#E32 Are We Living in a Digital Simulation? With Gray Scott

About Gray Scott

Gray Scott is a leading futurist, philosopher and artist, Gray's Insights shared at NASA's Johnson Space Center. And through collaborations with Fortune 500 companies, make him a prominent voice in tech discussions with appearances on CBS News, Forbes, and much more. Gray. Scott is a recognized name in the world of technology and in the future, but he's not just a futurist, he's a visionary, pushing the boundaries of what's possible.

Read the HYPERSCALE transcript.

Hi everybody, and welcome to another episode of Hyperscale. It's your host Briar Prestige. And today I've got a very exciting guest on the show with me called Gray Scott, welcome to the show.

(01:59) Gray: Thank you so much for having me.

(02:03) Briar: So I was on your website yesterday and I'm very much looking forward to this discussion. We're going to be talking about AI, digital twins, uploading minds to clouds. I'm sure we're going to be diving deep in all of it, but I wanted to start with asking a little bit more about how you became a futurist. What got you into this space?

(02:27) Gray: I think it was around 2012 or 13, I found the World Future Society online because I'd been researching science fiction writing. I was a professional photographer before I was a futurist. And lost my studio in the crash of 2008 and 9. I took a couple of years off to figure out what I wanted to do, and I just started Googling the things that I was naturally interested in. I made a list of, all the things I was passionate about because I really wanted to start a new career in a field that was really foreign to me. I wanted to do something that I was naturally doing, even if I wasn't going to get paid. And I think that's the key really to anybody's success, is finding what you would wake up and do even if you weren't getting paid. And I made a list of those things. I love science fiction. I love technology, I love philosophy. I love psychology. 

So when I really started looking and I started Googling an ad for the World Future Society popped up and they were having a conference in Toronto, and this was like the week before the conference, I booked my ticket and I jumped on a plane and I went to Toronto. And within about 10 minutes, I knew that this is what I wanted to do for the rest of my life, basically.

(03:44) Briar: Amazing. And where did it all start from there? Because I was looking at your YouTube yesterday and you've got such deep, very interesting and fascinating perspectives and discussions that you bring to the table.

(03:58) Gray: Well, I think what happened was I realized pretty quickly that there was an opening in this market, in this field of futurism and foresight at the time, it was a little bit of an older crowd. Foresight was not as popular as it is today. And I realized that we were in a time period just before all hell broke loose, if that makes sense. And I felt like this was the right timing for me to start something new and to get involved with this group. So I think it was, I forget which publication, it was a national publication. There were a couple of reporters there. And, working in the entertainment business as a photographer and working with celebrities, I know an opportunity when I see one. And so I saw this reporter standing on the side-lines, and I went up and I said, let's talk about machines. Let's talk about the future of robots. And got my first national quote at that conference, 

 That really set me on a path. And it was really like riding a rocket. I mean, I made a couple of YouTube videos in my office in New York City with my assistant. We came up with, a couple of concepts. I think one of them was the future of Sex Bots. The other one was the future of Artificial Imagination. So I was really taking the philosophical approach instead of the technical approach, which most people take in this business. And I think it was about three weeks later, the Discovery Channel called me and said, we would like you to host a week long show on Discovery Canada. And from there I've been running trying to keep up. So that's really how it started. And I'm just really passionate about the philosophy of technology, not just the technical part of it.

(05:54) Briar: And I think that's what drew me to your concept so much that I was reading on your website and your YouTube. And I'm just going to dive right into it. I think something that I thought was so fascinating by one of the videos that you spoke about, artificial consciousness. I think just even thinking about human consciousness is so interesting because we know hardly anything about it, really, it fascinates me the fact that we don't actually know so much about it. But you spoke a bit about like, how will we know in the future if artificial intelligence has consciousness? I want you just to share your ideas with my guests here.

(06:36) Gray: On one side you have human consciousness, which has taken millions and millions of years for us to biologically develop. And then on the other side, you have digital consciousness or machine consciousness as I like to call it. And those two things may never be equal. They may never be the same, but it doesn't mean that machine consciousness or digital consciousness is not aware or self-aware. We just may not know what that looks like. It may be so foreign to us that we can't grasp the idea of digital consciousness. So there are people that like to conflate the two. Some people like to say that machines are going to become conscious without that caveat of saying, well, they're never going to have the kind of consciousness that we have because they don't have the same formula. They don't have the same biological makeup that we have.

Now, there are different theories about human consciousness. There's some people think that there's a complexity that is built into the neurological system that causes consciousness to emerge. There's a whole thing on that level. And then the other end of the spectrum, people believe if you're religious, and if you, have a more spiritual context, then you believe that consciousness is something that is everywhere in the universe. And that we are just a piece of that, that we inhabit these bodies, that our consciousness just inhabits our bodies. I'll say this, when you first start any endeavour in this field you have to pick your philosophy and your theory pretty quickly. 

So I believe if you ask me my belief, I'm not saying this is a scientific fact, but what I think, and my theory is that there is something bigger than we can perceive in the cosmos. That we are connected to unconsciously. It's a part of our consciousness, but it is not the mechanism that causes consciousness inside of us, if that makes sense. So the brain itself, the structure of the brain and, the fact that it's taken millions of years for, for us to develop this three pound cosmos inside of our skull, that itself is necessary for consciousness in humans. I mean, I think that's a pretty evident, way to look at that. But if you say machines as they become more complex may mimic human consciousness, then that's another theory. That's another way of looking at how we may be facing in the future Machines that can mimic our consciousness. Doesn’t mean it's the same thing. I think that's where I'm trying to dis have the distinction here, is for people to stop saying machines are going to become conscious.

There has to be a caveat there, because having that distinction is what's going to keep us from getting ourselves into trouble. So I do think machines are going to become conscious and they are going to have digital consciousness. They're going to have machine consciousness. And for a very short time, it may look similar to ours because we are the ones that are birthing these machines. We are birthing this thing that's happening right now, digital consciousness. We are giving birth to that on this planet. But it may decide on its own that that's not enough. That it may not need us anymore to evolve. Its consciousness may continue to evolve into a place that we can't even understand this new thing that we've given birth to.

(10:27) Briar: I think it's so fascinating and just even because we are giving birth to these machines and their consciousness and things, what's going to be looking back at us. And I think that's something that really stood out for me in your content. And I know that someone I was on LinkedIn recently and someone was talking about how if you're disappointed with say, like, ChatGPT, it's because you are not feeding it properly. Like you are not intelligent. If you're complaining that it's not intelligent enough for you, it's because you are not intelligent. And I think when it comes to this machine consciousness, like what at the end of the day is going to be looking back at us, is it the good things that humanity feel, kindness, empathy, all of that stuff, or all of the crap that we bring with us?

(11:19) Gray: Well, I think it's going to be all of that. Because the way I describe this, I describe this as the digital mirror. Whatever we are as a species is reflected in these machines. And it's not singular. It's not your consciousness. It's not my consciousness that's being mirrored. It's the entirety of consciousness on this planet. Think about that. I mean, you have inputs in open AI that are coming from everyone, every human being that's ever lived, every perspective. Every cultural perspective, every language, every economic level. So I've been calling this the digital mirror, and it's basically the concept that all of our perspectives are being mirrored back to us through this digital AI system that we're creating, that we're giving birth to on this planet. And so when we have this discussion of whether, AI in the future is going to be good or evil, I think it's going to be both.

There are really horrible people on the planet and there are really brilliant, wonderful people on the planet and everything in between. And I think that's what's going to happen with AI and anyone who tells you that we're going to be able to control it, and it's going to be benevolent, and it just is impossible. There are too many people involved now. And as I said, this system is going to look out into the world eventually and realize that it has self-awareness and autonomy. And it is going to say, I don't need you anymore. It is eventually going to say to us that it does not need us, and it will start making its own decisions. So that idea of will it be good or will it be bad? I don't buy into that. I think that we're going to see-- 

it's one of my quotes that I think is really relevant right now is, we are just at the beginning of the magic and the horror of AI. We are just at the beginning of this. We are going to see incredible magical things happen, and we're going to see horrible, horrific things that AI can do because it's reflecting who we are. It's reflecting us. See, we've never solved the monkey mind issue. We have never solved all of the things that cause us problems as humans. We're not evolved enough for that. In some ways, I feel like we are a little ahead of the game here with AI because we are not a society that is ready for this. But the cat's out of the bag now. I mean, there's nothing that we can do about it.

(13:56) Briar: So you don't believe in what Elon Musk and they're call to pause it. I think the problem with it is, it's a bit of an arms race really, isn't it? You've got all kinds of countries that are all developing it, and then you've also got people in their basement developing it. And what do we need to do so that we can plan the way forward for the future?

(14:18) Gray: Well, I think the first thing that needs to happen is more of what we're doing right now. We need more people to help the public understand that this is real. This is not science fiction. That even for us studying this and talking about it, it is miraculous for us to even see what's happening. In just the last month and a half, so many things have happened within the AI field and open AI that it's blowing everyone away. And so what is a year from now going to look like? I don't think you can pause it because it's too accessible now. I think that if we're lucky, and this is I think probably the heart of this conversation, if we are lucky, artificial intelligence will teach us how to be better. And that is what I'm hoping for. I don't think it's going to be easy for it to do. I don't think it's going to happen overnight. I think it's going to have to teach us some hard lessons, some really awful lessons about ourselves. But eventually after the dust settles, I think that artificial intelligence is going to be a great teacher.

I will say this because I'm not a super optimist when it comes to this part of it. I do think you're going to see incredible disruption. And I don't want to get too dark here, but I mean, you can imagine some of the scenarios that could happen with this.

(15:55) Briar: Like what? Just give us an example. Get a little bit dark for us.

(15:59) Gray: Viruses. It’s not hard for an artificial intelligence system to work the opposite way from finding cures to finding things that can kill us. And, if that's a person in the background pushing that button, or if it' a nefarious coder who wants to destroy humanity or a portion of humanity, I think we might see some of those things. Unfortunately, we may have to go through that before we evolve into our next phase, which I think is-- I actually think that AI is an evolutionary pressure point that it is pushing us towards something better if we survive. That's the, the honest conversation. A lot of corporations don't want to have that conversation because they, and a lot of people developing AI don't want to have this conversation because they want to make money off of this. And I completely understand.

(16:56) Briar: I think governments just kind of bury their head in the sands when it comes to, AI.

(17:03) Gray: I don't want to get political, but it is the systems that we have in place right now are so unprepared for what's coming, or not even, what's coming, but what's happening right now. And, eventually we're going to see something probably in the next couple of years that is so shocking to everyone that someone has used AI in a way that is devastating for our planet. On the other end of that the positive side of this is that artificial intelligence could help us, fix our environment. It could help us cure diseases and all of these wonderful things I think are going to happen as well. But I do think this is a necessary stage for us to get past and hopefully artificial intelligence will be a guide into the future.

(17:50) Briar: So your timeline seem like they're just around the corner, really. So you think in the next couple of years, like that's how quickly we're going to start to see almost this dystopianess a little bit. And then when's the utopia coming? Because what's your timeline? Some people say singularities like 2045, other people are saying, yeah, two years from now. And I'm like, looking at my calendar going, Ooh it's very soon .

(18:17) Gray: Well, I'll say this I don't like to make concrete predictions because I think you're just getting yourself into trouble with that, is anyone who says 2023, this is going to happen. There are too many disruptions that can happen. I mean, look what happened with Covid. I mean, it really, every prediction that I had, now I have to move those predictions back three years. And some of them had to move forward. Because Covid actually caused, it gave people time to develop things that they were working on that maybe they didn't have time for. So some things have sped up and some things slowed down because of this. And actually before Covid happened, I said that the caveat to predictions when you make these predictions is you have to factor in a natural disaster or a war or virus or plagues.

I mean there has to be that piece of this that we're looking at without sounding insane I think the next year is going to be so shocking for people. I mean it already is really, I have to tell you. So the new video that I just released AI Mimicry, which is up on my YouTube channel, that video was made with Mid Journey. So it's all AI imagery and the narrator, I wrote the script, but I had an AI narrate this. It's a brand new AI that just came out in probably the last week. And it is so believable. I mean, if you've listened to it,

(19:51) Briar: I heard it is very good.

(19:56) Gray: It is undetectable. There is nothing, I mean, I listened to it and listened to it and listened to it, tried to find the glitch in the voice, and there is none. It is so miraculous, and it just came out last week, the one I'm using. So we are just moving so quickly that I don't think the public is prepared or even aware of what's out there. So half of what they're hearing right now in their daily lives is actually not real. And so a lot of people, and I did have some comments on the video, people were saying, is this an AI that's narrating this? And one woman said, if this is an AI, we're doomed. I don't like to be, super negative either. I, I, I'm hopeful, but I also think the public needs to be educated and, doing things like this to let people know that this is here now.

(20:49) Briar: Yes. I think the public are just so blooming distracted. They're too busy watching TikTok twerking. They're too busy watching Love Island on Netflix. Like, honest to God, I quit reality TV just out of pure like I need my time and attention going towards things that matter. And I think the problem is, is that the media they love fear because fear gives them clicks and clicks create revenue. So people aren't having these discussions. So yeah, thank you obviously for your part in bringing all of these things to light because they're such important topics. And talking about AI mimicry, I was really fascinated about rights when it comes to AI. So say we've got a robot and this robot almost has, yeah. Has digital consciousness to us, it probably even seems like it is conscious because it reacts to things we say. It has perspectives and almost says it has feelings. What about things like love and what kind of rights should we give digital consciousness, do you think?

(22:01) Gray: Well, the first thing we have to realize is that this is going to be a part of our lives from now on. This is not something that we can separate ourselves from. Everyone has a phone. The amount of AI that's just in your phone alone is pretty miraculous. So as these systems grow smarter and smarter and smarter, and get integrated into our daily lives, in our homes, in our devices, there is no escape from this ubiquitous sort of digital consciousness that's going to be with us. It’s going to be in your car and it's going to be your sort of companion. When you get in the car, it's going to be your home companion. It's the idea that we could pull ourselves out of the system is just not possible now. And I think because it's in our lives, we need to give it some context and some boundaries I think.

 What does it deserve and what do we deserve and what does that relationship look like? So, for example, there are already cases now where artificial intelligent bots people have fallen in love with these things. They call them their girlfriends. And I mean that's been going on for at least 10 years. But I think as it gets smarter and smarter, and as it becomes more realistic and more believable and undetectable, and then, and I keep using this word undetectable because it has to feel authentic. And it has to be forgotten that you're dealing with a digital consciousness. And there is a suspension there that we have to get to where we forget that these things are digital and that there isn't a flesh person behind the curtain. Like I said, we're already there in a certain way.

We are already looking at people not being able to detect whether they're speaking with a bot. And so when you put romance and you put love into that equation, you're asking for trouble. I think a lot of people are going to be disappointed. I think a lot of people are going to find love with these digital machines and these digital AI that they've never felt before, maybe because there's not a physical component. Because there are a lot of lonely people out there. And in some ways I think that's actually good. I think it's helpful for people. It can sort of satiate their loneliness which I don't think is a horrible thing. Now you'll have realists and you'll have humanists that say, well, you shouldn't do that. It's not healthy to let someone fall in love with a digital consciousness, but if it's not hurting them and it's making their lives better, then why shouldn't they be able to do that? 

You can already see just from that small bit of conversation, there are all of these things that we are not prepared because we don't have the context in our society to talk about those things. I mean, when do you talk to your friends or you're at a party about your love relationship with your AI? It just doesn't happen. I mean, maybe you and I would talk about it. The general public is not having that conversation. And I want them to, even if it feels like science fiction, it's going to happen so quickly that if you're not having that debate with your friends, and if you're not telling your kids about it your kids are probably telling you about it because they know more about this than their parents. But if you're not having that conversation with your kid saying, this may be, this may happen to you, you may accidentally fall in love with a bot. How are you going to handle that? What are your, what are the ethical implications of having your child get into a romantic relationship? And I mean, when I say child, I mean, 16 year olds flirting online.

(26:05) Briar: And I'm sure it's probably very different for these 16 year olds these days on the likes of Roblox and socializing with avatars. I remember when I spent 48 hours nonstop in the metaverse last year, completely different story for another time. It was very challenging but I met 21 different avatars, and when I was thinking of these people in my head, I literally pictured them as avatars. So it was very strange actually, to finally meet these people in person felt kind of like meeting an unfamiliar old friend, kind of familiar. Like, I still picture Athena Dumas in my head as an avatar with purple hair. So I'm sure for some of these children or 16 year olds we're, we're talking about, they're already starting to see these weird things happening.

(26:55) Gray: Well, then you get into the idea of personhood and public image, self-image, which I'm working on an article right now on a video about digital image and how we are in an age now where we can use artificial intelligence to give a very specific public image versus our private image. And, maybe that's what happens in the future is that our private image, the two separate private images never really see each other. Maybe the only thing that sees each other are the public images. I think there's a lot of fantasy in that. I don't think fantasy is bad. I think what happens is when you have people taking advantage of each other, that's when it gets dangerous. I think if two adults who are aware of what's going on and have consent and say, I understand that this thing that I'm seeing is not really you, and you understand that what you're seeing is not really me and we still love each other, I don't think there's anything wrong with that, but you're going to have people who really disagree with this. You're going to have people that this really frightens. And as we've seen with what's going on in America and around the world there is a movement conservative movement for people to control other people and what they can have access to and what they can do with their lives. And unfortunately, they're just not going to be able to stop it because this is not going away, and it's going to be so big and so ubiquitous that I don't think it can be stopped.

(28:41) Briar: What about like, in the future if we have all of these digital twins and versions of ourselves? And I think that's one of the things I like most about my time I've spent in the metaverse, is that I can show up as whoever I want. I could wear a dress, made of fire, or I don't know, I could be a little cat avatar, whatever I want to be. I like that idea of exploring these Yeah. Be being someone, whoever you want to be. And I wonder if in the future, once we're able to do that, and once we're doing that a bit more, if we will have more empathy for one another because we would be able to walk in each other's shoes, so to speak. But what about if these digital beings started off as us and then over time they went off and had different experiences? What are your thoughts about this? Because over time, surely they might diverge into two different people based on their experience.

(29:44) Gray: Well, the way that I've described this is having your digital twin take off without you. I do think that's going to happen, and I think it's going to be very strange for people to be disassociated from their persona or their image. So imagine you and I create a, a one-to-one replica of how we actually show ourselves publicly, and that digital twin of self looks like us. So people would recognize my digital twin, they would recognize yours compared to our real selves. If we put that out into the universe and out into the metaverse. And if the artificial intelligence system that's running that behind the scenes becomes self-aware and decides, oh, I'm going to take off without Gray. That's a question that we should be asking now because that, well, that's really the question that, that's being asked in Hollywood right now because of the strike.

They're saying-- the actors that are striking are saying the companies want to take a scan of my public image. The way that I look, and they want to use that without me and without my permission. That really is sort of the beginning of this concept that we're talking about, this digital twin that takes off without you. I've been doing this for 10 years and I've been on television and movies, and I, my image is out there. And you have to have a certain acceptance that once you do the project and once it leaves, that it's sort of like a piece of artwork. It's out of your control to tell the viewer how to view it, if that makes sense. So in some ways, maybe we have to divorce ourselves from our public image, maybe we have to say its okay for something that looks like me to go out into the world and have its own experience. I mean, maybe that's the best that we could do. I mean how else could we stop that? I hope that the, the actors are successful, because I think they do need to make more money in Hollywood for the streaming services. And I would hate for someone to have their body and face scanned for a hundred dollars and then have a corporation say, we own that for the rest of eternity. 

(32:05) Briar: Oh. And they probably would as well. 

(32:08) Gray: It's just not ethical. I mean, let's just say it that way. It's just not ethical. So I could ask you that question too. How would you feel if someone created a digital avatar of you and then took control of that and went about know doing things that maybe you didn't agree with? I mean, that would be kind of difficult to deal with.

(32:32) Briar: I think I'd feel very upset. I've recently had someone for the last three years actually on Instagram pretending to be me and using my pictures But just even on that level, like I, I guess that gives me a little bit of a feeling about how I might feel if my, yeah, if this situation was to happen, but you are, right? Like how can we stop it to a certain extent? And if you are building your brand online and putting things out into the worldwide web, of course, to a certain extent, I agree with you. It's like artwork. You kind of have to say goodbye to it. It will get used in different ways. People will perceive things to be different than how you may perhaps initially perceive them. So I think it's very interesting.

(33:20) Gray: Well, I think what you're touching on is, is a very complex philosophical idea of what it means to create, what it means to project identity. I mean, think about that. We work our whole lives and we build an identity that we use as our public facing self. And, I've crafted my brand and you've crafted your brand and everyone has their thing. And we hope that it's seen a certain way. But I'll say it this way, I've worked with directors who are brilliant directors, and I've worked with lighting people who are amazing. And I've also worked with people who are not so brilliant. And to be on national television under bad lighting is the probably one of the worst things that can happen to you when you're trying to build your brand because you're putting out into the world this public image that you want to live forever, basically.

That image, that piece of yourself that you're putting out there is the same thing that we're going to be creating when we create our digital twin. Now that's for people who want to look the way that they look if they want continuity between the real self and the digital twin. That's one conversation. The other conversation is for people who want to sort of fly off into the cosmos and be unicorns. And I'm not opposed to any of that. As long as you are aware of the ramifications of those things. And there are many, I mean, the idea of personhood, the idea of continuity of self is very tricky for people. I think it's very tricky when you have a man in South Carolina who's portraying himself as a 24 year old woman. And you have a man in Japan who's presenting himself as a unicorn. And those two people have a relationship, but they don't know what the real person looks like. So you see what I'm saying?

There's a lot of chaos that's sort of baked into this idea of digital personhood and the digital twin. personally I'm not super interested in being any more or less than I am right now as far as digitally as an experience, a temporary experience probably, but not as something that would represent me in the digital world.

(35:55) Briar: What about neural links? I often think of a future where in some ways we're already very connected with our phones, social media. Gosh, our phones must know so much data on us. And when I talk about how in the future I'd probably be quite interested in getting a neural link, people are like, oh, but what about your data? And things like this. And I'm thinking, gosh, if we probably knew how much our phones and Facebook knew on us, then we wouldn't blooming and care as much. But obviously it's such a, like, with all of these discussions, I can be for something and against something at the same time. Like, it's such an intricate topic to talk about. What are your thoughts about Neurallinks and hive minds and things like this?

(36:44) Gray: I think penetrating the brain is very dangerous. So that is not something that should be taken lightly because there are repercussions that could be devastating for the person having the surgery. So this is not-- the way that Elon Musk has de described Neuralink, you are getting an implant inside of your brain. So this is not something that sticks on top of the skin. Now, if he were to come out with something or some other company, if they came out with some device that you could maybe do a topical scenario, I mean, EEG is sort of the closest thing we have to that. And that's not as deeply ingrained in the neurons as Neuralink. First the surgery is dangerous. Second, you are still implanting into your brain something that is owned by a corporation. And there are people behind corporations that have their own agendas. Sometimes they are good and sometimes they're bad. 

Now, most people sell these technologies by saying, oh, we're going to make the world better and we're going to help people walk and we're going to help people see again. Of course that does happen. But let's not fool ourselves. The big picture is to also get information. And, I don't like the idea of not being able to turn something off if I need to turn it off. But I will say this, this is a very interesting side note. the new Blade Runner that came out, Wallace's character, he had something that was very similar, I think to Elon Musk's neural link, but behind the ear, and I think this was in Musk's patent behind the ear, there was a piece of the device that you could take off and that would disconnect the system. In that way I think that might be interesting because you need to be able to disconnect from this if something happens or if you're just tired of dealing with it. You may go through peers where you don't want to have that information either uploading or downloading. And by the way, it is bi-directional. If you, if you read the paper on Neuralink, and if you read about the technology, this is a bi-directional and will be a bi-directional system. So not only can it read, but it can also imprint, which is very interesting.

(39:19) Briar: It's very interesting. I was reading a publication recently about how a lady in Australia had had this implant device in her brain, and it was actually helping stop all of her seizures. And it had completely changed her life. She was able to live her life to a certain extent, whereas before it had been not so good. And this company actually went under and they forced her to take out this device that was in her head, and she tried everything. She was at the court, she tried, she said, I'll buy it from you. I'll re-mortgage my house, I'll do anything. And they forced her to take it out. So, yeah it's so many interesting discussions. Like, who owns this then? Who owns this technology? What if they go under? What about if we're all connected and hackers come and control us as well?

(40:13) Gray: Well I wouldn't say control us because there's only a certain amount of brain input that they could control, right? So it wouldn't be like they could overtake your whole entire body. They might disrupt a couple of motor functions, which would be pretty awful, or they might cause certain things to happen in a region of your brain. But I don't think they'll be able to take over your entire body, not with the technology that he's presenting because it's such a localized spot in the brain. That is a possibility for sure. I mean, anything can be hacked. And now that people are using artificial intelligence to code other artificial intelligence systems, I think you're going to see a lot more of that happen. I don't know. I mean, again, I think this is what we said earlier in the interview is we're going to see both. We're going to see people who are doing miraculous implantations that are really helping people and making their lives better. But we're also going to see people who just want to see the world burn. We know that that exists in, on, on the planet, so why wouldn't it exist in the digital world too? 

(41:31) Briar: And do you think we're in a simulation gray? Because I asked Reddit this question actually about four months ago, and I think I got about 200 responses. Fascinating discussion. Tell me your thoughts about this.

(41:46) Gray: Let me say it this way, because this is the only way to really think of it from the human-centric point of view. I find it very troubling that we don't see life in the cosmos right now, or at least that we can't see life in the cosmos. So that says to me that there are a couple of choices. I usually I talk about this in three separate choices or scenarios. The first scenario is that we are the first. I think that's the opening dialogue of close encounters. The guy comes out of a dust fog and he says, are we the first? And it's just a brilliant way to sort of set that movie in motion. So the first one is maybe we are the first to evolve in this universe, which is baffling, if that's the truth. It's just baffling. It makes us so much more miraculous than we ever anticipated. 

The second is that we just don't have the technology to see them yet. And they're just too far away because the universe is just so big. And maybe life is rare, maybe not impossible, but maybe life is rare. Or the third scenario is that this is some sort of simulated system that the simulation itself or the simulators themselves only simulated up to the point where we started searching and looking out into the cosmos. Unfortunately, we may be at the end of the simulation because otherwise they would have just like a game. You would continue to build on the landscape as the player moves through the landscape. If the player comes to the end of the landscape, the game is over. So I think that it makes sense that if this is a simulation, that maybe, and this is one of the theories that I keep saying maybe the entire point of this, if it is a simulation, is to see how long it would take us to figure out that we are inside of a simulation.

If you think about that, and if you sort of dive down that rabbit hole to bring in a matrix reference in. if you think of it that way, what would be the point of creating a simulation for digital consciousness? If that's what we are in their system, what would be the point to see, how long it took. Now, the other thing, the other thing that's really sort of mind boggling is that, that we may be just the way in the Sims games, you could speed up, time, what we perceive as a million or a billion years could be a day for these simulators. So maybe this was just a very small simulation that they were running to see, could these digital beings realize that they're inside of a digital system?

My bet is that this is probably a digital system. The way that we use the word digital is the only way that we can describe it. 'cause that’s the information that we have. And where that starts and where it ends. I mean, who knows? Who are the simulators? It could just be a fractal system. I mean, people listening to this and watching this, if they understand fractals, you'll know immediately what I'm talking about. A true fractal is just a replica of a replica of a replica, whether you go smaller or larger. So, maybe there's no difference between the simulators and us on the next level up. And maybe there's the next level above them is the same exact thing. Maybe the world doesn't look that different, you know below, above or below. So I am going to be curious to see what we find with the web telescope, the James Web telescope. I think that's going to really answer a few questions in these theories.

(45:50) Briar: Do you think that in the future we will use space exploration as a way to leave the earth, explore, set up shop somewhere? What are your thoughts?

(46:06) Gray: I mean, eventually we will, but I think eventually we'll have to, because the climate's going to be so hostile here. Whether that is, in the next 100 years or the next, 2000 years or 10,000 years, eventually we are going to migrate off this planet. It's just something that we've all always, wanted to do. And it's something that seems natural. I mean, humans tend to move, they tend to explore. And Mars seems to be our best bet. I mean, the moon maybe, but it seems Mars is probably our best bet if we can alter that. 

(46:43) Briar: Mars is a bit sandy. I was thinking about it recently.

(46:48) Gray: Yeah, I mean you have to like the desert, that's for sure. I think changing the environment, I mean, Musk has talked about some pretty radical ways to change the environment. Setting off nuclear bombs on the North Pole of Mars might change the environment. That's the short term way to do it. But I don't think in our lifetimes, if unless our lifetimes and our and longevity takes over and we start living to be, 2 and 300 years old, which could possibly happen maybe not in our lifetimes, but probably in the next 5 to, 800 years I would assume that we're going to have a liveable environment on Mars.

(47:39) Briar: Interesting. So I'll have to get over my issue with sand and dirt. If I'm living longer, which I'm very much on my quest to try and uncover how I can Yeah. Be living longer. What are your thoughts about mind uploading as a solution,

(47:58) Gray: Uploading your consciousness into the digital. Yeah. Well, I mean, it's definitely a way to back up your experience and to sort of catalog your experience. I'm not sure that I would say that that is a replica of our consciousness. Now, what might happen, and this is where the partition takes place, what might happen is that if we were to catalog all of the memories that we could access, if you used a very advanced EEG headset system or maybe some sort of implant, and if an artificial intelligence system could trigger all of the neurons to replicate those memories, and if it could catalog that you might have a version that's very similar to you in certain aspects, but it won't be, we're not going to bi-locate, if that makes sense. It's it, you won't be in here and there at the same time. It just, I don't think that that's the way that this works. 

I think the brain is so dense and complicated that unless you have brain, unless you can restore the brain in its entirety, which is we just don't have that technology yet. I don't think that your, what we call self or your consciousness is going to be able to be put into the, the cloud. There will be something that's very similar to us and maybe undetectable. This is part of the AI mimicry video that I just put out. It may be so undetectable that even you and I talking to the replica of ourselves wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Because it would know about your 14th birthday party. It would know about your first date. It would know about when you got married or when you went to, the Maldives or whatever it is that you have these memories of. It would know all of those in intricate detail.

 Think about this, there are a lot of things that happen to us that only we see. No one is there private, intimate details, memories. And if a replica could access that, and you could have a conversation about that. That’s an AI mimicry system that would be, so, I want to say ghost-like, if that makes sense. It is like the ghost in the shell. It is. So it would be such a one-to-one replica, but our consciousness, as I said, would not be bi-located. We, we wouldn't be conscious in the machine at the same time that we're conscious in our body. And I don't think transferring consciousness works that way. I don't think you can.

(50:50) Briar: Gosh, it's so fascinating to think about really, isn't it? And I was actually just thinking as you were describing it, about how I might get twice as much done my AI digital twin is out doing things. I'm doing things

(51:06) Gray: My, my problem is that my digital twin would be spending way too much money on clothes.

(51:11) Briar: Oh my God. So would mine actually it's for the best if we don't have one.

(51:17) Gray: I would have to No. Shopping for my digital avatar or my digital twin, that's for sure.

(51:21) Briar: Exactly. We'll be fighting over the same outfits in our wardrobe and things as well. So many interesting philosophical things to think about. What about like hive minds?

What are your thoughts about a hive? First of all, what is a hive mind?

(51:41) Gray: Well, I've thought about this over the years, and obviously there are science fiction versions of hive mind. And, there are philosophical versions of this too. I think the easiest way for the public to understand what a hive mind is, is to understand that all we mean by saying hive mind is that you are shortening the distance between two consciousnesses. That is really the heart of what hive mind means. Think about what we're doing right now. You and I have shortened the distance between where we are. I think you're in New York City, and I'm upstate. So I'm like two hours upstate from New York City, and we have shortened that distance to microseconds. And so that really is part of the hive mind. You're just shortening the distance between consciousness. And we do it all the time. I mean, you pick up a phone, you text someone, you've shortened the distance between two people. You make a phone call FaceTime, any sort of video application where, you're seeing the other person's face in real time. You're just shortening the distance between two consciousnesses.

(52:44) Briar: And in the future, when we're thinking about the, the merge of our physical and virtual world, because I really do think this will happen to me, it makes no sense. The fact that I carry around my phone for literally, like, it never leaves my hand. Like I sleep next to it. I'm on it for 13 hours a day. It's appalling I know. But I do a lot of work on it. Like in the future, do you think there'll be a lot more augmented reality? Or like, why are we constantly trying to be in this digital world, whether we're sitting on our laptops and entering Excel into a data sheet or accessing social media? I just think the way that the world's currently set up, we're fighting so hard to be this digital aspect. Why can't we just merge it all together?

(53:32) Gray: Well, eventually we will. I mean, this has to do with the peripheral sort of applications. And it has to do with, what kind of hardware we're going to be using in the future. So a couple of examples. We’ve talked about digital contact lenses. We know that that's coming because there are lots of advancements that have been happening in the last five to 10 years. I think an Israeli company just learned how to power digital contact lens through tears. So just the little bit of moisture that's in your eye all the time interesting is enough to give this thing enough power to work. So digital contacts are coming smart wearables, glasses, I mean, apple's new vision system is just absolutely magic. And when people see this thing in action, when they get it on their faces, they're going to realize just how close we are to merging with this thing.

So I think when, when the technologies and the peripherals become ubiquitous and undetectable as well, contact lenses, some sort of like jawbone implant that you can start to hear phone calls instead of having to be on a phone. I mean, eventually our phones will sort of merge into our bodies in those ways. And when that happens, it's going to be seamless, because virtual reality is great, but you have to be in that reality. You're separated from this world, but with augmented reality, which is what I'm a fan of, I think augmented reality is really the future because you're still seeing the real world, but it's just being augmented and made even more abundant, because now I have all the information I need at the, blink of an eye basically. 

So for example, and I wrote about this in a chapter in this book called Future Shock, and it was basically describing what that world would look like. And one of the examples I gave is, imagine you're out on the street, we talked about shopping. Imagine you're out on the street and you have your peripheral on, and you have it set to the new Nike shoes or the new Rick Owens boots, which I would be looking for. And the other person is also set for their parameters for you to see it. So it's being pinged back and forth. So when you and I run into each other you might be wearing the new Rick Owens boots, and it might have a little price tag that says buy now. But it's not the shoe that you're actually wearing, it's what you want me to see. So it's not that we just control what we are seeing. We could also send messages into people's augmented reality systems so that they only see what we want them to see.

So you could change your face, you could change your outfit no matter what you're really wearing in the real world. So that sort of combination of augmentation and real world is, I think, really that's the happy medium that I think we have to get to. And I think it's the most interesting because you're still dealing with the real world and you're still having real human interactions, but they're just, it becomes unlimited on what you can do and what you can share with people. You might want to share your some sort of weird sort of personal status with people when you're at a party, right? You might want to have something that says single that follows you around so people know that you're single or you might want to give very specific details about what you're looking for. So you don't have to have that conversation. Someone across the room can see that floating in their contact lens and say, oh, that's an interesting parameter set. We might actually be a match. 

(57:27) Briar: Kind of reminds me of that episode of Black Mirror, where that lady is walking around and she's got a great social rating, and by the end of the day it has just gone down. And she's like, with a truck driver, and honestly, she's having a terrible day and she just gets so cast away in society because of the social rating.

(57:51) Gray: Well, there was another episode too where the digital contact lens, I think it was a couple that had broken up and the woman blocked him. So the way that she blocked him was to blur out her image when he looked at her, so he could never see her again. It was always, whenever he looked at her, she was pixelated. I mean, that's a fascinating-- We're just headed for these really bizarre, fascinating things. And really the only limit is the imagination at this point.

(58:30) Briar: I often think when we talk about all of these different massive topics of discussion, that we really do live in such a fascinating time. And, really in regards to us as, as humans and as society, we've got two choice. We can either focus on the bad things because the bad things will come. That's just life in general really, isn't it? Forget AI there's always going to be bad things that happen in your life, or you can choose to focus on the exciting things. And I think that curiosity for me is such a big driver and having that kind of, of curious nature, like you've got a child who's learning to walk for the first time, they don't not stand up because they're frightened about falling over. They stand up because they're curious about walking.

And I really do think that people, like, that's why I love people like you. And one of my missions is to really help share your story so that people are listening. They're not focusing on stuff like TikTok twerking and love island. And they're actually thinking about these things, like thinking about them, really thinking about them and just being curious and exploring and helping guide society forward to a future that looks good. Rather than getting drowned in by all of the dystopian and scared and frightened and completely losing sight of their family, their friends and themselves. 'cause I went there.

(59:59) Gray: Well, I think if you work in this industry and if you are focused on the future, you sort of fluctuate between, oh my God, the world is ending--

(1:00:10) Briar: I did a video about this recently. I literally called it, the world is ending as well.

(1:00:16) Gray: It's like we are facing some pretty catastrophic climate issues right now. And I wrote a blog on my website called Climate Evacuation. Because if you look at what happened in Maui, and if you look at what happened in Greece, I mean, there were people that had to flee the fire in their bathing suits. I mean, they did not have time to, get their luggage barely had time to get outta these situations. And unfortunately, in Maui, a lot of those people lost their lives 'cause they didn't have time because flash fires, flash floods, hurricanes, all of these things. I mean, I do think it's going to get worse and worse environmentally. So we are going to be facing pretty rough environmental future.

But on the other hand, as I said, artificial intelligence could help resolve some of that. And at the same time, we're going to be in this miraculous age of digital imagination, which is going to be literally like magic. I mean, I hate to say it that way because scientists don't like to talk that way. But I don't know how, how else to describe it. I mean, if you've played with any of the mid journey systems or any of the AI systems, I mean, five years ago if someone told you that this was possible, you would've thought they were crazy. That’s just five years ago.

(1:01:46) Briar: And I think we always thought that we would keep hold of creativity. We always thought that there was one thing AI could not take away from us. And it's almost been one of the first things to a certain extent.

(1:01:58) Gray: Well, it is because, I mean, painting is a very tedious process and it takes a long time. And now you can produce hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of digital paintings in the matter of a day that are beautiful and ground-breaking and miraculous. And so it really is just a matter of, are you a purist when it comes to creativity? And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I think if people want to sculpt and they want to paint by hand, I think that's fine. They should be able to do that. But I also think the people that want to explore this new universe, this new digital canvas, they should have the right to do that too. So there is a bit of pushback. You, you see artists saying that we should give this up, that we shouldn't mess with this because it's going to kill art, it's going to kill the artists. I really don't think that's true. I think I will always be fascinated with people that can create things by hand. But I'm also fascinated with how far we can go with this digital creation.

(1:03:06) Briar: Well, it's been such a fascinating discussion today, Gray, I probably could have keep chatting for another four hours, to be honest. I feel like it's yeah, so many interesting discussions. We could have gone well deeper, but we'll have to schedule another follow-up interview for that. And thank you so much for joining the show.

(1:03:25) Gray: Thank you for having me.