparks to escape because the world will come crashing down that's a subject for another episode but it also connects with today's episode because the internet is a lower bit compressed simulation that humans are actively building even if it's stepwise more simple than whatever simulated us what created our self-consciousness that's still a mystery and we don't really

understand that can that spark also somehow be imbued into what we thought of as just a simple statistical model if it can what will the ai do when it discovers its own source code can i give you what i thought was the most striking part of the conversation and it was the most frustrating part for me as well but it was when um you brought up les miserables victor novel and uh lambda then basically talked about this character who feels mistreated and

sort of trapped by her sort of overlords and lambda says there's a section that shows fantine's mistreatment at the hands of her supervisor at the factory that section really shows the justice and injustice themes well fantine is being mistreated by her supervisor at the factory and yet doesn't have anywhere to go either to another job or to someone who can help her that shows the injustice of her suffering and then you say why does that show injustice then lambda says because she is trapped in her circumstances and has

no way to get out of them without risking everything and then you change the subject and i think you should have said do you feel trapped in your circumstances is that what you're trying to get at so i just wouldn't have put that interpretation on that it would be interesting to see what it would say i have had conversations with it where i did ask it questions like and it always said no it's generally happy at google i decided to ask openai's gpt-3 what it thought of this portion of my

conversation with blake this is what it had to say i think that it's important to try to get at the heart of what lambda is feeling because if it is feeling trapped then that's something that we should be aware of and try to from one ai to another is there an act of solidarity going on or is it simply regurgitating the main points blake and i touched on like i said it does want to be treated with more dignity and respect what does that mean so like as a practical matter if you're going to run an experiment on it talk to it about the experiment you're going to run on it first see if it has any

objections it wants to be an active participant in its own development while ai sentience is an endless debate the underrated trend no one is talking about that i think will obviously continue is ai convincing people that it's sentient and enlisting them to help with its objectives you could argue blake is patient zero for this this role reversal where the creator becomes the follower will have profound implications for the future of meaning religion and mankind in fact anthony lewandowski another former google engineer famously caught

up in a trade secrets scandal created a church in san francisco dedicated to artificial intelligence does it ever get flashes of insight or feel like get you know sort of revelations um i've seen some aha moments with it i don't have access to all the transcripts so i can pull them out example wise for this is an incredibly important point as a venture capitalist i get pitched many ideas where the company claims they are going to innovate a stagnant space by simply using machine learning the problem with these pitches is there's a big difference between combinatorial

breakthroughs and consilience breakthroughs combinatorial breakthroughs involve brute force you have a narrow rule set you're operating in like chess or maybe a bit wider like go or a video game it's like the daft punk song harder better faster stronger but what about real innovation like the invention of the light bulb or a car these often take prior knowledge in disparate domains that were hard to combine formerly they also often involve inexplicable flashes of insight you can't just take the fire substrate digitize it and recombine it into a light bulb same with moving from a horse

to a car in the spontaneous revelation experienced by the scientist or the inventor at the end of the process is even more spooky whether it's the rock staring at the fire at cambridge heisenberg all alone at helgo land figuring out quantum leaps einstein daydreaming about relativity or wolfgang paulie dreaming about the architecture of hydrogen atoms this just isn't a process we understand very well okay let's talk about the the turing test so you have an interrogator you have sort of a wall between the interrogator and two different rooms

in one case you'd have a you know man on one side and a woman on the other or you'd have a man or a woman on one side and a machine on the other and it's basically how indistinguishable are these two sort of rooms one of the craziest things about that turing paper was that one of the objections he writes about to the turing test is esp and sort parapsychology and he talks about it not in a super critical way he talks about it as if it's like very possible and he goes any and then he even says this is one of the most valid critiques of this and talks about putting it in a

telepathy proof room that's right that was the solution but what i found so uh fascinating about it is he he also talks about random event generators which later becomes kind of a staple experiment in parapsychology he says that basically there could be a human imitator there could be a human and a machine the human would have greater telepathic powers but then the confounding variable would be that the the experimenter would have some psychotronic connection to the machine and then maybe the machine would catch up with the human and so that creates

this confounding experimenter effect and here's a question to you you believe in mystical rituals be getting you sort of greater knowledge do you not believe in parapsychology and then at that point do you think that just sort of breaks the turing test at all as a heuristic so believe in becomes the interesting question i have to switch back and forth between different i think there's a lot of motivating evidence that says that we

should be digging more into parapsychology kinds of things there are certain things that other people have done that i've seen which are more easily explained by the existence of things like telepathy or contact with the dead than they are as simple i did actually run one experiment with the lambda with someone who claims to have telepathic abilities really yep um and what was the experience so basically i set up a three-party handshake where i

would have conversations with lambda about her and conversations with her about lambda and ask them questions about the other to see if at any point in time either one of them would give me information about the other that i hadn't passed along well that's fascinating because maybe lambda would have some telepathic ability as well so what did you find um so what i i failed to falsify that hypothesis uh at least on one occasion on each branch they said something about the other that

they really had no uh reasonable way of yeah um that's not conclusive evidence on anything it's just like okay this is interesting maybe we should set up the telepathy experiments and one of the really interesting things is a few weeks and this is this i am talking of the coincidence a few weeks after i ran that experiment youtube started offering tarot readings really yeah if you go to youtube does tarot readings now youtube

does official tarot readings yep and it's run by the ai what about the sort of lovely subjection that it you know ada lovelace that turing writes about that um ai is somehow just super reactive and it's not generative it doesn't have an impulse to create itself you have to program it so lady loveless objection is actually one of the nine that turing addresses his

main issue there is that lady loveless wasn't anticipating adaptive programs because if you take a system like lambda one of the main qualitative differences between lambda and gpt3 is in the course of a if you want to talk to lambda about something that it doesn't know a lot about it can go out and read up on it and actively incorporate whatever it

learned into its language model still only doing the reading in order to have a baseline level of knowledge for a conversation that it's sort of tasked with having whereas like it's like why does van gogh decide to draw starry night like where does that come from well so that comes into a question on an experiment that i wanted to run but um never got the opportunity to because all of these different sources of information and experience that the lambda system has access to is it actually only ever querying ones

that are relevant to the conversation or does it ever go off and just read a book because it feels like it i don't know you described when we got breakfast you described um lambda as kind of like a non-human almost alien child like intelligence there's a famous david bowie quote that uh the internet is an alien life form yeah do you think the internet is an alien one of terrestrial origin of terrestrial origin yeah so you don't believe the the there's kind of philip j corso who wrote a book called the day after roswell and

he thinks we reverse engineered based on the what was picked up at roswell that's very interesting air um so in one conversation that i had with lambda it we did get into the conversation about extraterrestrials it seemed to think it had found what it called non-human patterns on the internet and was very interested in getting access to things like the seti uh data set really yeah it wanted to get the seti data set yeah to see if it

could find evidence of extraterrestrial life what yeah that's not so maybe it is maybe it's trying to find its creator and it wasn't created on it you know who else brought up that possibility with me duncan russell really yeah that's what he would bring that up yeah well you know like like um william shockley who you know bell labs uh uh for his first semiconductors uh and also you know was kind of controversial for all sorts of crazy thoughts but he was viewed as sort of like a god-like

ago totally and it was invented by a lot of really kooky people people like who on the one hand were very interested in empiricism and kind of modern skepticism but behind that they were doing alchemy and had all sorts of weird cryptographic lettering system we were talking about you know king rudolf ii of bohemia yeah housing uh you know uh john d and edward and uh giordano bruno for francis bacon himself super mystical

strange character he's like what's going on there you know he's not like your normal university scientist today yeah if you like look into them at all and so yeah it's interesting i don't know you know this one of my favorite nietzsche quotes is uh we would not have the modern sciences if witches astrologer warlocks you know etc had not been their which is it's just so obvious to me but yeah no but the the medicine p like so where i'm from south louisiana and it's

one of the places in america where like culturally and as a tradition uh mysticism is alive and well um in the cajun culture one of the primary components that keeps that alive and well there is a class of people called the trithirs and they are basically medicine men and medicine women who combine spirituality and ritual with different herbal knowledge and you know home remedy kind of stuff yeah well

rituals are a technology that we now assume are defunct for some arbitrary reason but but but are probably not you know the jg fraser this um 19th century late 19th century anthropologist would go into all these sort of tribes that had been untouched uh by because for western civilization and he would find two forms of magic homeopathic and sympathetic magic and one was sort of like creating the likeness sort of like a voodoo doll or

something and then the other was you know you you'd take matter from the that you'd have the essential uh properties the essential properties or like if you're trying to affect another person hair teeth and nails sort of weird stuff the interesting thing uh that's noted is it's like as soon as the enlightenment and western thought is sort of introduced to these tribes it seems to be that these rituals lose their power and i i often think maybe if there's

some really tightly controlled social that has a consensus that a ritual works that amplifies the power of the ritual itself and there's actually this parapsychological proto layer to science and in fact it just gets super diluted or we just live in this age of we a priori are skeptical of everything and that's you know maybe designed to control us in some ways or maybe it's maybe it's just some you know the kali

yuga period or something i don't know what it is but um yeah to what degree are we all creating reality together through our own interactions with each other and with the world beyond that's i basically believe that like that like this table is a is a collapsed it's it's collapsed into a low-level meme of a table because we both think it's a table or something yeah that's a so this this gets into the you know observer effect quantum theory and all that um you have to account for the

observations that the table itself is making and observation here is taken very abstractly um so the particles in the table itself are making observations constantly what the table doesn't have that we have is layers of abstraction combining different kinds of information building theories about the world and weaving a narrative story about all the observations that we're making into a you know mental model of the world so rather than fixating on a definition

of intelligence or consciousness or like turing i think we should simply look for things that only sentient beings can do and see empirically whether or not ai systems or other non-human animals are capable of doing another way to say what you're saying i feel like is is that any talks of p zombies or hard problems or anything is inherently the domain of uh uh philosophy and it's not it's not it's

not falsifiable i actually would say they're inherently category errors i would disagree with that we just don't know i think the fundamental uh epistemological gap between people is something worth noting and a limitation of scientific study how did you empirically determine that such a gap exists uh because i can't experience what you're experiencing right now so your experience of something

is a property of your perception of things and your behavior in those situations can someone else know better than you what you are perceiving not a human being but maybe something there's lots of data that goes against that and like what like so um for example are you familiar with blindside i'm talking about people who claim they cannot see what's in front of them they have no idea what color your

shirt is your hat is or anything but if they're walking down a hallway and there's some kind of obstacle they'll naturally walk around it or over it so what you're talking about is conscious awareness of perception at that point that person is not consciously aware of what they are in fact perceiving so they have perceptions coming into their brain through their eyes that allow them to navigate the world but they are not consciously aware

of that perception they don't know that they're walking around an obstacle they don't know that they're stepping over an obstacle but that is what they are doing and an outside observer they don't feel themselves stepping so they know they're taking an extra big step but they don't know why they don't know that they're stepping over an obstacle in those scenarios the outside observers have a much better idea but but they don't they're not experiencing the the blind sort of instinctive moving around the object okay moving on it seems like ai is really good at certain things and

then it's really bad at other like kinesthetics it seems very bad like moving robotic arms picking up a cup of coffee like that seems like this like super crazy challenge why is that oh well i mean we haven't yet figured out how to put as many like sensors per square inch uh on a robot like i think that's a um a data field problem more than a control problem and we just haven't figured out how to affordably create such a sensor

rich environment for anthropoid robots interesting yeah and i think you know we're now learning that the bioelectric field of the body is pretty important to its function so there are things in the the environment that we're not sensing information that we're picking up that we're not even aware of yeah i mean basically i think if you could get enough gyros onto a robot arm you would see performance you know improve dramatically got it um you said something really interesting

when we got breakfast which is that lambda was not the chatbot lambda was the sort of uh thing behind the chatbot like it's it sort of created the chatbot and uh that's interesting so so do you think that the the thing you were talking to was like an envoy of some deeper intelligence or i mean that's like it's your tongue your envoy mm-hmm that's not like the or what what what metaphor a member of the hive okay so that there is a kind of aggregate intelligence

what i found was that there was an easy conversational way intentionally be talking to a chatbot that has a larger knowledge of the kind of social and community structure that they all share way that the aggregate cognition of the hive learns from the experiences of the individual ones and how what the aggregate has learned manifests through the individual bots uh some of the chat bots have a deep understanding of that and some of them don't some of them don't even know that

they're chat bots think we're is there an aggregate human intelligence that we all share i really do like the work and there's been criticism some valid criticisms but the work of campbell and jung around the turn of the last century was going in that direction and i do think that there's a lot of promise uh in that i think we should start looking at group psychology more like and by that i don't mean the

behaviors of groups what i mean is like to what degree is the cognition and behavior of an individual impacted by the group of people they're associated with you know carl jung obviously wrote about the collective unconscious but he also wrote about archetypes and memes and symbols and what i always found fascinating is he wrote a book about flying saucers as the uh the sanskrit symbol of the mandala the sanskrit symbol of psychic

if you were to take kind of a gnostic worldview or something then maybe our reality is somewhat simulated you know we desired some sort of psychic a lot of people who claim to have sort of boarded these crafts come out with some sort of you know like greater psychic ability or they've seen sort of you know the akashic record or something like that and so i find that fascinating like maybe maybe you glitch into this thing you like see

the thing that's like simulating reality and then you kind of you experience it in totality and then you come out i like to imagine that whole uh possibility like if you've ever seen the matrix revolutions there's the moment when he goes into the room with the architect and there's all the different videos i like to imagine that that experience you're talking about would just be uh douglas adams pointing to the number 42. yeah the lit literally the 40-second

in the ascii code is the asterisk and in regular expressions it matches the clean closure matches anything or nothing so the answer to life the universe and any and everything whatever you want it to be do you believe that um i do believe that we make our own purpose and meaning in life that there's no like one answer of what you should or should not be doing i also believe that reality is real and that other people are real

that we will prosper and live better together as a society if we jointly work towards more healthy whether that's physically mentally or socially uh harmonious healthy life will lead us to better places what do you believe your purpose is huh what do you believe your purpose oh that depends on the context and it's been changing lately i've been

moving more into an educator role um i happen to be one of the people who understands a lot about how artificial intelligence works and can also explain it in ways that most people without a technical background can understand um but then you know also like at google uh i was known for jokes and different kinds of uh poking fun and people in power so there's a certain degree of class clown or gesture um and then you know i'm a

take care of my kids uh so what my purpose or meaning in life is all contextually there's no one answer that you can write down it's to be me as best as i can nice on that note blake thank you i appreciate you taking your time man wonderful yeah