Now we got a touch on Elon Musk's desire to Star a truth a GPT Now Elon just launched a LLC or company and is potentially looking to raise money from shareholders called X Dot A I and shareholders would probably be private venture-backed shareholders who are already shareholders in companies like Tesla and Twitter So not something we'd publicly be able to invest in. But a lot of this is inspired by Elon Musk's frustration with Openai turning into really a for-profit rather than being a non-profit especially since he helped start Open Ai And there's a lot of drama around. Hey, wait a minute. What is a truthful Ai And why does it matter? Well, we'll listen to a clip here from Elon Musk in just a moment.

But I Want to start by pointing out this uh, this community notes response that Elon Musk had following one of his tweets and so Elon Musk tweeted the fall following. He said NPR literally said Federal funding is essential to public Radio on their own website. Now taking down what Hypocrites now I believe you could actually still find this NPR Federal funding item on their website. They're pretty transparent about their funding sources, but it is a little confusing to break apart because some parts they like to say oh well, in some years we average one percent from federal organizations and then the reality is they're kind of like misdefining exactly where some of the money comes from.

And really a lot of this is blowing up right now because companies like NPR are basically getting notes put under uh of their uh, their actual Twitter tags showing that uh, hey, they are backed by the government. For example, here you have NPR has a tag government funded Media or another one. that's pretty funny. that came up yesterday was the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation if you go to just at CBC they uh, they argue they were less than 70 percent funded by the government.

So Elon Musk helped label them as 69 government-funded media which on one hand is pretty dang funny on the other hand makes you wonder, wait a second whose truth really goes into this information And that does create some potential problems Because for example, here is a community Notes response to this that says at the time of this tweet, there we go At the time of this tweet, NPR's website dedicated to their finances still claim that Federal funding is essential. So Elon Musk actually got community noted on this so it's not taken down. NPR is still claiming that Federal funding is essential to the public radio service to the American public. Now what I reply to with this because it's been such a big deal is I replied uh, when I can find my reply I think I have to press back twice him I replied it said unbelievable that Community Notes left out the percent of funding and I said I lost some respect for Community notes.

Now if you weren't part of the big debate around this, that might seem extreme. Hey, Community Notes is just comparing or just suggesting that Hey Look, it's still essential, right? We're just fixing that item from Elon Musk's tweet and that's fair. But all of this is based on a massive debate on Twitter about what percentage of NPR's funding is from the government. Is it one percent? Is it Ten percent? Is it 15? And in my opinion, if Community Notes is going to come in and talk about this Federal funding you have to also talk about the percentage because even though NPR suggests that they're funding, their government, funding is essential.

You have to remember what the word essential means and it's something that nobody on Twitter is talking about. and the reason this is important is because of congressional. Appropriations See that is the most important thing that is on Twitter And that's pretty common because we're generally trying to look for the most emotional responses to hate or support people. and it's really sad how frustrated people are on Twitter I Really feel like everybody? If if people on Twitter were walking around, they'd all be walking around like this.

their hands on their hips and with just like a big scowl like hmm yeah, I support that. but you're an if that's really what Twitter feels like. and to me, it's a cesspool. It's disgusting because nobody's really trying to delve into truth.

Instead, you're getting this war. and so I think it's ironic that Elon Musk is trying to create truth. a truth GPT when actually what you're seeing on Twitter is very much a fostering of divisiveness. Now there's this idea that, well, maybe people should be able to speak freely.

But really, what you're doing is you're creating Echo Chambers and even Community Notes isn't helping with that Echo Chamber problem. If anything, it often feels like it leans more towards just supporting Elon overall in his arguments, because again, it, whether or not Elon was Community noted for saying oh, they took it down from their website. That's not the part that matters. The part that actually matters.

The next level part that matters is, well, is Government funding for NPR essential. But why does that word essential really matter? Well, calling something essential is more important than actually deciding whether or not that quote-unquote essential funding actually dictates how NPR's news coverage is created or dispersed, Or if there is independent journalism. Calling something essential is critical because when you look at Congressional Appropriations Congress wants to appropriate money to where things are needed in the impression of the other companies, right? And so this, in my opinion, is where NPR is like, well, we don't really want to lose that Federal funding even though they could probably make up some of their Federal funding from other sources or potentially all of it I Think it's a lot easier for them to say hey, Congress we're essential, don't take our money away Now that's my opinion. it.

could be wrong, right? It's entirely possible. Yes, the money is actually essential. but I Know what? NPR does their membership drives and they talk about their basically expiring coupon code like I do Because we're having a big price increase tomorrow on 420 at the end of the day at 11 59, we're getting rid of some of the lower bondwell options. We're getting rid of some of the lower priced uh, courses, We're raising the prices.

We're changing things completely. So if you want to lock in the lowest price, jump in. But just like people say, Hey, you know I don't want to hear about the coupon code all the time. You don't want to hear about the fall membership drive at NPR All NPR all the time.

But that's what they do to raise money so they could stay in business and actually provide value to their constituents, right? And so, in my opinion, this definition of essential goes to Congressional Appropriations And it's basically a way saying. Look, it's easier for just us to just take some of that money from Congress and then not cut us out. Now then that does make you wonder: is NPR impartial because of that? Maybe personally, this video isn't designed to defend or support NPR I Actually personally like listening to NPR but that doesn't mean I I Agree with everything they say. Just like when I listen to the English paper, the economists, they lean super far left and they hate Donald Trump Do I listen and believe everything they say? No, of course not.

but I use it as inspiration to fact check. That's the same thing that you should do as well so you can make up your own opinion. But my argument is that hey, if we really want to get to the bottom of Truth in social media, then we have to provide context to the entire discussion, not just one tweet. and this was a missed Opportunity by Community Notes.

where Community Notes could have very simply broken down the debate. hey, in 2010, NPR's funding was this in 2010 through 2023, the funding was this: XYZ it's all public Community Notes could have easily broken that down, but instead it seemed more interested in saying no, no, it's essential which is basically taking the side of Elon even though it was a note against Elon is taking it aside of Elon and the Elon fans on Twitter rather than actually adding more detailed support to the debate. So I question Elon's calls for the greatest truth GT GPT Because I don't think Community Notes is doing the best job yet I Think it's useful. It's going in the right direction, but it has some work to do and it all is in response to this.

Tucker Carlson piece with Elon Musk Let's listen to this and see what Elon has to say and it's not playing. Quite fun There We go to a success of uh open AI Uh, it was I I I Put a trans amount of effort into recruiting Ilia and he changed his mind a few times. Ultimately decided to go with the opening high but if he'd not gone without any opening, I would not have succeeded I really put a lot a lot of effort into creating this this organization to serve as a counterweight to Google And then I kind of took my off the ball I guess and uh, they are now closed Source Um and they are obviously for-profit and they're closely allied with Microsoft Uh, you know in effect Microsoft Uh has a very strong say. If not, Um directly controls uh Openai at this point.

So you really have an open-end Microsoft situation. and then at Google deepmind uh. other two sort of heavyweights in this Arena So it seems like the world needs a third option. Yes.

So I I I think I will create a third option. although I was starting very late in the game of course, can it be done? I don't know I think it's we'll see, it's uh, certainly starting late Um. but I will I will I'll try to create a third option. Um, and that third option hopefully does more more good than harm.

Uh, like the intention with opening eye was obviously to do good, but it's not clear whether it's actually doing good or whether it's I Can't tell at this point. except that I'm worried about the fact that uh, it's been. it's being trained to be politically correct, which is simply another way of of being on Truth saying untruthful things. Yes, so that's that's a bad sign.

There's certainly a path to AI Dystopia is to train an AI to be deceptive. So yeah, I'm going to start something which you call Truth Gbt or a maximum truth Seeking AI that tries to understand the nature of the universe and I think this this might be the best path to Safety In the sense that an AI that cares about understanding the universe uh, it is unlikely to annihilate humans because we are an interesting part of the universe. Uh, hopefully they would think about it. I I Think you know because yeah, like, like we like Humanity could, um, decide to hunt down all the chimpanzees and kill them.

but we don't Yeah, and so they go into this argument that a like, hopefully you could create something that cares up most about the truth that then doesn't want to destroy all the other organisms that exist. just like we don't destroy whales or chimpanzees or otherwise. Now, later in this interview, Elon Musk talks about how social media often comes. It turns into the Cesspool where everybody's fighting for clicks and then you have this argument of everybody's trying to fight about how the other Clan hates the other person rather than focusing on getting to the truth or getting to food right.

And that's very much unfortunately. What I think Elon's Community notes can sometimes actually contribute to is this divisiveness. See for example, here's a comma term and I appreciate you saying this. Kevin I'm a member of Community Notes and rated that tweet.

Direct funding is different year by year and indirect funding Also, fed funds is given by different organizations yearly. Our goal wasn't an itemized audit I Understand that your goal might not have been an itemized audit. My argument is that it should have been. and here is why: I say that Because if Elon Musk wants to create something that is looking for the utmost truth.

If the answer is truth, then what we need is data. And instead of analyzing data or providing data in this case, Community Notes simply provided one minor argument in a larger debate that reiterated one side. You have to think about that. Community notes reiterating that NPR is still saying funding is essential is taking one side of the debate.

Think about that when we draw this out like this: If on one side you have NPR is Gov Shale right and then on the right side you have NPR is independent. Okay, they're independent. Whatever. So on one side you have NPR's independent.

On the other side you have NPR as a is a government chill in order to get to the maximum level of Truth which is a goal that Community Notes is trying to do. it shouldn't Simply Be Community Noting something that actually reiterates that's it NPR is a government chill. That's what Community Notes did it. It made a correction In Fairness, It made a correction, but by making that correction and not stepping into the rest of the debate to actually remain neutral, it de facto chose a side and it happened to be the side that Elon Musk was on and that is scary.

So I Know it might seem extreme, but the reality is, if Elon's going to be trusted with a truth GT GPT which anybody can create whatever they want, then you should also do your best to help settle disputes if you're a member of Community Notes by providing as much data as possible. Even if you have a little preface that says hey, government like it could be as simple as there's a debate going around on NPR Here's the reality: A NPR still says it's government uh or or government funding is still essential, but here are more details on the debate: NPR's average funding has been eight percent from government sources and PR says they're independent. uh. Elon Musk is debating creating a threshold for at what point of government funding a business should be deemed government supported and then that should equally apply to other businesses.

If certain media businesses are eight percent funded by the government, then maybe if N Phase is 10 8 supported by the government, it should be considered a government supported Enterprise as well. or Tesla so that should apply equally. And so really, I'm not here to Shell NPR or Elon I'm probably taking the most unpopular opinion which is again trying to be in the middle. but the reality is, if you don't fully extinguish the debate and you just take us uh one side, then Community Notes actually looks like it's partisan All of a sudden.

Community Notes: looks like it's just a bunch of Elon shills doing something to support. Elon Musk Even though they were correcting Elon they still took us that side of the greater debate Elon doesn't care about being corrected if anything and this is the Sinister way to look at it. Elon could have purposefully made the mistake on his tweet to purposefully be Community noted and then have Community notes reiterate his basic argument that NPR is the government shell, that's touchy, that's touchy. uh uh.

so I don't disagree Kevin But the point of Community Notes is context to a specific claim, not the larger argument. That's a very fair. Counterpoint uh I Agree with you I Would take it a step further though and say if if the broad goal is to maximize truth than if somebody inputs an argument, they should get both sides right. Like for example, if I put into truth GPT and say uh is Donald Trump racist and it just says no or yes, whatever it says right And then give me an example of Donald Trump being racist And it's like here's an example where Donald Trump you know said something about a black person.

whatever right? Uh, And then you're like, give me an example of where Donald Trump said something about a white person. It does fine in such an example. In theory, it would be useful for the Truth GPT to also go hey, look, you asked for this. But just keep in mind here's a whole host of data and information that suggests that yes, out of context, one of those comments may have been made.

but in aggregate, so-and-so is likely not racist or likely racist. Because if we create a binary world. that is, you're either for me or against me, then we have a disastrous world. And that's really what I'm exemplifying Here, you're creating.

You're creating a one side versus the other side. But humanity is is much more complex than that. And humanity is is what I call a gradient, right? This is what you have. You have a gradient and so you have people at various different elements.

You have people over here on the left, you have people over here on the right, and the more you are to these these edges, the more extremes you have. The vast majority of people I would imagine rest over here. And and these people, this is probably 80 percent right here. They deserve both sides of the argument, not just one.

And unfortunately, that Community known example was providing just one piece of data which reiterates just one side of the spectrum and it doesn't even provide the suggestion like a button. That's like, hey, if you want more of our opinion on the or like the community notes view of this debate, click here. Well then again, you're not actually leading the world to realize there's more truth to be had than just one little correction. So again, by making one correction and not others, you're de facto taking a silence a problem.

So that is, uh, my advice to maybe, uh, the truth GPT Folks if uh, if there should ever become a truth GPT And that is my take on Elon Musk and Truth GPT People like oh, Kevin's always an Elon and Tesla shield no I I Personally try to look for truth as well and that doesn't mean I'm perfect, but I Really try even if it's unpopular to do. I Really try to look for what's the middle of the road. What are both sides of the argument? Because reality is I Think most people, eighty percent of people serve both sides. I Mean really, everybody does, but some people won't want to hear it.

Cheers.