On October 19, Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, and CTO and executive chairman of X, who supports former president Donald Trump, announced cash incentives to voters in swing states. Specifically, he gave $100 to voters in the key swing state of Pennsylvania who signed a petition supporting the first and second amendments. Musk also offered $1 million each day leading up to the election via a raffle to a registered voter who signs the petition in one of the seven swing states.

This move sparked a lot of controversy legality such incentives, including a tweet Dallas Mavericks co-owner, television star and ultra-rich entrepreneur Mark Cuban questioned whether the plan violated voting or gaming laws in Pennsylvania.

Cuban, who once supported Trump’s early presidential aspirations and now supports Vice President Kamala Harris, has differing views with Musk not only on politics but on a variety of other issues, including social media and artificial intelligence. Musk was one of the signatories of the March 2023 open letter called on developers to pause training of AI systems more powerful than ChatGPT-4 for six months, citing “profound risks to society and humanity.” On the other hand, Cuban believes that it is crucial to limit government regulations on artificial intelligence so that the United States can maintain its leading position in technology to maintain its economic and military position in the world.

I interviewed Cuban via email to get his thoughts on some of these topics, including the tech industry’s influence on politics and government.

The resulting interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Sara Goudarzi: Lately, you’ve been campaigning for Kamala Harris and against Donald Trump. From where?

Mark Cuban: I believe Kamala Harris will be a much better president for our country.

– Goudarzi: Over the last few years, a handful of technology companies such as Google, Apple, Meta, Oracle, X, OpenAI have gained enormous power and influence over the flow of information and communication, among other things. Their decisions about what to see can affect everything from public health to policies to elections. AI seems likely to concentrate power in the hands of a relatively small number of technology companies and their leaders. Do you see this concentration of power as a problem? If so, what can be done in a democratic system to help solve this problem?

Cuba: There are two questions: The first is about algorithms, especially social media. I think this is a problem. It creates our own personal echo chamber where the algorithm constantly sends you more of the food you’ve already consumed in an attempt to get you to consume more. Considering that most are user-specific, we all have our own personal wormhole. I’m not sure you can do much (in this regard) because creating an algorithm deserves as much freedom of expression as writing a book.

It’s too early to say anything about artificial intelligence. It’s like the early days hostswhere every manufacturer needs significant, expensive resources. Over time, increasingly powerful computers and software became increasingly cheaper to build, making them common to build or purchase.

The same can be said for different forms of artificial intelligence. It’s really expensive and resource intensive right now. Mastering artificial intelligence is essential for the United States to maintain our economic and military position in the world; so this is the domain of the government and our largest corporations.

Over time, I think the price-performance curve for the equipment required to run today’s most advanced AI options will follow the technology we’ve seen over the last 50 and more years. As (the price) drops, it will become more accessible to everyone except the most advanced models and new applications used by the military. For the rest of us, as consumers and businesses, there will be tens of millions of models to create and use.

– Goudarzi: What do you think happens when someone like Elon Musk, who owns a social media platform, decides to not only remove guardrails that combat misinformation and disinformation and limit hate speech, but also publicly support a political candidate? Is this a problem or is Musk just doing what any media owner would do?

Cuba: Of course, for Musk, Zuck (Mark Zuckerberg), or anyone else, owning a social media platform is a power trip; there is no doubt about it. But that’s not all that different from what Rupert Murdoch has.

Everyone wants to be Charles Foster Kaneand in the end they will all want their sleds.

– Goudarzi: You Questioned the legality of Musk’s latest plan Offering cash incentives to voters. The move is alarming at best. Should there be clear laws and better checks and balances to reduce such actions?

Cuba: This is up to the people of each state. I’m not a fan of what he did. But I also believe this will backfire. It seems hopeless and diminishes the value people place on their votes.

– Goudarzi: In 2022, Musk wrote on Twitter (now known as X): “…my historical party affiliation has been Independent, and until this year my actual voting history has been entirely Democrat.Similarly, other Silicon Valley members, such as PayPal’s former COO David Sacks, who previously supported Hillary Clinton, now support Donald Trump. Historically, Silicon Valley has been more liberal. Why do you think these people are rallying around the former president now?

Cuba: It made perfect sense for them to switch to Trump when there were questions about Biden’s ability, especially since so many people believed they could influence him. I think he and Kamala regret it now, but they’ve clearly identified themselves so much with Trump that they feel they have no choice but to stay with him. I guess they think “at worst it will only last four years” and at best they can influence him to do what they want.

– Goudarzi: Other social media owners who do not publicly express political affiliations, such as Mark Zuckerberg, can and still use their influence in other ways, such as suppressing content and controlling how many times a post is viewed. Social media platforms have positive effects, but they have had definite negative effects on everything from politics to democracy to mental health. Do you think the United States government should increase its regulation of social media platforms? If so, how?

Cuba: First we need to understand how. I think the best first step is that if a platform has users 16 and under, they are required to publish all source code for their algorithms and provide an HTML page available to parents with a link to any videos or images shown to the child. See it whenever you want. Nothing tells you more about a kid than their social feeds on TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube.

– Goudarzi: Taking this one step further: What happens when a handful of individuals and corporations decide to challenge governments because they control much of the technology involved in people’s daily lives, commerce, communications, and military? For example, Musk resisted when asked by the Brazilian government to block problematic content on X. He eventually gave up after a judge ordered the platform to be blocked in the country. What happens if there is no surrender (many countries rely on Starlink satellites, for example)? So are we looking at a society where billionaires with no real government or military experience will have more power than governments? Why is this problematic?

Cuba: I don’t think it’s much different than three TV networks, a newspaper or two, and a few radio stations controlling all the media. Rupert Murdoch is as powerful as all of them, if not more powerful.

As for technology: The military needs to be equal in terms of technology. I realize Elon has a lot of clout thanks to SpaceX and to a lesser extent Starlink, but there are competitors as well. We need to support them. Technology is changing so fast that the world will be different before the feds figure out their initial response. We need to make sure the government has a president who is tech-savvy enough to emphasize getting AI, just like Kennedy wanted to go to the Moon.

– Goudarzi: To ensure the United States stays ahead of China in the AI ​​race, you have been vocal about limiting government regulation of AI in favor of innovation. Are you concerned about the role of AI in spreading misinformation (election-related or otherwise) and what solutions, if any, do you think could be effective in combating AI deepfakes and misinformation? Do you see any role for government here?

Cuba: Yes Name, Picture, Similarity rules are in effect. There are copyright and trademark rules. We need to adapt these to the digital age, just as we did with digital copyright law.

You can’t train an AI model very well using only data generated by another model or publicly available materials. In order to be trained, he must use a broad knowledge base. Almost all of this is copyrighted material. If we implement these laws, I think the basic models would be that Netflix would pay the owners of intellectual property, like paid film and TV studios.

– Goudarzi: Are you afraid that you will suffer negative consequences for your opposition to Donald Trump if he wins the presidential election?

Cuba: I don’t know.

– Goudarzi: Will the Dallas Mavericks agree to visit the White House after winning the 2025 NBA championship, regardless of who wins November’s presidential election?

Cuba: It will be up to the players. But I guess so. Let’s hope we have to decide.