Neuralink app

The following is a conversation with Elon Musk, DJ Seo, Matthew MacDougall, Bliss Chapman, and Noland Arbaugh about Neuralink and the future of humanity. Elon, DJ, Matthew and Bliss are of course part of the amazing Neuralink team, and Noland is the first human to have a Neuralink device implanted in his brain. I speak with each of them individually, so use timestamps to jump around, or as I recommend, go hardcore, and listen to the whole thing. This is the longest podcast I've ever done. It's a fascinating, super technical, and wide-ranging conversation, and I loved every minute of it. And now, dear friends, here's Elon Musk, his fifth time on this, the Lex Fridman podcast,

Drinking coffee or water? Water. I'm so over-caffeinated right now. Do you want some caffeine?

Yeah. That BPS is an interesting metric to measure. There might be a big leap in the experience once you reach a certain level of BPS. Yeah.

Well, it is a very interesting question for a super intelligent species, what use are humans? I think there is some argument for humans as a source of will.

So do you think people... When you have a Neuralink with 10,000, 100,000 channels, most of the use cases will be communication with AI systems? Well, assuming that there are not... They're solving basic neurological issues that people have. If they've got damaged neurons in their spinal cord, or neck, as is the case with our first two patients, then obviously the first order of business is solving fundamental neuron damage in a spinal cord, neck, or in the brain itself. So, our second product is called Blindsight, which is to enable people who are completely blind, lost both eyes, or optic nerve, or just can't see at all, to be able to see by directly triggering the neurons in the visual cortex.

Do you think there'll be... let me ask a Joe Rogan question. Do you think there'll be... I just recently have taken ayahuasca. Is that a serious question?

You've talked about the threats, the safety concerns of AI. Let's look at long-term visions. Do you think Neuralink is, in your view, the best current approach we have for AI safety? It's an idea that may help with AI safety. Certainly, I wouldn't want to claim it's some panacea, or that it's a sure thing, but I mean, many years ago I was thinking like, "Well, what would inhibit alignment of collective human will with artificial intelligence?" And the low data rate of humans, especially our slow output rate would necessarily, just because the communication is so slow, would diminish the link between humans and computers. The more you are a tree, the less you know what the tree is. Let's say you look at this plant or whatever, and hey, I'd really like to make that plant happy, but it's not saying a lot.

I got to visit Memphis. Yeah. Yeah.

Because it's able to- Because reality scales. Reality scales to the scale of reality. It's actually humbling to see how little data humans have actually been able to accumulate. Really, if you say how many trillions of usable tokens have humans generated, where on a non-duplicative... Discounting spam and repetitive stuff, it's not a huge number. You run out pretty quickly.

Can you just speak to what it takes for a great engineering team for you? What I saw in Memphis, the supercomputer cluster, is just this intense drive towards simplifying the process, understanding the process, constantly improving it, constantly iterating it. Well, it's easy to say 'simplify,' and it's very difficult to do it. I have this very basic first principles algorithm that I run kind of as a mantra, which is to first question the requirements, make the requirements less dumb. The requirements are always dumb to some degree. So, you want to start off by reducing the number of requirements, and no matter how smart the person is who gave you those requirements, they're still dumb to some degree. You have to start there, because, otherwise, you could get the perfect answer to the wrong question. So, try to make the question the least wrong possible. That's what question the requirements means.

Since I am interviewing Donald Trump- Cool.

Well, first of all, thank you for recommending Will and Ariel Durant's work. I've read the short one for now, The- The Lessons of History.

What do you think it takes for the American Empire to not collapse in the near term future, in the next a hundred years, to continue flourishing? Well, the single biggest thing that is often actually not mentioned in history books, but Durant does mention it, is the birthright. So perhaps to some, a counterintuitive thing happens when civilizations are winning for too long, the birth rate declines. It can often decline quite rapidly. We're seeing that throughout the world today. Currently, South Korea is, I think maybe the lowest fertility rate, but there are many others that are close to it. It's like 0.8 I think. If the birth rate doesn't decline further, South Korea will lose roughly 60% of its population. But every year that birth rate is dropping, and this is true through most of the world. I don't mean to single out South Korea, it's been happening throughout the world. So as soon as any given civilization reaches a level of prosperity, the birth rate drops.

All right, well that's good. Just about your own life, what to you is a measure of success in your life? A measure of success, I'd say, how many useful things can I get done?

It has to be to some degree. If I'm sad, if I'm depressed, I make worse decisions. So if I have zero recreational time, then I make worse decisions. So I don't know a lot, but it's above zero. I mean, my motivation if I've got a religion of any kind is a religion of curiosity, of trying to understand. It's really the mission of Grok, understand the universe. I'm trying to understand the universe, or at least set things in motion such that at some point civilization understands the universe far better than we do today. And even what questions to ask. As Douglas Adams pointed out in his book, sometimes the answer is arguably the easy part, trying to frame the question correctly is the hard part. Once you frame the question correctly, the answer is often easy. So I'm trying to set things in motion such that we are at least at some point able to understand the universe. So for SpaceX, the goal is to make life multi planetary and which is if you go to the foamy paradox of where the aliens, you've got these sort of great filters. Like why have we not heard from the aliens? Now a lot of people think there are aliens among us. I often claim to be one, which nobody believes me. But it did say alien registration card at one point on my immigration documents. So I've not seen any evidence of aliens. So it suggests that at least one of the explanations is that intelligent life is extremely rare.

Go forth, multiply. Thank you Elon. Thanks for talking about it. Thanks for listening to this conversation with Elon Musk. And now, dear friends, here's DJ Seo, the Co-Founder, President and COO of Neuralink. When did you first become fascinated by the human brain? For me, I was always interested in understanding the purpose of things and how it was engineered to serve that purpose, whether it's organic or inorganic, like we were talking earlier about your curtain holders. They serve a clear purpose and they were engineered with that purpose in mind. And growing up I had a lot of interest in seeing things, touching things, feeling things, and trying to really understand the root of how it was designed to serve that purpose. And obviously brain is just a fascinating organ that we all carry. It's an infinitely powerful machine that has intelligence and cognition that arise from it. And we haven't even scratched the surface in terms of how all of that occurs.

And then around 2013, obviously the holy grail when it comes to implantable system is to understand how small of a thing you can make, and a lot of that is driven by how much energy or how much power you can supply to it and how you extract data from it. At the time at Berkeley, there was this desire to understand in the neural space what sort of system you can build to really miniaturize these implantable systems. And I distinctively remember this one particular meeting where Michel came in and he's like, "Guys, I think I have a solution. The solution is ultrasound." And then he proceeded to walk through why that is the case. And that really formed the basis for my thesis work called Neural dust system, that was looking at ways to use ultrasound as opposed to electromagnetic waves for powering as well as communication. I guess I should step back and say the initial goal of the project was to build these tiny, about a size of a neuron, implantable system that can be parked next to a neuron, being able to record its state and being able to ping that back to the outside world for doing something useful. And as I mentioned, the size of the implantable system is limited by how you power the thing and get the data off of it. And at the end of the day, fundamentally, if you look at a human body, we're essentially bag of salt water with some interesting proteins and chemicals, but its mostly salt water that's very, very well temperature regulated at 37 degrees Celsius. And we'll get into how, and later why that's an extremely harsh environment for any electronics to survive. As I'm sure you've experienced or maybe not experienced, dropping cell phone in a salt water in an ocean, it will instantly kill the device. But anyways, just in general, electromagnetic waves don't penetrate through this environment well and just the speed of light, it is what it is, we can't change it. And based on the wavelength at which you are interfacing with the device, the device just needs to be big. These inductors needs to be quite big. And the general good rule of thumb is that you want the wavefront to be roughly on the order of the size of the thing that you're interfacing with. So an implantable system that is around 10 to a hundred micron in dimension in a volume, which is about the size of a neuron that you see in a human body, you would have to operate at hundreds of gigahertz. Which number one, not only is it difficult to build electronics operating at those frequencies, but also the body just attenuates to that very, very significantly.

So on the theme of parking very small computational devices next to neurons, that's the dream, the vision of brain computer interfaces. Maybe before we talk about Neuralink, can you give a sense of the history of the field of BCI? What has been maybe the continued dream and also some of the milestones along the way of the different approaches and the amazing work done at the various labs? I think a good starting point is going back to 1790s.

So what is the biophysics of the read and write communication that we're talking about here as we now step into the efforts at Neuralink? Yeah. So brain is made up of these specialized cells called neurons. There's billions of them, tens of billions, sometimes people call it a hundred billion, that are connected in this complex yet dynamic network that are constantly remodeling. They're changing their synaptic weights, and that's what we typically call neuroplasticity. And the neurons are also bathed in this charged environment that is latent with many charge molecules like potassium ions, sodium ions, chlorine ions. And those actually facilitate these, through ionic current, communication between these different networks.

Well, they're mostly quiet, but when they speak, they say profound shit. That's the way I'd like to think about it. Anyway, before we zoom in even more, let's zoom out. So how does Neuralink work from the surgery to the implant, to the signal and the decoding process, and the human being able to use the implant to actually affect the world outside? And all of this, I'm asking in the context of, there's a gigantic historic milestone that Neuralink just accomplished in January of this year. Putting a Neuralink implant in the first human being, Noland. And there's been a lot to talk about there about his experience because he's able to describe all the nuance and the beauty and the fascinating complexity of that experience of everything involved. But on the technical level, how does Neuralink work? So there are three major components to the technology that we're building. One is the device, the thing that's actually recording these neural chatters. We call it N1 Implant or The Link. And we have a surgical robot that's actually doing an implantation of these tiny, tiny wires that we call threads that are smaller than human hair. And once everything is surgerized, you have these neural signals, these spiking neurons, that are coming out of the brain, and you need to have some sort of software to decode what the users intend to do with that. So there's what's called the Neuralink Application or B1 App that's doing that translation. It's running the very, very simple machine learning model that decodes these inputs that are neural signals and then convert it to a set of outputs that allows our first participant, Noland, to be able to control a cursor on the screen.

Yeah, there's an external charging device. So yeah, the second part of the implant, the threads are the ones, again, just the last three to five millimeters are the ones that are actually penetrating the cortex. Rest of it is, actually most of the volume, is occupied by the battery, rechargeable battery, and it's about a size of a quarter. I actually have a device here if you want to take a look at it. This is the flexible thread component of it, and then this is the implant. So it's about a size of a US quarter. It's about nine millimeters thick. So basically this implant, once you have the craniectomy and the directomy, threads are inserted, and the hole that you created, this craniectomy, gets replaced with that. So basically that thing plugs that hole, and you can screw in these self-drilling cranial screws to hold it in place. And at the end of the day, once you have the skin flap over, there's only about two to three millimeters that's obviously transitioning off of the top of the implant to where the screws are. And that's the minor bump that you have. Those threads look tiny. That's incredible. That is really incredible. That is really incredible. And also, you're right, most of the actual volume is the battery. This is way smaller than I realized.

And so the first one you're focusing on is, it's just a beautiful word, telepathy. So being able to communicate using your mind wirelessly with a digital device. Can you just explain exactly what we're talking about? Yeah, I mean, it's exactly that. I mean, I think if you are able to control a cursor and able to click and be able to get access to a computer or a phone, I mean, the whole world opens up to you. And I mean, I guess the word "telepathy," if you think about that as just definitionally being able to transfer information from my brain to your brain without using some of the physical faculties that we have, like voices.

Speaking of challenges, Neuralink published a blog post describing that some of the threads retracted. And so the performance as measured by bits per second dropped at first, but then eventually it was regained. And the whole story of how it was regained is super interesting, that's definitely something I'll talk to Bliss and to Noland about. But in general, can you speak to this whole experience, how was the performance regained, and just the technical aspects of the threads being retracted and moving?

But it sounds like one of the fascinating challenges here is for the system on the decoding side to be adaptable across different timescales. So whether it's movement of threads or different aspects of signal drift, sort of on the software or the human brain, something changing, like Noland talks about cursor drift, they could be corrected. And there's a whole UX challenge to how to do that. So it sounds like adaptability is a fundamental property that has to be engineered in. It is. I mean, as a company, we're extremely vertically integrated. We make these thin-film arrays in our own microfab.

I think it's a good place to actually ask the big question that people might have, is how do we know every aspect of this that you described is safe? At the end of the day, the gold standard is to look at the tissue. What sort of trauma did you cause the tissue, and does that correlate to whatever behavioral anomalies that you may have seen? And that's the language to which we can communicate about the safety of inserting something into the brain and what type of trauma that you can cause.

So what's designed for the future, the upgrade procedure? So maybe for Noland, what would the upgrade look like? It was essentially what you're mentioning. Is there a way to upgrade the device internally where you take it apart and keep the capsule and upgrade the internals? So there are a couple of different things here. So for Noland, if we were to upgrade, what we would have to do is either cut the threads or extract the threads depending on the situation there in terms of how they're anchored or scarred in. If you were to remove them with the dual substitute, you have an intact brain, so you can reinsert different threads with the updated implant package. There are a couple of different other ways that we're thinking about the future of what the upgradable system looks like. One is, at the moment we currently remove the dura, this kind of thick layer that protects the brain, but that actually is the thing that actually proliferates the scar tissue formation. So typically, the general rule of thumb is you want to leave the nature as is and not disrupt it as much. So looking at ways to insert the threats through the dura, which comes with different set of challenges such as, it's a pretty thick layer, so how do you actually penetrate that without breaking the needle?

Okay. So you mentioned scaling. Is it possible to have multiple Neuralink devices as one of the ways of scaling? To have multiple Neuralink devices implanted? That's the goal. That's the goal. Yeah. I mean, our monkeys have had two neural links, one in each hemisphere. And then we're also looking at potential of having one in motor cortex, one in visual cortex and one in wherever other cortex.

Thanks for listening to this conversation with DJ Seo. And now, dear friends, here's Matthew MacDougall, the head neurosurgeon at Neuralink. When did you first become fascinated with the human brain?

And all of that is coming from this, the brain. Yeah.

What was the hardest part of the training on the neurosurgeon track? Yeah, two things, I think, that residency in neurosurgery is sort of a competition of pain, of how much pain can you eat and smile? And so, there's work hour restrictions that are not really ... They're viewed, I think, internally among the residents as weakness. And so, most neurosurgery residents try to work as hard as they can, and that, I think necessarily means working long hours and sometimes over the work hour limits.

Well, can you take me through the full procedure for implanting, say, the N1 chip in Neuralink? Sure. Yeah. It's a really simple, straightforward procedure. The human part of the surgery that I do is dead simple. It's one of the most basic neurosurgery procedures imaginable. And I think there's evidence that some version of it has been done for thousands of years. That there are examples, I think, from ancient Egypt of healed or partially healed trepanations, and from Peru or ancient times in South America where these proto-surgeons would drill holes in people's skulls, presumably to let out the evil spirits, but maybe to drain blood clots. And there's evidence of bone healing around the edge, meaning the people at least survived some months after a procedure.

How deep in the brain can you currently go and eventually go, let's say on the Neuralink side. It seems the deeper you go in the brain, the more challenging it becomes. Yeah. So talking broadly about neurosurgery, we can get anywhere. It's routine for me to put deep brain stimulating electrodes near the very bottom of the brain, entering from the top and passing about a two millimeter wire all the way into the bottom of the brain. And that's not revolutionary, a lot of people do that, and we can do that with very high precision. I use a robot from Globus to do that surgery several times a month. It's pretty routine.

What do most people not understand about the biology of the brain? We will mention the vasculature. That's really interesting. I think the most interesting maybe underappreciated fact is that it really does control almost everything. I don't know, for an out of the blue example, imagine you want a lever on fertility. You want to be able to turn fertility on and off. There are legitimate targets in the brain itself to modulate fertility, say blood pressure. You want to modulate blood pressure, there are legitimate targets in the brain for doing that. Things that aren't immediately obvious as brain problems are potentially solvable in the brain. And so I think it's an under-explored area for primary treatments of all the things that bother people.

Keep telling yourself that. How have all the surgeries that you've done over the years, the people you've helped and the stakes, the high stakes that you've mentioned, how has that changed your understanding of life and death? Yeah, it gives you a very visceral sense, and this may sound trite, but it gives you a very visceral sense that death is inevitable. On one hand, as a neurosurgeon, you're deeply involved in these, just hard to fathom tragedies, young parents dying, leaving a four-year-old behind, say. And on the other hand, it takes the sting out of it a bit because you see how just mind-numbingly universal death is. There's zero chance that I'm going to avoid it. I know techno-optimists right now and longevity buffs right now would disagree on that 0.000% estimate, but I don't see any chance that our generation is going to avoid it. Entropy is a powerful force and we are very ornate, delicate, brittle, DNA machines that aren't up to the cosmic ray bombardment that we're subjected to.

Yeah. When you, all the surgeries you've done, have you seen consciousness in there ever? Was there a glowing light? I have this sense that I never found it, never removed it like a Dementor in Harry Potter. I have this sense that consciousness is a lot less magical than our instincts want to claim it is. It seems to me like a useful analog for about what consciousness is in the brain is that we have a really good intuitive understanding of what it means to say, touch your skin and know what's being touched. And I think consciousness is just that level of sensory mapping applied to the thought processes in the brain itself.

Thanks for listening to this conversation with Matthew MacDougall. Now, dear friends, here's Bliss Chapman, brain interface software lead at Neuralink. You told me that you've met hundreds of people with spinal cord injuries or with ALS, and that your motivation for helping at Neuralink is grounded in wanting to help them. Can you describe this motivation? Yeah. First, just a thank you to all the people I've gotten a chance to speak with for sharing their stories with me. I don't think there's any world really in which I can share their stories as powerful way as they can, but just I think to summarize at a very high level, what I hear over and over again is that people with ALS or severe spinal cord injury in a place where they basically can't move physically anymore, really at the end of the day are looking for independence. And that can mean different things for different people.

So maybe it'd be nice to get into a little bit more detail of what the signal looks like, and what the decoding looks like? Yep.

Yeah. And also because you're currently using the Bluetooth protocol, you have to batch stuff together? But you have to also do this, keeping the latency crazy low? Crazy low? Anything to say about the latency?

Wow, yeah. You said something that I think is worth exploring there a little bit. You said it's primarily a UX challenge, and I think a large component of it is, but there is also a very interesting machine learning challenge here. Which is given some dataset, including some on average correct behavior, of asking the user to move up, or move down, move right, move left, and given a dataset of neural spikes. Is there a way to infer, in some kind of semi-supervised, or entirely unsupervised way, what that high resolution version of their intention is?

And again, all of that is UX challenge? How much signal drift is there hour-to-hour, day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month? How often do you have to recalibrate because of the signal drift? Yeah. So this is a problem we've worked on both with NHP, non-human primates, before our clinical trial, and then also with Noland during the clinical trial. Maybe the first thing that's worth stating is what the goal is here. So the goal is really to enable the user to have a plug and play experience... Well, I guess they don't have to plug anything in, but a play experience where they can use the device whenever they wanted, however they want to. And that's really what we're aiming for. And so there can be a set of solutions that get to that state without considering this non-stationary problem.

So maybe this is a good place to ask about how to measure performance, this whole bits per second. Can you explain what you mean by that? Maybe a good place to start is to talk about Webgrid as a game, as a good illustration of the measurement of performance. Yeah. Maybe I'll take one zoom out step there, which is just explaining why we care to measure this at all. So again, our goal is to provide the user the ability to control the computer as well as I can, and hopefully better. And that means that they can do it at the same speed as what I can do, it means that they have access to all the same functionality that I have, including all those little details like command tab, command space, all this stuff, they need to be able to do it with their brain, and with the same level of reliability as what I can do with my muscles. And that's a high bar, and so we intend to measure and quantify every aspect of that to understand how we're progressing towards that goal.

So how much of the work on the decoder is generalizable to P2, P3, P4, P5 PM? How do you improve the decoder in a way that's generalizable? Yeah, great question. So the underlying signal we're trying to decode is going to look very different in P2 than in P1. For example, channel number 345 is going to mean something different in user one than it will in user two, just because that electrode that corresponds with channel 345 is going to be next to a different neuron in user one to person user two. But the approach is the methods, the user experience of how do you get the right behavioral pattern from the user to associate with that neural signal. We hope that will translate over multiple generations of users.

So what things are you excited about in the future development of the software stack on Neuralink? So everything we've been talking about, the decoding, the UX? I think there's something I'm excited about from the technology side and some I'm excited about for understanding how this technology is going to be best situated for entering the world, so I'll work backwards. On the technology entering the world side of things, I'm really excited to understand how this device works for folks that cannot speak at all, that have no ability to bootstrap themselves into useful control by voice command, for example, and are extremely limited in their current capabilities. I think that will be an incredibly useful signal for us to understand really, what is an existential threat for all startups, which is product market fit. Does this device have the capacity and potential to transform people's lives in the current state? And if not, what are the gaps? And if there are gaps, how do we solve them most efficiently?

Thanks for listening to this conversation with Bliss Chapman. And now, dear friends, here's Noland Arbaugh, the first human being to have a Neuralink device implanted in his brain. You had a diving accident in 2016 that left you paralyzed with no feeling from the shoulders down. How did that accident change your life?

It was a freak thing that happened. Imagine you're running into the ocean, although this is a lake, but you're running into the ocean and you get to about waist high, and then you dive in, take the rest of the plunge under the wave or something. That's what I did, and then I just never came back up. Not sure what happened. I did it running into the water with a couple of guys, and so my idea of what happened is really just that I took a stray fist, elbow, knee, foot, something to the side of my head. The left side of my head was sore for about a month afterwards, so I must've taken a pretty big knock, and then they both came up and I didn't. And so I was face down in the water for a while. I was conscious, and then eventually just realized I couldn't hold my breath any longer and I keep saying took a big drink. People, I don't know if they like that I say that. It seems like I'm making light of it all, but it's just how I am, and I don't know. I am a very relaxed stress-free person. I rolled with the punches for a lot of this. I took it in stride. It's like, "All right, well, what can I do next? How can I improve my life even a little bit on a day-to-day basis?" At first, just trying to find some way to heal as much of my body as possible to try to get healed, to try to get off a ventilator, learn as much as I could so I could somehow survive once I left the hospital. And then thank God I had my family around me. If I didn't have my parents, my siblings, then I would've never made it this far.

What was the experience like of you being selected to be the first human being to have a Neuralink device implanted in your brain? Were you scared? Excited? No, no. It was cool. I was never afraid of it. I had to think through a lot. Should I do this? Be the first person? I could wait until number two or three and get a better version of the Neuralink. The first one might not work. Maybe it's actually going to kind of suck. It's going to be the worst version ever in a person, so why would I do the first one? I've already kind of been selected? I could just tell them, "Okay, find someone else, and then I'll do number two or three." I'm sure they would let me, they're looking for a few people anyways, but ultimately I was like, I don't know? There's something about being the first one to do something. It's pretty cool. I always thought that if I had the chance that I would like to do something for the first time, this seemed like a pretty good opportunity. And I was never scared.

What was the day of surgery like? When did you wake up? What'd you feel? Minute-by-minute. Were you freaking out? No, no. I thought I was going to, but as surgery approached the night before, the morning of, I was just excited. I was like, "Let's make this happen." I think I said that, something like that to Elon on the phone. Beforehand we were FaceTiming, and I was like, "Let's rock and roll." And he's like, "Let's do it." I don't know. I wasn't scared. So we woke up. I think we had to be at the hospital at 5:30 AM. I think surgery was at 7:00 AM So we woke up pretty early. I'm not sure much of us slept that night. Got to the hospital 5:30, went through all the pre-op stuff. Everyone was super nice. Elon was supposed to be there in the morning, but something went wrong with his plane, so we ended up FaceTiming. That was cool. I had one of the greatest one-liners of my life after that phone call. Hung up with him. There were 20 people around me and I was like, "I just hope he wasn't too starstruck talking to me."

Yeah. When was the first time you were able to move a mouse cursor?

Let's talk business. So Webgrid, I saw a presentation where Bliss said by March you selected 89,000 targets in Webgrid. Can you explain this game? What is Webgrid and what does it take to be a world-class performer in Webgrid, as you continue to break world records? Yeah.

Exactly. Exactly. So what did it feel like with the retractions, that some of the threads are retracted? It sucked. It was really, really hard. The day they told me was the day of my big Neuralink tour at their Fremont facility. They told me right before we went over there. It was really hard to hear. My initial reaction was, all right, go in, fix it. Go in, take it out and fix it. The first surgery was so easy. I went to sleep, a couple hours later I woke up and here we are. I didn't feel any pain, didn't take any pain pills or anything. So I just knew that if they wanted to, they could go in and put in a new one next day if that's what it took because I wanted it to be better and I wanted not to lose the capability. I had so much fun playing with it for a few weeks, for a month. It had opened up so many doors for me. It had opened up so many more possibilities that I didn't want to lose it after a month.

You said the app improved a lot from version one when you first started using it. It was very different. So can you just talk about the trial and error that you went through with the team? 200 plus pages of notes. What's that process like of going back and forth and working together to improve the thing? It's a lot of me just using it day in and day out and saying, "Hey, can you guys do this for me? Give me this. I want to be able to do that. I need this." I think a lot of it just doesn't occur to them maybe, until someone is actually using the app, using the implant. It's just something that they just never would've thought of or it's very specific to even me, maybe what I want. It's something I'm a little worried about with the next people that come is maybe they will want things much different than how I've set it up or what the advice I've given the team, and they're going to look at some of the things they've added for me. [inaudible 08:07:26] like, "That's a dumb idea. Why would he ask for that?" And so I'm really looking forward to get the next people on because I guarantee that they're going to think of things that I've never thought of.

When you're up at 2:00 AM playing Webgrid by yourself, I just imagine it's darkness and there's just a light glowing and you're just focused. What's going through your mind? Or you were in a state of flow where it's like the mind is empty like those Zen masters. Yeah. Generally, it is me playing music of some sort. I have a massive playlist, and so I'm just rocking out to music. And then it's also just a race against time, because I'm constantly looking at how much battery percentage I have left on my implant, like, "All right. I have 30%, which equates to X amount of time, which means I have to break this record in the next hour and a half or else it's not happening tonight." And so it's a little stressful when that happens. When it's above 50%, I'm like, "Okay, I got time." It starts getting down to 30, and then 20 it's like, "All right, 10%, a little popup is going to pop up right here, and it's going to really screw my Webgrid flow. It's going to tell me that... The low battery popup comes up and I'm like, "It's really going to screw me over. So if I'm going to break this record, I have to do it in the next 30 seconds," or else that popup is going to get in the way, cover my Webgrid.

And then also, there are a lot of different disabilities that all originate in the brain, and you would be able to hopefully be able to solve a lot of those. I know there's already stuff to help people with seizures that can be implanted in the brain. I imagine the same thing. And so you could do something like that. I know that even someone like Joe Rogan has talked about the possibilities with being able to stimulate the brain in different ways. I'm not sure how ethical a lot of that would be. That's beyond me, honestly. But I know that there is a lot that can be done when we're talking about the brain and being able to go in and physically make changes to help people or to improve their lives. So I'm really looking forward to everything that comes from this. And I don't think it's all that far off. I think a lot of this can be implemented within my lifetime, assuming that I live a long life. What you were referring to is things like people suffering from depression or things of that nature, potentially getting help.

Please never stop. So you were talking about Optimus. Is that something you would love to be able to do to control the robotic arm or the entirety of Optimus? Oh, yeah, for sure. For sure. Absolutely.

Okay. As he's sitting next to me. Did you ever make sense of why God puts good people through such hardship? Oh, man. I think it's all about understanding how much we need God. And I don't think that there's any light without the dark. I think that if all of us were happy all the time, there would be no reason to turn to God ever. I feel like there would be no concept of good or bad, and I think that as much of the darkness and the evil that's in the world, it makes us all appreciate the good and the things we have so much more. And I think when I had my accident, one of the first things I said to one of my best friends was... And this was within the first month or two after my accident, I said, "Everything about this accident has just made me understand and believe that God is real and that there really is a God, basically. And that my interactions with him have all been real and worthwhile."

What gives you hope about this whole thing we have going on human civilization? Oh, man. I think people are my biggest inspiration. Even just being at Neuralink for a few months, looking people in the eyes and hearing their motivations for why they're doing this, it's so inspiring. And I know that they could be other places, at cushier jobs, working somewhere else, doing X, Y, or Z, that doesn't really mean that much. But instead, they're here and they want to better humanity, and they want to better just the people around them. The people that they've interacted with in their life, they want to make better lives for their own family members who might have disabilities, or they look at someone like me and they say, "I can do something about that. So I'm going to." And it's always been what I've connected with most in the world are people.