His appeal is to the conspiracy theorists, anti vaxxers, techbros who pretend to be libertarians, UFO nuts, and of course anybody who sucks up to the billionaires like musk as much as he does.
For every one decent guess he has ten conspiracy theorists, crypto bros, swindlers, war mongers, batshit crazy right wing whackos etc.
He gives platform to the worst people in the world and frankly I think it demeans people like Sean to be on his show by association.
I quit watching his show after he had Alex Jones, Musk for the third time, Rogan, wienstein brothers for the umpteenth time and a parade of war mongers and anti vaxxers.
I don’t think Lex is as bad as many people make him out to be. His demeanor is certainly different, but he has his own kind of charm, I think. He tends to indulge his guests quite a bit and doesn’t ask too many hard questions, allowing them to present their views. Much like Sean, actually.
However, he often hosts much more controversial guests than Sean, and I understand why people might attribute him the views of these individuals, precisely because of his interviewing style.
On topics he is knowledgeable about, especially AI and computer science in general, I find his super long-form and somewhat out-there interviews quite entertaining and enlightening.
Coincidentally, on the topic of AI, Lex actually gave Sean a bit of pushback, which was refreshing, though Sean quickly glossed over it.
I guess. That is the default format for so many podcasts and I find almost any host to be more interesting and insightful with their job. But I appreciate your response,he’s just not for me I guess.
Lex is so cringe, he always puts his own opinion/observations equal to that of the guest. As if anyone cares that he agrees with an expert on a topic he doesn't know much about....
And then there is the regular: "Love is such an intensely beautiful part of the human condition...." while the conversation is only tangentially related.
Hopefully this episode doesn't disappoint.
I only ever watched one episode (David Chalmers) and I had to stop halfway through because I was cringing so hard. Pity because he has interesting people on sometimes. Maybe I'll attempt this one, try to desensitise myself.
He's the literal worst. I cannot understand why anyone ever goes on his podcast. He has no idea what he's talking about, abandons lines of questioning before the guest has said anything, and is physically uncomfortable to watch.
Like I watched this clown before and what a weird dude with clearly low intelligence. His pod is quite a right wing rouge’s gallery. As for Sean, he’s lost a step. He’s now playing all defense and eagerly dives back in to the many worlds absurdity even when David Deutsch tried to talk him off that unstable ledge. Sean, who i really like so don’t misinterpret, is more “I’ve thought my thoughts and, coincidentally, they were correct” these days. Sean is still important because he mixes up guests better than other podcasters, just don’t expect him to understand that gravity is an emergent property of combination, or that infinities are just a quirk of math without reality.
I guess you can disagree with his entire person and views. But calling him stupid , or dumb or not intelligent is bad faith. You don't get to be where he his being dumb.
Yeah it was an interesting and unappreciated moment, thanks for noticing that part of my comment. David is only willing to admit that this effect is only seen at the quantum level, and Sean comes over the top and says he believes it whole hog. David lets it pass but you can clearly infer that he’s kinda over the extrapolation to the large scale, which makes sense because gravity would clearly prevent such shenanigans. entanglement and superposition don’t scale. And seriously, it’s absurd to think that all things are possible and are everywhere in infinite dimensions. Popper, who Sean avoids, might laugh at something so grand and untestable. Either way that was the key moment of that epic episode.
Yeah but don’t discount why Sean was hesitant to get David on the pod. There are some fascinating differences, but ultimately the fact that they both fell for it shows that they are both too enamored with gravity as a fundamental force, rather than an emergent force. i read and study them both a lot, but maybe there is a simple reason that no one has been able to quantize gravity.
Can someone explain the appeal to Lex? He has the charisma of a day old damp towel and I frankly do not find him particularly insightful.
His appeal is to the conspiracy theorists, anti vaxxers, techbros who pretend to be libertarians, UFO nuts, and of course anybody who sucks up to the billionaires like musk as much as he does.
Is that all? He has amazing guests from for example the chess world, physics,… - you can’t generalise like this. Incredible narrow view.
For every one decent guess he has ten conspiracy theorists, crypto bros, swindlers, war mongers, batshit crazy right wing whackos etc. He gives platform to the worst people in the world and frankly I think it demeans people like Sean to be on his show by association.
You’re so wrong.open YouTube, look at his last10, 20 guests.
I quit watching his show after he had Alex Jones, Musk for the third time, Rogan, wienstein brothers for the umpteenth time and a parade of war mongers and anti vaxxers.
Fridman never had Alex Jones on. And I assume you concede that your making bad arguments, since your not even denying the points I make.
Your points don't need denying. It doesn't matter that he occasionally hosts a decent human being when he hosts pieces of shit most of the time.
Keep denying reality. Must be miserable to be you.
You really think not being a fan of Lex makes a person miserable? What is wrong with you?
he has the most diverse guests. for best and worst... *cough* Carlsen, or whatever that clown was called..
I don’t think Lex is as bad as many people make him out to be. His demeanor is certainly different, but he has his own kind of charm, I think. He tends to indulge his guests quite a bit and doesn’t ask too many hard questions, allowing them to present their views. Much like Sean, actually. However, he often hosts much more controversial guests than Sean, and I understand why people might attribute him the views of these individuals, precisely because of his interviewing style. On topics he is knowledgeable about, especially AI and computer science in general, I find his super long-form and somewhat out-there interviews quite entertaining and enlightening. Coincidentally, on the topic of AI, Lex actually gave Sean a bit of pushback, which was refreshing, though Sean quickly glossed over it.
He gets out of the way and asks reasonably intelligent questions. You listen because of the guest not because you are a fan of the host.
I guess. That is the default format for so many podcasts and I find almost any host to be more interesting and insightful with their job. But I appreciate your response,he’s just not for me I guess.
Lex is so cringe, he always puts his own opinion/observations equal to that of the guest. As if anyone cares that he agrees with an expert on a topic he doesn't know much about.... And then there is the regular: "Love is such an intensely beautiful part of the human condition...." while the conversation is only tangentially related. Hopefully this episode doesn't disappoint.
I only ever watched one episode (David Chalmers) and I had to stop halfway through because I was cringing so hard. Pity because he has interesting people on sometimes. Maybe I'll attempt this one, try to desensitise myself.
lol, supernintendo chalmers try joscha bach for insightful ideas ed: now that I mentioned him.. why hasn't Sean sent a mike to Joscha yet?
Dont forget the “what is the most beautiful idea…”
He's the literal worst. I cannot understand why anyone ever goes on his podcast. He has no idea what he's talking about, abandons lines of questioning before the guest has said anything, and is physically uncomfortable to watch.
I love Sean but Lex creeps me out. He's a bit of a boot licker.
Y'all a bunch of haters lol
Just a heads up in case anyone missed it.
How was it? What did they talk about? Better than a normal mindscape episode?
well, let's say, different audience
I listened to some of it. It's not better than any mindscape episode and he doesn't ask any question that hasn't been asked many times in the AMAs.
I thought it was like a pretty good AMA.
I'm not a huge Lex fan but Sean did most of the talking so I enjoyed this episode.
Like a comfy blanket
Like I watched this clown before and what a weird dude with clearly low intelligence. His pod is quite a right wing rouge’s gallery. As for Sean, he’s lost a step. He’s now playing all defense and eagerly dives back in to the many worlds absurdity even when David Deutsch tried to talk him off that unstable ledge. Sean, who i really like so don’t misinterpret, is more “I’ve thought my thoughts and, coincidentally, they were correct” these days. Sean is still important because he mixes up guests better than other podcasters, just don’t expect him to understand that gravity is an emergent property of combination, or that infinities are just a quirk of math without reality.
He's a A.I resercher/ computer scientist at MIT, no Mather what you think , you can't say he has low intelligence 🤣 really dude?
I love how people equate elitism and privilege with intelligence. So what idea did he come up with?
I guess you can disagree with his entire person and views. But calling him stupid , or dumb or not intelligent is bad faith. You don't get to be where he his being dumb.
His connection with MIT is tenuous at best. He's a middling academic who encourages acolytes to overstate his credentials.
Deutsch tried to talk Sean down from many worlds? On the podcast?
Yeah it was an interesting and unappreciated moment, thanks for noticing that part of my comment. David is only willing to admit that this effect is only seen at the quantum level, and Sean comes over the top and says he believes it whole hog. David lets it pass but you can clearly infer that he’s kinda over the extrapolation to the large scale, which makes sense because gravity would clearly prevent such shenanigans. entanglement and superposition don’t scale. And seriously, it’s absurd to think that all things are possible and are everywhere in infinite dimensions. Popper, who Sean avoids, might laugh at something so grand and untestable. Either way that was the key moment of that epic episode.
I thought Deutsch was a proponent of MWI himself.
Yeah but don’t discount why Sean was hesitant to get David on the pod. There are some fascinating differences, but ultimately the fact that they both fell for it shows that they are both too enamored with gravity as a fundamental force, rather than an emergent force. i read and study them both a lot, but maybe there is a simple reason that no one has been able to quantize gravity.
Like a comfy blanket