Would have been nice to have Snowden actually there in person if he were not such a coward.
Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
101–110 of 600 posts
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#102His podcasts are infinitely better than any amount of talking-head punditry available on the major news networks. I've not run across one yet that wasn't well-reasoned, patient, and interesting - even if I didn't agree with conclusions being made or the thought processes expressing them.
> I've not run across one yet that wasn't well-reasoned, Then you cannot listen to many. Joe speaks so much bollox with an authoritative air that if you didn't know the subject you would think that Joe did, when many many times he clearly does not. I agree they are interesting when he lets the guest speak (even if completely disagree with them) or it is on something Joe does know about / has researched. But that is f…
I really like Joe Rogan, and the format of its podcast. I don't know other medias where they let people speak for three hours. I was suspicious the first time I listened to him. I thought, can this beefy archetypical MMA dude say anything interesting? actually he can. He's at ease with all types of guests, he just seems to be an outspoken, honest guy.
I agree that he tends to bring up his favorite topics all the time, which gets a bit repetitive but it's ok. You can't expect him to run hundred of conversations without being repetitive.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Love - revealed to us that our constitutional rights were being absolutely trampled to death. Hate - revealed to the world endless amounts of national security data that was not directly relevant to these constitutional encroachments.
> Hate - revealed to the world endless amounts of national security data that was not directly relevant to these constitutional encroachments. He worked with journalists in order to avoid this. He gave the government a head's up before the press released anything everytime they released something new. What more do you think he should have done?
Not release information on how we spy on other countries.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right. Only other scenario that would work is for Joe to fly over there... which probably wouldn't happen. Regardless, Joe's getting so many good interviews in the past two years.
> Only other scenario that would work is for Joe to fly over there... which probably wouldn't happen. I wouldn’t want to see a Sean Penn/El Chapo incident[0] happen with these two. [0] https://theintercept.com/2016/01/12/sean-penn-el-chapo-opsec...
Different circumstances: Snowden's location is well-known, he's protected via political asylum. El Chapo on the other hand was being hunted by the local government so he was dependent on his location remaining secret.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really depends. Go listen and to his interview with Adam Connover where he uses him as a foil to spout off a lot of nonsense about trans people and their agency.
Connover was doing a lot of hemming and hawing as well I recall
Yes because he’s not an expert on trans issues, he’s a comedian, which Rogan knows, but chose to use him as a foil for his equally misinformed stances.
Connover, to his credit, went so far as to provide additional context for his defense of trans people’s agency post-interview:
https://www.adamconover.net/adding-evidence-to-the-discussio...
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#106It's not strange many interesting people want to visit Joe Rogan podcast. First, he is willing to give a voice to many who won't be able to tell their stories on mass media. Who other will let speak people like James Damore? What major broadcaster is willing to interview Jordan Peterson without protraiting him as a villain? He respects his guest, when in disagrement. His interview to Jack Dorsey (not much of his liki…
I question the value of letting people like James Damore and Jordan Peterson speak on such a big platform. Edit: The people downvoting me are hypocrites. The function of downvoting to make something less visible. Are you saying what I say has less value and should therefore have a lesser platform? But to be serious, everyone acknowledges that what some people say is of more value than what other people say, and shoul…
Yes, we should selectively filter people whose ideas we don't like from being able to speak them to any audience. In fact I question the value of letting people like speak on such a big platform.
/s
Surely you understand that what you're suggesting here is totalitarian? The value you mention is the strengthening of a society where freedom of ideas is considered a core value.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
Joe is a master interviewer for the reasons you mention. I'd also add he has broad interests in almost any topic and subject matter, which helps. Another technique he employs is "listening". There are many times when I want to butt in when listening to his podcasts. But Joe just waits and let's the other person speak and soaks it in. There are of course the interviews which are actually him being interviewed (he does…
Joe is not a master interviewer. Compare him to someone who does a lot of research ahead of time and comes prepared with thought-provoking questions, and can keep pace with the deep conversations, like say a Tim Ferriss. Joe does little research on most guests (mostly due to the sheer volume of guests I'm sure), which could be a more stylistic choice if he were a deft interviewer who could think on his feet and dig d…
Narduar is my favorite example of a master interviewer. Watch him leave Pharrell speechless multiple times (starting around the 5:15 mark is a good example). This guy does his homework better than anyone.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#108There is a real lesson here about just how cavalier the American government - and to some degree the public - is about civil liberties, but that isn't the biggest problem. The problem here isn't even so much the government is being shady - that has happened before, it will happen again. I can understand people not feeling threatened by constant snooping even though I disagree. To me the real problem is how effectivel…
The simplest explanation for lots of confusing events is that the intelligence agencies have enjoyed supremacy over the government for some time already. They run the media as well: just look at the glowing plaudits for their fake "whistleblower" as contrasted with the ongoing disdain for actual whistleblowers.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
But he is financially dependent on youtube, isn't he? I am not suggesting he auto-censors himself but he is not "independent".
Does the actual podcast, not the one that gets uploaded to YouTube, have Joe reading ads? I assumed it did and they got cut out?
Yes if you listen through other services Joe reads ads from several sponsors at the beginning and end.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Democracy is a system of government where the three powers: law giving, executive, and judicial are separated and at least the law giving is in the hands of (representatives of) the people. In the case of the massive spying by government we are dealing with secret laws and/or the executive branch writing its own law. This is not very compatible with democracy.
Interestingly, I recently learnt that the judicial branch as implemented in most democracies (presently), holds no real power. In my country, for instance, it is appointed by the government -- in the USA, if I'm not mistaken, it's also the case that the Supreme Court is appointed by the president, but I believe they need the consent of your Senate. I've read that there are a few democracies where the judicial power i…
Well, these distinctions are not all-or-nothing. A common way to further the independence of the judicial branch is to appoint judges for life. A judge that cannot be fired by the executive branch has less need to appease it.