High Signal Podcasts Evidence ledger
Method
Browse
← Back to evidence

Evidence receipt / belief

Published · transcript-backed

Satya Nadella: belief

19 Feb 2025 Dwarkesh Podcast Satya Nadella — Microsoft’s AGI plan & quantum breakthrough

“I know David Autor and others have talked a lot about this which is, 60% of labor- I think the other question that needs to happen, let’s at least talk about our democratic societies.”

— Satya Nadella

Source trail

Everything needed to verify it.

Speaker
Satya Nadella
Attribution
Verified speaker
Claim type
belief
Recorded
19 Feb 2025
Publisher
Dwarkesh Podcast

Transcript context

…Right. But if you have this picture where you can have 10% economic growth, I think it really depends on getting something like AGI working, because tens of trillions of dollars of value, that sounds closer to the total of human wages, around $60 trillion of the economy. Getting that magnitude, you kind of have to automate labor or supplement labor in a very significant way. If that is possible, and once we figure out the legal ramifications for it, it seems quite plausible, even within your tenure that we figure that out. Are you thinking about superhuman intelligence? Like, the biggest thing you do in your career is this? You bring up another point. I know David Autor and others have talked a lot about this which is, 60% of labor- I think the other question that needs to happen, let’s at least talk about our democratic societies. I think that in order to have a stable social structure, and democracies function, you can’t just have a return on capital and no return on labor. We can talk about it, but that 60% has to be revalued. In my own simple way, maybe you can call it naive, we'll start valuing different types of human labor. What is today considered high-value human labor may be a commodity. There may be new things that we will value. Including that person who comes to me and helps me with my physical therapy or whatever, whatever is going to be the case that we value, but ultimately, if we don't have return on labor, and there's meaning in work and dignity in work and all of that, that's another rate limiter to any of these things being deployed. On the alignment side, two years ago, you guys released Sydney Bing. Just to be clear, I think given the level of capabilities at the time, it was a charming, endearing, kind of funny example of misalignment. But that was because, at the time, it was like chatbots. They can go think for 30 seconds and give you some funny or inappropriate response. But if you think about that kind of system--that, I think to a New York Times reporter, tried to get him to leave his wife or something--if you think about that going forward, and you have these agents that are for hours, weeks, months going forward, just like autonomous swarms of AGIs, who could be in similar ways misaligned and screwing stuff up, maybe coordinating with each other, what's your plan going forward so that when you get the big one, you get it right?…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.

Search evidence