Speaker unverified: uncertainty

Transcript context

…You can think about all the suffering that’s going on in the world, every single human being that’s suffering right now. It’ll be a glowing red dot. The more suffering, the more it’s glowing, and you just see the map of human suffering and any technology that allows you to dim that light of suffering on a grand scale is pretty exciting. Because there’s a lot of people suffering and most of them suffer quietly, and we look away too often, and we should remember those are suffering because once again, most of them are suffering quietly. Well, and on a grander scale, the fabric of society. People have a lot of complaints about how our social fabric is working or not working, how our politics is working or not working. Those things are made of neurochemistry too in aggregate, right? Our politics is composed of individuals with human brains, and the way it works or doesn’t work is potentially tunable in the sense that, I don’t know, say remove our addictive behaviors or tune our addictive behaviors for social media or our addiction to outrage, our addiction to sharing the most angry political tweet we can find. I don’t think that leads to a functional society, and if you had options for people to moderate that maladaptive behavior, there could be huge benefits to society. Maybe we could all work together a little more harmoniously toward useful ends. There’s a sweet spot, like you mentioned. You don’t want to completely remove all the dark sides of human nature. Those are somehow necessary to make the whole thing work, but there’s a sweet spot.…

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