jon, pce tomorrow, we get more earnings, including dell, marvel, ulta tomorrow, but really focused on salesforce. we know it's been the comeback kid of the dow this year. >> also, nutanix up 8%. tripled off the june lows. back in the 10 billion market cap territory. that does it for us. "fast money" starts now. live from the nasdaq market site in the heart of new york city's times square, this is "fast money." here's what's on tap tonight. we are minutes away from elon musk taking the stage at the deal book summit with andrew ross sorkin. this, as tesla gets set to start delivering the cybertruck. we'll break it all down for us. plus, the bulls keep running into bonds. the yield on the ten-year dropping to its lowest level since early september. should investors be cheering this continued rate slide? and later, one foot still sort of in, and the other out the door. how one of our traders is feeling about foot locker after

today's big post-earnings rebound. i'm melissa lee, coming to you live from studio b at the nasdaq. on the desk tonight -- so, we are just hours away from the delivery of tesla's first ever cybertruck, and just minutes away from elon musk's interview with andrew ross sorkin. we'll take you there as soon as it begins. but we want to get to general motors. that major buy-back announcement, $10 billion, and the reinstating of its 2023 guidance. the automaker increasing its quarterly dividend by more than 30%. major efforts to boost their sagging stock after ev setbacks, and a long uaw strike. the stock popping more than 9% on this news, but still down more than 20% in the last year. for more, let's kick it around the hornand we'll bring in mark. i know that you are taking a look at this very closely. do you buy these efforts, buying back the stock, all these things? this is what investors wanted to hear. >> yeah, it's what they want to

hear. when you are trading at this multiple of earnings, this is really accretive. however, that's capital allocation decision. and so, capital isn't free, and you have to decide -- it's sort of -- the other part i thought was interesting, beside this, which is the buy-back is very interesting, the dividend is really not such a huge deal, is sort of the -- they've gone to this big labor thing, right? it was really aggressive, you know, it was fraught. and then to come out and say, we've cut, you know, it's not that big of a deal, it's $1.1 billion and we're going to make it up in cost cuts and that was sort of surprising to me, just as a matter of optics. >> right. it adds to the average cost of the vehicle $500. >> right. >> less than 2% of the average cost of the vehicle to the buyer. like, this whole thing was no big deal. >> right. right. that, i found sort of interesting. so, mary barra, i think with the

cruise issues, feeling under the gun. i just happened to see, she joined gm on january 14th of 2015, i believe, or 15th on the '14, that might be it. coming up on the ten-year anniversary. it's been a tough ten years. not just for mary barra, but for ford, as well. and returns haven't been great. this clearly would juice the stock. i thought there was a little bit of some funny little math in there, but point being that they're saying, the business is good, our earnings are great. we've got a lot of cash flow. we've got a lot of -- it's very, very accretive to buy stock back. i get it. >> to karen's point, isn't the buy-back what the uaw was totally against? isn't that what people always have a problem with? that's corporate america. that's financial engineering. so, when you have that, and how much have they lost on evs? and now they're going to reward shareholders. where the average worker is

disadvantaged. so, i think it's a terrible setup, framing for the company. and look at the year to date performance. down 5%, ford down 8%. tesla, the gorilla in the room, up 100% year to date. tesla still is only company that could make evs efficiently and make money out of it. >> still, is there a little bit of a turnaround aspect to the gm story at this point, tim? what do you think? you know, mary barra is addressing exactly what investors are concerned about, we're going to cut costs, we're going to pull back on cruise which has lost $2 billion in the first nine months of this year. we're really going to look hard and how we're spending money. >> i think it sends a great message. i love the message. this may not be great optics. they got a union deal done. it was going to be contentious. everybody fought their corner. investors love this. they love the clarity. they love the bit under the stock. 17% of the flow taken off the

market. they have the ability to buy back shares. the stock does need a catalyst. it's not the reason necessarily a company should be doing this, they do it because they can, and because they actually think this is the best allocation of capital. we all know that they have to spend on evs, but the message to me is that their core business, first of all, is a lot more profitable than the street gives it credit for. morgan stanley who we have a ton of respect for here pointed out what's difference about this? what's different to me is that it's almost that you can look at it from the other side. now, we actually, at least understand that this is a company that we knew was 4 1/2 times trailing, otherwise, absurdly cheap and had intrinsive value in the underlying shares to buy back, so, i just think it reminds people that this company has been run differently, it's been run better than ford. it has a lot to do in ev land. everybody knows that. margins at tesla are getting razor thin. we're going to hear about a truck that's not profitable at

tesla. so, you know, it was a great day for gm, it was a great day to, i think, remind people that this company has been generating free cash flow for the last three years and the market hasn't paid attention. >> is it enough, though, guy, to convince you that this is, you know, a longer term play? >> it's great for the stock. i'm not sure it does anything for the problems that gm's faced for the last decade or so. we're all sort of saying the same things. i will say this, and i sort of agree with steve on this one, i think it's a giant slap in the face to the uaw. you basically, you negotiate hard on both sides, negotiations over, and oh, by the way, here's $10 billion to buy back our stock. i mean, i wouldn't feel particularly good about that, but clearly shareholders do. i guess, though, if you look at the stock, and we are, it gets us back to where we were basically a month or so ago. so, look, i think there's a floor in for the stock now in terms of this recent low. this clearly helps. big volume day. i don't think it fixes the woes of the company. it might fix the woes of the

stock. >> by the way, i want to get to karen's point about the funny business when it comes -- they're reducing the share count and issuing guidance, how does that factor in? >> it helps. so, they're reducing the share count and it seems like they're doing it right away. when they calculate the earnings per share, they take the average shares outstanding over the quarter. those will shrink. there's only one month left, but it's a sizable reduction in the share count, so, you have an earnings boost there. so, the rate -- the range went down, but they gained a few cents from doing that immediately. >> right. okay. something to keep in mind. for more in all this, let's bring in mark fields, a cnbc contributor. mark, great to have you with us. what's your take on what mary barra did today? does this give her a lifetime with investors? the stock is down 18%. does this buy her more time to get things right at gm? >> well, i think she's making a

statement. there's a lot of frustration, as we said earlier. she's done a very good job over the last time running gm differently. but listen, there was a lot of investor concern coming out of the uaw negotiations, around rising costs, s with labor, slog ev demand, which they put a lot of investment in, and just overall higher interest rates and what that means for demand going forward. so, i think she really wanted to make the statement that says, listen, this stock is undervalued, and i think as was mentioned earlier, she kind of put a floor on that. i think going forward, the frustration is, you know, she has staked her reputation on the new ev and autonomous technologies. she's, you know, had a messaging over the last couple of years of, listen, we're really becoming a tech company, and not a traditional automaker. and they're having issues, as they ramp up those technologies, and you have a big competitor like tesla, who, yes, their

margins are down, buzz they're profitable. so, i think that's the challenge. i think she has put a floor in, but they have not executed this year on, you know, her two main pillars of her strategy, and that's going to be a good barometer for her over the next year or two. >> do you think her days could be numbered? >> well, you know, listen, every ceo serves at the pleasure of the board. i think she's done a wonderful job leading this company from where it was when she took it over. but listen, they, you know, she has laid out a strategy, and, you know, laid out the capital, along the lines of the future being in evs. it's a bit of a risky strategy, because if you luke atook at cos like toyota and ford, they are investing in hybrid, which is a nice step, but she skipped that. so, if the demand is not there, once they master the production, they're going to have a lot of facilities that are going to be under utilized, and that's going to hurt the profitability of the

company. so, i think she's got the time to prove it, but you can't manage by press releases anymore around their ev announcements. they have to deliver in the next 18 months. >> we are awaiting elon musk, mark, so, i want to weave tesla into this conversation, because part of the bear case against tesla has been that the oems will be stiff competition when it comes to evs. do you think that's still the case? can you still make that argument? when you say there's a lack of demand, is that lack of and in overall for evs, that just hasn't lived up to the hype, or is the lack of demand for what general motors is producing? or will produce? >> well, what tesla has done very well over the last number of years is capture all the early adopters, now, you're getting to mass adoption. and that comes to not only cost for those consumers, but convenience, particularly around charging. so, i do believe it's not so much around, you know, overall demand, i think the demand is going to be there.

the issue, it's not going to come as fast as people expect, because not only do the costs have to come down where they match i.c.e., but that charging in infrastructure needs to be there, and on top of it, i do think the established automakers are going to figure out how to produce evs in high quantities, but you know, tesla's taken a very distinct strategy of integrates everything into their company, and -- versus outsourcing, and that's an advantage for them right now, and that's why it's going to be a challenge for the automakers, but you have to get that charging infrastructure in there, because the average joe sitting across the kitchen table with their spouse determining what they're going to spend and what they're going to buy, and consumers take the path of least resistance, and right now, it's a bit of a challenge for consumers to consider evs. >> how do you think the cybertruck will do? from a demand perspective, and -- i mean , it sounds like

it's a nightmare to manufacture, but just overall, what's your take? >> well, listen, it's a very polarizing product, right? you look at it and you either love it or you hate it. >> where do you fall? >> well, you know, i'm not a big fan of it, i don't like the design, but you know, i'm just a focus group of one, there's going to be plenty of tesla fans that are going to want this vehicle. i think when you look at this, melissa, the traditional pickup truck driver and consumer will not want this vehicle. i think this will be more for ev, you know, early adopters, the casual kind of use buyer. but i think the real critical thing is for any car product, it's not the first year in terms of how successful it is, it's the second and third and fourth year, in terms of, is this a fan product or does this product have legs? and so, i -- you know, i think they're going to have problems, as you mentioned, ramping it up, because it's a very difficult product to produce, given the engineering and the design.

the first year is going to be what it's going to be. but once they can start ramping, that's going to be the real barometer for this of whether it's going to be a successful product or it's just going to look in the dust bin of history as a fad. >> so, basically, you don't like it, but you have to give it a chance to really assess its success, or failure. >> listen, i love the technology in it. i'm not a big fan of design, and i think every consumer is going to make their own decisions around this. but listen, in the first year or so, it will be successful, because there's not going to be a lot produced. musk was very clear on his earnings call that they were going to be very cautious around production. but again, it's that second and third year in terms of, does this vehicle have legs, and what kind of halo does it contribute to the tesla brand? >> all right. mark, appreciate it. thank you. mark fields. and elon musk is taking the stage at the deal book summit with andrew ross sorkin. for that conversation, we want

to go there live. let's listen in. >> final interview of this remarkable time we've all had together. he doesn't need much of an introduction, but i want to say a couple things. he's the richest person in the world -- >> what? >> he may very well be the most -- >> for now. >> the most consequential individual in the world right now. he runs the most innovative companies in the world, tesla, spacex, starlink, part of that, the boring company, x, and his x.ai. and he's disrupted each of these lanes. he's moved at breakneck speeds, but he's faced a swarm of controversy in the process. he joins us today following a visit, as you all know so well and we discussed earlier, on monday to israel, where he met with the prime minister there and the president of israel, and we're going to take about everything, and my hope is that we can talk about how he thinks about his influence, about his power, about all of it, and we're going to talk about innovation and everything else.

i want to say, just, two other things real quick. >> sure. >> we met each other for the first time 16 years ago. >> yeah, long time. >> it's been a long time. >> all these kids were 3. >> when we first met, i think you were just -- you were about to deliver your first roadster. i don't think you had yet. larry page was still waiting to get one. >> 2007. >> 2007, 2008. i remember going back to the newsroom and saying, i think i just met the next steve jobs. >> really? >> i'm going to hold to that. >> okay. >> i'm going to hold to that. but a lot has happened between when i first met you and now. you came to -- >> it's not been boring. actually, technically, i do have a boring company. >> 2012, you came to deal book and sat on this stage and we're thrilled to have you back. but there's been so much that's happened between now and then and there's been so much that's

happened in the last week, week and a half. and a lot of folks -- >> hell of a year. >> a lot of folks called me up, said, you are really going to host elon musk here? can you believe what he said on twitter -- >> on what? >> on x. on x. >> no idea what this twitter thing is you keep talking about. >> and should you platform him. that's what they said. and i said that i think that it's our role and i know you have issues with journalists. >> i have a platform. >> i know you have an issue with journalists often times, but i said it's our role to have conversations and to inquire and to sometimes even interrogate ideas. >> sure. >> and i'm hoping we can do that. so, i want to start just so we can begin this conversation and just level said, take us through everything that happened, if you could -- >> everything? >> over the past week and a half. >> how long have you got? >> we've got the time. >> ah -- okay.

>> you send out -- you send out a post, or, a tweet -- >> post, whatever. i'm trying to -- like when things were just 140 characters, it made sense to call them a tweet, but you know, the point of which you can put, like, three-hour videos on, it's a very long tweet. so -- >> so here we are -- >> post is more descriptive, i think. >> i don't know where you were, but you write in responding to another tweet -- >> yes. >> this is the actual truth. and it set off a firestorm of criticism, all the way to the white house. >> right. >> and then you make this trip to israel, you have advertisers who have left the platform. people calling you -- >> the trip to israel is independent -- it wasn't, like, some apology tour, i want to be clear. that was -- >> let's talk about that. just take us back to the moment at which you write that -- >> trip to real is independent,

wasn't in response to that at all. >> we'll do israel in a moment. >> and i have no problem being hated, by the way. >> i hear you. >> hate away. >> but you know what? let's go straight to that then for a second. >> sure. >> because there is an idea, and you could say that -- >> real weakness to want to be liked. a real weakness. and i do not have that. >> let me ask you this then. there's a difference between you saying, i don't care if anybody likes me or they hate me, but given your power, and given what you have amassed, and the importance you have, i would think you want to be trusted. i would think -- maybe you don't need to be liked, or hated, but trusted matters. if x is going to become a financial platform where people are going to put their money, the government is going to give you money for rockets, where people are going to get into the cars, they need to ultimately decide that you are -- maybe they don't have to decide that they love you, but that you are

ultimately a decent and good human being. >> yes, i'm -- i think i am. but i'm certainly not going to do some sort of tap dance to prove to people that i am. sol, as for trust, i mean, i think you can break that down in a few ways. if you want satellites sent over reliably, spacex will do 80% of all orbit this year, china will do 12%, the rest of the world will do 8%. so, the track record of the rocket is the best by far of anything. you could -- you could hate my guts, you could not trust me, it is irrelevant. the rocket track record speaks for itself. with respect to tesla, we make the best cars. whether you hate me, like me, indifferent, if you want the best car or do you you not want the best car? so -- so i will certainly not

pander. and jonathan, the only reason i'm here is because you are a friend. like, what was my speaking fee? >> you are not making -- first of all, i'm andrew. >> sorry. >> yeah. yes. >> we've known each other for a long time. >> you know -- >> listen -- what i'm trying to illustrate is that sometimes i say the wrong thing. >> i think a lot of people are tired. let me go back. >> you should hear the sketches that "sn"snl" wouldn't post. those are really good. >> unfortunately, or fortunately, whatever friendship we have, not great, we don't talk that much, but let me ask you this. it's true. that's true. >> where am i?

the point is, i'm not here because i need validation. we've been friends for 16 years, and i promise you i'd be here and that's why i'm here. >> i appreciate you being here. but let me ask you this. go at it. tell me what happened. you write this tweet that says that this is the actual truth. people read that tweet -- >> yes. >> and they say, elon musk is an anti-semite, that he -- he is -- he is riling up this base, you're hearing it from, as i said, the white house, you're hearing it from jewish groups all over, i think jonathan greenblatt from the adl is here. there are lots of people who say this, and by the way, it's not just -- >> did you read the whole thing. >> i did. >> and the responses? >> excuse me? >> more -- >> more responses. >> i said more than what you just -- >> no, there was absolutely more. but i'll tell you the thing that struck me. it wasn't -- i'm an american jew.

it wasn't just the people who had that view, it was actually people who really are anti-semimilts who said, oh, my goodness, go -- go elon. this is fabulous. and that actually was the thing that really -- really set me back. i said to myself, what is going on here? and i want to know how you felt about that, in that moment, when you saw all of this happening. >> yeah, well, first of all, i did clarify almost immediately what i meant. i would say that was, you know, if i could go back and say, i should in retrospect, not have replied to that particular post and i should have written in greater length as to what i meant. i did subsequently clarify in replies, but those clarifications were ignored by the media, and essentially i handed a loaded gun to those who hate me, and arguably, to those

who are anti-semitic, to -- for that, i'm quite sorry. that is not -- that was not my intention. so, i did, you know, post on my primary timeline to be absolutely clear that i'm not an anti-semitic. and that i, in fact, if anything -- and the trip to israel was planned before any of that happened. it was neither here nor there. see this thing? >> uh-huh. >> you know what it is? >> i do, because i actually followed your entire trip to israel. >> right. >> why don't you tell everybody. >> this is -- this says -- it says "bring them home." the hostages. it was given to me by the parents of one of the hostages. and i said i would wear it as long as there was a hostage still remaining. and i have. >> what was that trip like? and obviously, you know that

there's a public perception that -- and you are clarifying this now, but there's a public perception that that was part of a -- apology tour, if you will. this had been said online there was all of the criticism, there was advertisers leaving, we talked to bob iger today. >> you hope they stop? >> you hope -- >> don't advertise? >> you don't want them? >> no. >> what do you mean? >> if somebody's going to try to bl blackmail me with advertising? go -- yourself. but -- go -- yourself. is that clear? i hope it is. hey, bob. if you're in the audience. >> let me ask you then -- >> that's how i feel. >> if part of the underlying

model released today, maybe it needs to shift, maybe the answer is, it needs to shift away from advertising. if you believe that this is the one part of your business where you will be be-holden to those who -- have this view -- >> gfy. >> i understand that, but there's a reality, too. right? >> yes. no, it -- >>ccarino is right here and she has to sell advertising. >> actually, what this advertising boycott is -- is going to do is it's going to kill the company. >> and you think -- >> but -- and the whole world will know that those advertisers killed the company. everyone will document it in great detail. >> but those advertisers, i imagine, they're going to say, we didn't kill the company. >> oh, yeah. tell it to earth. >> but they're going to say -- they're going to say, elon, that

you killed the company, because you said these things and they were inappropriate things and they didn't feel comfortable on the platform, right? that's what linda said. >> let's see how earth responds to that. >> something -- okay, this goes back to -- >> we'll both make our cases and we'll see what the outcome is. >> what are the economics of that for you? you have enormous resources. you can keep this company going for a long time. would you, if there was no advertising? >> i mean, if the company fails because of advertising boy colt, it will fail because of an advertising boycott and that will be what bankrupts the company and that's what everybody on earth will no. >> what do you think, then -- >> it goes back to the idea of trust. >> it will be gone because of an advertising boycott. >> you recognize that some of these people are going to say they didn't feel comfortable on the platform, and i -- i just wonder, i ask you, think about that -- >> tell it to the judge. >> but the judge is going to be --

>> the judge is the public. >> and you think that the public is going to say that disney is making a mistake? >> yes. >> and they're going to boy cot disney? >> they already are. >> well, there are some that are for lots of different reasons, but you think this is going to -- that you have the -- this goes to actually the interesting thing of power and leverage. >> let the chips fall where they may. let the chips fall where they may. >> can i ask why that is the approach? and i ask it, because you've been -- >> what's the other approach? >> you've been very particular about, i mean, the approach to tesla, when you think about the engineering involved in that, the approach to spacex, the approach to some of the stuff you're doing with a.i., has been very specific, right? there's not, a let the chips fall where they may approach to those businesses, i don't think. >> no, we focus on making the best product. and tesla's gotten to where it's gotten with no advertising at all. >> i understand that.

>> sells twice as much in terms of electric vehicles, e leg vick carmakers in the united states combined. tesla's done more to help the environment than all other companies combined. it would be fair to say that as the leader of the company, i've done more for the environment than any single human on earth. >> how do you feel about that? >> how do i feel about that? >> no, i'm asking you personally how you feel about that, becausbecause er we are talking about power and influence -- >> the reality of goodness, not the perception of it. and what i see all over the place is because people who care about looking good while doing evil. >> let me ask you, i think part of this -- by the way, there are some people that say, owning x to begin with has just created problems. they created so many things that

are changing our world. and i know you want to make x this fabulous town square, free speech platform, but that onto itself, it's created such a distraction of all of these things, this is the conversation -- we're not talking at least yet, and we will, on tesla, you have the cy cybertruck deliveries tomorrow. >> yes, it will be the biggest product launch of anything by far on earth this year. >> is there any part of you, though, that just says, you know what, i just shouldn't have done this, or maybe i should sell it or give it away or do something else -- with the x piece of it. >> yeah. >> given the propensity for some of the things you do and say on that platform to create these issues. >> yeah. a lot of the posts i've done on the platform, i think they might be 30,000 or something like

that -- >> right. >> once in awhile, i'll say something foolish. and i have. and i certainly will put that comment, as you said, that's one of the foolish things i've done on the platform. and i did do my best to clarify afterwards, that, you know, i certainly don't mean anything an anti-semitic in that. the nature of the criticism was simply that -- the jewish people have been persecuted for thousands of years. there is a natural affinity, therefore, for persecuted groups. this has led to the funding of organizations that -- essentially promote any persecuted group, or any group with the perception of perse persecution. this includes radical islamic groups.

everyone here has seen the -- the massive demonstrations for hamas in every major city in the west. that should be jarring. a number of those organizations receive funding from prominent people in the jewish community. they didn't expect that to happen. but if you generically, without condition, sort of fund -- if you fund persecuted groups, in general, some of those persecuted groups, unfortunately, want your annihilation. and what i'm -- what i meant by that when i subsequently clarified is, is that it's unwise toll find organizations that support groups that want your annihilation. this is coming across clearly?

>> it is. my question to you, though, is -- >> i think logically, this makes a lot of sense. >> is there any part of you -- just tell me what happens when once all this happens -- >> let 's say you fund a group and that group supports hamas, who wants you to die. perhaps you should not fund them. >> right. but you -- >> thank you. >> you do appreciate that when you wade into these very delicate waters at these very delicate times -- >> yes. >> that it can create a real, i mean, it's created headlines for the past two weeks, and economic impact. what -- i'm just so curious -- your brain, when you see all this happening, are you sitting there you saying, oh, my god, i stepped in it, are you saying, screw them, i hate these people, why are they after me? >> no, but all of that.

i'm sorry for that post. it was foolish of me. of the 30,000, it might be literally the worst and dumbest post that i've ever done. and i tried to do my best to clarify, six ways to sunday. but you know, at least -- i think over time it will be obvious that, in fact, far from being anti-semitic, i'm in fact philo-semitic. and all the evidence in my track record would support that. >> let me ask you this, though, but there are people who say crazy things on x, as you know, maybe you think they're crazy, maybe they're not. >> the -- the aspiration for x is to be the global town square. now, if you were to walk down to, let's say, times square -- >> right. >> do you occasionally hear people saying crazy things? >> yes. but they don't have the megaphone, right? and that's the conundrum. they can only say it to the 50 or 100 people that are standing there in times square. >> they don't have -- i mean, look, the joke i used to make

about old twitter, it was like giving everyone in the psych ward a megaphone. you know, i'm aware that things can get promoted that are negative beyond sort of the circle of somebody simply screaming crazy things in times square, which happens all the time. you know, so the -- it's actually -- it's pretty rare for something, frankly, that is hateful to be promoted. it's not -- it's not that it never happens. but it's -- it's farely rare. i would encourage people to look at -- those who use the system, when you look at the feed that you receive, how often is it, is it hateful? and over time, has it gotten more or less hateful? and i would say that if you look at the x platform today, versus a year ago, i think it's

actually much better. i mean, what is -- >> are you surprised -- >> i'm just curious. >> i use the platform religiously. >> you would notice. >> i'm an addict. and i use the for you and i will -- i will say -- now, the problem is, because i'm a journalist, i go looking for stuff. >> well, that's -- >> i'm just saying. and because i -- and i also think the algorithm for me, personally, because i'm looking for stuff, is also feeding me other things. >> this is actually a challenge in that -- like sometimes people will say, why is it showing me, you know, posts from this person that i hate, and we're like, well, did you interact a lot with this person that you hate? well, yes. well, therefore, it thinks that you want to interact more with this person that you hate. that's, like, a reasonable -- you kind of want to have an argument. >> when you tweet, do you -- >> post. >> post. let's say post. when you post -- >> listen, if someone can come up with a better word, that

would be great. but the least bad word i can think of is post. >> when you post, though, are you trying to rile up either a base or an audience. do you recognize the power you have in that? and also, by the way, not just rile up one version, but also rile down, which is to say, as i said, there are people who are an anti-semitic on the site who i get jew boy things and all sorts of things that come my way. >> they thought i was jewish for awhile. my name is super jewish. >> you think to yourself, i'm going to say, these people, i condemn these people that are on my site, saying these things. >> i have -- >> condemned anti-semitism. >> yeah, i said i -- literally -- i literally posted i posted anti-semitism in all its forms. that is a literal post that i made. i mean, i'm like, listen, i can

get out the thesaurus and we can -- >> let me ask you a different question. >> you compose it, i'll post it. >> let me ask you this. you -- you were on a podcast about a month ago, and you said something that struck me, and it struck me as accurate, came out of your mouth, so, hopefully it is, but i'm hoping to go deep on this. >> just because it came out of my mouth doesn't mean it's true. >> you said, my mind is a storm. i don't think most people would want to be me. they may think they want to be me, but they don't know, they don't understand. what did you mean by that? your mind being a storm, ithink it -- i mean, i have known you for quite some time, think it is a bit of a storm. >> yes. yeah, i mean -- as much as a weather metaphor makes sense. my mind is -- often feels like a

very wild storm. i mean, i have a fountain of ideas. i have more ideas than i can possibly execute. so, i have no shortage of ideas. innovation is not the problem. execution is the problem. i've got a million ideas. i've got an entire design fur an electric super sonic vertical takeoff jet, but i mean, if -- i just can't do that as well. i've had that for ten years. and there's a million things. >> but is your storm a happy storm? >> no. >> it's not a happy storm. >> no. >> tell us about that, because i think that actually -- when people try to really understand you, i think there's a lot of this comes from some other place, and i want to talk about that. what do you think that is?

>> i wish there was a psychiatrist couch here or something. um -- you know, i think to some degree, i was born this way and it was amplified by a difficult childhood, frankly, but i can remember even in happy moments when i was a kid that it just feels like -- it's just a -- a rage of forces in my mind, constantly. now, this productively manifests itself in technology and building things for the most part, so -- and i think on balance, the output has been very productive. the results, as we, you know, discussed earlier with spacex,

tesla, paypal, which is, you know, still growing today, the first year in that company, in fact, the first company i started was funded by -- >> yes. i remember. >> and we wrote some of the software for "the new york times" website and we helped bring online several hundred newspapers that previously were only in print. now, this is in the '90s, which, at this point, i'm like a grandpa, basically. you know, the '90s and internet feels like a precprecambrian er where there were only sponges. i think a lot of productive things have been done. and you can look at tesla as being many companies in one. our supercharging network, if it were -- if the tesla

supercharging network would be its own ompany, it would be a fortune 500 company by itself. just the supercharging system. we also make the cells, we power electronics in the power train from scratch, we're the most innovative structural design, the largest castings ever used, the best manufacturing technology at tesla. better manufacturing technology than companies that have been doing it for 100 years, so -- these -- these demons of the mind, you know, are -- for the most part, harnessed to productive ends. >> let me ask you a question -- >> but that doesn't mean that once in awhile, they -- you know -- go wrong. >> but -- and this is a question i think a lot of people, you know, are always trying to figure out about not just you, but sometimes themselves,

meaning, what is driving all of this? you are doing all of these things. do you think -- do you think that you would be as successful, whatever success is, if it wasn't being driven -- i think there's something that you're trying to prove, either to yourself or to somebody, i don't know. we're all trying to -- >> to prove to who? >> i don't know. >> no. if i were to describe my philosophy, it's a philosophy of curiosity. i mean, i didn't have this existetenistential crisis when around 12, about what's the meaning of life, is it all pointless? why don't just commit suicide, why exist? i read the religious texts, i read the philosophy books, but -- especially the german philosophy books made me quite

depressed, you shouldn't read that as a teenager. but then i read "hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy," which is a form of philosophy in humor. and the point adams was making there is, we don't actually know what questions to ask, that's why i said, the answer is 42. basically, giearth is a giant computer and came up with the answer 42. but to find the question, that's the actual hard part. and i think this is generally true also in physics. at the point of which you can properly frame the question, the answer is -- is actually the easy part. so -- so my motivation, then, was that, well, my life is finite, really a flash in the pan on a galactic time scale, but if we go expand the scope

and consciousness, then we are better able to figure out what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe. and maybe we can find out the meaning of life or even what the right question to ask is. you know, where do we come from? where are we going? where are the aliens? are there aliens? you know, these questions -- you know, is there new physics to discover? or is this -- because there are real questions around dark matter and dark energy and -- so the purpose of spacex is to extend life beyond earth on a sustained basis, so that we can at least pass one of the

filters, which is being a single planet civilization. if we are, we are simply waiting around for some extinction event, whether that is man-made or natural. but if you are a single planet civilization, eventually you will -- something will happen to that planet and you will die, if you are a multiplanet civilization, you will live much longer. also multiplanet civilization is the natural steppingstone to being out there among the stars, so -- all this, i think, has two -- there's not simply defensive motivation, but it is also one where, you know, that gives meaning. man's search for meaning. >> can i ask you -- >> let me finish this philosophy point, even though it may seem rather esoteric, it may resonate with some people. we must get pass this filter of

being a single planet sichlization. and if we do that, we're more likely to understand the nature of the universe and what questions to ask, and if you are a believer in the philosophy of curiosity, then i think you should support this ambition. and -- but it's -- being a multiplanet species is more than simply, you know, life insurance for life collectively. that's a defensive reason, but i think also that life has to be more than simply solving one sad problem after another. you know, there have to be reasons why you wake up in the morning and you're happy to be alive. there have to be reasons -- you have to say, why are you excited about the future? like, what gives you hope?

and if you aren't sure, ask your kids. and i think the idea of us being a space-fearing civilization and being out there among the stars is incredibly inspiring, and exciting, and something to look forward to. and there need to be such things in the world. >> let me ask you a different question about confidence. we were having a conversation here earlier about people and where people get their confidence from. some people have great insecurity. o other people have great confidence. and i was thinking about you, because you have a very interesting history with people have told you over and over again that you're wrong. >> well, sometimes they're right. >> well, sometimes they are, but i would say that when it comes to tesla, when it came to spacex, people told you that you were crazy, you were out of your mind, this was never going to happen. this was never going to work. >> yes.

>> i ask you this, though, now, when people say you're wrong, this isn't right, do you look at that and say, you know, that's a red flag for me, because i've been told so often that i'm wrong that i know that -- and i know i'm right, because i've had that experience, or are there people in your life, when they say, you know what elon, this is not right, do you know what i'm saying? >> i mean, i think what you're trying to say is, do i at this point think because i've been right so many times for others that have said i'm wrong that now i believe i'm right when i'm, in fact, i'm wrong? >> you did very well. what do you think? >> no, i'm right. so, yeah -- look. here's the thing. physics is unforgiving. physics is unforgiving, so sh the -- i mean, i have these

little sayings that i've come up with, that physics is the law, and everything else is a recommendation. >> right. >> in the sense that you can break any law made by humans, but try breaking a law made by physics. that's much more difficult. so, if you are wrong and persistent being wrong, the rockets will blow up and the cars will fail. >> right. >> so this is -- we're not trying to figure out what flavor of ice cream is the best flavor of ice cream. >> right. >> like -- there's 1,000 things that can happen on a rocket flight, and only one of them gets the rocket to orbit. and so being wrong results in failure when dealing with physical objects. >> but that's the interesting part. so, now you have built this -- these great companies that physically, the physics of them

are enormously successful, so successful, arguably, that you have leverage over everybody else, right? there's -- nobody else can do starlink. nobody else can get the rockets in space yet, amazon and jeff bezos are trying, but they haven't yet. >> i hope he does. >> you hope he does? >> yeah, i do. i mean, i think, you know, -- >> but -- >> i actually agree with a lot of jeff's motivations. i mean, i think he's -- you know, i -- so i'm -- let me put it this way. if there was a button i could press to delete blue origin, i wouldn't press it. i think it's good he's spending money on making rockets, too. you know, it's just perhaps he spend more time on it, but it's up to him. the -- i just want to make a point here. nothing any of my companies have done has been to stifle

competition. in fact, we've done the opposite. so, at tesla, we have open sourced our patents. anyone can use our patents for free. how many companies do you know who have done that? you name one? i can't. at spacex, we don't use patents. so, i mean, once in awhile, we'll file a patent just so some patent troll doesn't cause trouble, but we're not stopping -- we've done nothing an anti-competitive, we've done nothing to stop -- >> i'm not suggesting you are. >> i just want to clarify for the audience, because some companies have done an anti-competitive things. i think -- the strange thing, the unusual thing about spacex and tesla is that we've done things that have helped our competition, so, at tesla, we have made our supercharger system open access. we -- we made our charger

technology available for free to the other manufacturers. >> the reason -- >> we could have put a wall up. instead, we invited them in. >> the reason i mention this, because you've had the success in the physical, physics world, you have these very difficult decisions that have huge impacts on the world, that are not physical decisions at all. they're decisions of the mind, they're decisions that you and others have to make and there's a question whether you should be making these decisions at all, and i think about it in the context of starlink, there was the report about how it's being used in ukraine and the russia war, there's questions about what, you know, taiwan, whether taiwan should use it or will use it, i believe they're not right now, because they're worried that at some point maybe the chinese will tell you you'll have to -- they are leverage over you and you're going to have to turn that off. i mean, these are very difficult decisions, and i'm so curious how you think about that, and not just the decisions, the fact that you have that power.

>> i just -- i think it's important for the audience to understand that the reason i have these power is not because of some anti-competitive actions, it's because we've executed very well. >> i'm not dismissing that. there are so many people who are huge supporters of what you've created. >> there are other satellites out there. >> but they're not as good as yours. you can make the same argument with cars and everything else, but as a result, that gives you enormous leverage. right? >> okay. >> with the exception of, by the way, the advertisers who aren't on x, in every other instance, everybody needs you. >> i mean, nobody's -- they can use our product if it's better, use somebody else's product if it's better. >> i accept that. maybe some day somebody will create a better product. >> how is it a bad thing to make better product than other companies? >> well, i want to go back to the starlink piece of it, though, because that has a geopolitical ramification in terms of your power and how you

think about that specific power, and then the power that the u.s. government might have over you or not over you, the power the chinese government might have over you or not over you. and how those things get used. >> what are you suggesting? >> i'm asking the question around this very idea, how the salt lites are going to be used. if you should have control of them, if the government should have control of them. >> do you trust the government? >> well, that's -- there's a lot of people who don't trust the government. >> exactly. >> but this goes back to the trust of you, right? >> i mean, like i said, we're not the only company who has communication satellites. our satellites are just much better than theirs, so, it's not like we have a monopoly. >> right. >> we just have the best product. >> do you feel anybody has leverage over you?

>> i think at the end of the day, if we make bad products that people don't want to use, the users will vote with their resources and use something else. certainly, my companies are overseen by regulators, and while, you know, once in awhile -- it's -- spacex, starinwistarin l starinwill starlink, tesla, are overseen by cumulatively over 100 regulators, actually more than that, a few hundred regulators, because we're in 55 coun countries, if you sum up all the times that i had an argument with regulators of hundreds of regulators over decades, it can sound really terrible, except they forgot to mention that there were 10 million regulations we complied with and

only five that i disagreed with. but it was still the five and sounds like, this guy's a real maverick. yeah, but what about the 10 million we complied with? >> let me -- one related thing on this, the leverage of countries and things over you and regulators, x is this free speech platform, you do business in china. lots of business in china, that's an important part of your business, i imagine. >> well, not spacex. >> how do you think about the leverage that the chinese have over you? and do they have leverage over you? and how do you feel about, some people would say, is it hypocritical for you to be doing business in china, or frankly, in other companies as it relates to x and other things, that don't follow this free speech past that you have espoused. >> the best that the x platform can do is adhere to the laws of any given country. do you think there's something more we can do than that? >> i think it would be very hard, but i just wonder, given

the sort of strong philosophical approach that you've been vocal about, whether you say to yourself, you know, maybe i shouldn't be doing business in that country. >> well, first of all, starlink and spacex do -- are no business in china whatsoever. tesla has one of four factories, four vehicle factories in china. and china is, you know, i don't know, a quarter of our market or something like that. and so, it's a quarter of the market of one company. the same is true, by the way, of all the other car companies. they also have something on that order of a quarter of their sale s in china. so, if you -- if that's a problem for tesla, it's a problem for every car company. i mean, i think people have to be careful about not conflating the various companies, because i can only do things that are within the balance of the law. i cannot do beyond that. my aspiration is to do as much

good as possible and to be as productive as possible, within the balance of what is legal. more than that, i cannot do. >> i want to pivot and talk about a.i. for a moment. we had jensen huang here. >> he's awesome. >> talking about bringing you the first box, with ilya, interestingly enough. >> yes. >> back in 2016, i think. >> there's video of jensen and me unpacking the first a.i. computer at openai. >> so, i'm so curious what you think of what's just happened over the past two weeks, while you were dealing with this other headline, series of headlines, there was a whole -- >> the openai soap opera. >> at openai. what did you think? >> well -- >> you founded it. cofounded it. >> cofounded it, yeah. well, the -- the whole arc of openai, frankly, is a little troubling, because the reason

for starting openai was to create a counterweight to google and deep mind, which, at the time, had two-thirds of all a.i. talent and basically infinite money and compute and there was no counterweight, it was a u unipolar world. i would talk to larry into the late hours of the night about a.i. safety and it became apparent to me that larry did not care about a.i. safety. i think perhaps the thing that gave it away was when he called me a specieist for being pro-humanity, as in a racist for species. so, i'm like, wait a second, what side are you on, larry? and i'm like, okay, listen, the guy's calling me a specieist, he doesn't care about a.i. safety,

we've got to have a counterpoint here, because this seems like we could be -- this is -- this is no good. so, openai was actually started and it was meant to be open source. i named it openai after it should be renamed super closed source for maximum profit ai because this is what it actually is. i mean, fate loves irony. i mean, in fact, a friend of mine has this -- says the way to predict outcomes is the most ironic outcome. like octam's razor. the most ironic outcome is the most likely. that's what's happened with ai. it's gone from an open source foundation t