Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 600 posts

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#451

Post by jessaustin »

tssva wrote: post #391
jessaustin wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real whistleblowers: Snowden, Kiriakou, Binney, Drake, Manning, Winner. Notice a theme of career loss, prison, total life upheaval, and a press that DGAF. Fake whistleblower: still works for CIA, whistleblowing has purely political rather than administrative effects, and ongoing adulation in the press. If you don't want to see this on HN, then downvote and move on.

What you refer to as "fake whistleblower" still has their job because they followed the legal procedure for reporting abuse and therefore enjoy whistleblower protection. The others sited didn't follow the legal procedure which would have allowed them to also enjoy whistleblower protection.

Thomas Drake followed procedure, and he got burned. John Crane was one of the bureaucrats involved with that procedure, and he didn't think the burning was proper. So he followed procedure in order to blow the whistle on the burning, so then he got burned.

Unsurprisingly, no one stepped forward for Crane.

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#452

Post by whatupmd »

Timpy wrote: post #96

Snowden is really clever with these interviews. Right away in the interview he establishes his concerns about the government, then briefly mentions the government smear campaign against him without hanging on the point too much. He calmly explains himself in an articulate way, establishing himself as perfectly sane. Then he reaches out to connect and empathize with his interviewer: > When I hear you just speak, I go…

Maybe he's getting some coaching from people where he lives now as he goes on his media tour before the next American election?

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#453

Post by blotter_paper »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #375
dd36 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Examples of partisan politics by IC?

I guess this isn't strictly "partisan," but it is highly political: the FBI tried to destroy Martin Luther King Jr., and even attempted to blackmail him with recordings they had taken.

Seriously, I'm amazed how many people are ignorant of this fact. They didn't just blackmail him, they clearly implied that he should commit suicide before recieving the Nobel if he didn't want the tapes released. ("There is only one thing left for you to do. You know what it is.") They never released the tapes, of course, but he did die. Everyone also seems unaware that the King family was awarded $1 in damages from the federal government for the wrongful death of MLK; they contend that the US government assassinated him and used James Earl Ray as a patsy, and while they never got Ray's conviction overturned (despite trying) they did get a separate US court to agree that the government should pay them symbolic damages based on this interpretation of events.

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#454

Post by jessaustin »

seppin wrote: post #448
jessaustin wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real whistleblowers: Snowden, Kiriakou, Binney, Drake, Manning, Winner. Notice a theme of career loss, prison, total life upheaval, and a press that DGAF. Fake whistleblower: still works for CIA, whistleblowing has purely political rather than administrative effects, and ongoing adulation in the press. If you don't want to see this on HN, then downvote and move on.

Ignore this guy, he's leaking from /r/politics

I've been to Reddit a couple of times, and never to that section. Unlike you I post under my own name. Anyway, the time for that valuable advice would have been before that comment spawned a big subthread and got upvoted into double digits...

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#455

Post by Spellman »

waffle_ss wrote: post #281
ghostpepper wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since others are posting examples of who they consider master interviewers, I need to include Sean Evans from the spicy-chicken-wing-gauntlet interview show Hot Ones. His guests routinely compliment him on his prep and the questions he ask. The show would be just as good without the hot sauce gimmick.

It's been quite a long time since I watched a Hot Ones but my impression was Sean Evans does great research with excellent questions, but he's often pretty stiff when he has to steer the conversation - it's like he has a clipboard with questions that he is focused on getting through. He is pretty quick and capable of riffing off guests' comments, but - perhaps due to time constraints - he jumps right back to his list…

I kinda agree.

He honestly doesn't add that much by being in the room vs if someone else had the same questionnaire sheet. And in some ways his wooden demeanor can even be detracting instead of some of the best interviewers who can melt away and give the interviewee the space and direction to shine.

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#456

Post by puranjay »

peatmoss wrote: post #372
puranjay wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought his recent interview with John Carmack was great. Though a lot of that has to do with Carmack himself being a great communicator.

Oh yeah, I did listen to that one. It was a perfect venue for Carmack because I could listen to John speak about anything for as long as John wants to speak about it. Rogan didn’t need to do much prompting for Carmack to spill his solid-gold guts, and he also didn’t feel the need to cut in.

It helped that Rogan is a self confessed Quake nut. If someone didn't have exposure to those early id software games, they might not have been as much at home with Carmack.

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#457

Post by larrywright »

asveikau wrote: post #207
Pigo wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The intelligence agencies have proven to be vindictive, and also a back-channel arm for straight up partisan politics. It seems like it goes unnoticed when the outcome is something that aligns with a party's goals. I just can't tell if it's fallible people in positions of power, or a real concerted effort. I think a lot of our problems stem from the undermining of our system of checks and balances, and whatever is up…

If it were partisan politics I don't think we would see the continuity that we did between Bush and Obama. I think it was clear and overt during the Bush era that there were some dubious claims thrown around about "we need this to prevent another 9/11", with "this" being vague, broad, varying with the particular speaker. It was disappointing to many when Obama embraced some of these conclusions.

Obama presented himself as the anti-Bush when it came to a lot of things to do with the military and intelligence operations. I suspected that once he took office his stance on some of these things would shift closer to Bush’s, and I was right.

I based this on my theory that there are things that the general public does not know, and will never know, that influence the decisions POTUS makes. Until you are privy to that information, it’s easy to take a contrarian viewpoint. Once you have the information, and the responsibility for making decisions that might save American lives, it’s a lot harder.

I’m not saying that any of these policies are right or wrong, or that the general public should be kept in the dark about whatever it is we’re being kept in the dark about. It’s just a theory I have about how the world works. I have no way of proving or disproving it, but I think the evidence supports it.

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#458

Post by Allower »

MrGLaDOS wrote: post #126
yodsanklai wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I am sure there are many others, but these three shows feature long-form interviews which feature interesting guests: The Ezra Klein Show - Ezra Klein Making sense podcast - Sam Harris 80000 hours podcast - Rob Wiblin [1] https://www.vox.com/ezra-klein-show-podcast [2] https://samharris.org/podcast/ [3] https://80000hours.org/podcast/

Just don't listen to the crossover between Ezra and Sam >_<

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#459

Post by [deleted] »

kup0 wrote: post #416
Lendal wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to agree with this but now that I've seen where this path leads, I think he should be given a fair trial and judged. Our government and the security of 350M US citizens cannot be held at the whim of a single hacker, no matter how right he believed himself to be. Our Congress has 535 members for precisely this reason, the president answers to Congress and is not a king, and even the Chief Justice does not rule…

The assumption that a fair trial is even a possibility is pretty naive, IMHO

[deleted]

Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]

#460

Post by agumonkey »

ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #394
0898 wrote: post #174

The success of Joe Rogan is fascinating and encouraging. For a long time there was a view that attention spans were diminishing. Facebook and Tik Tok reduced content to the smallest possible dosage. But look at this. This is one of the world's most popular podcasts and it's nearly three hours long. You see it too in TV: what is a Netflix series but a 13 hour movie? I see a definite trend towards long form content rig…

Until you listen to his actual content and it is, the vast majority of the time, pretty "easy" listening in the sense that it is pretty vacuous and doesn't really require any sort of concentration to follow along. Don't get me wrong -- I listen to it often on my way to work, but one of the reasons I do is because it is not something that really requires much of my concentration to follow along.

Good point but at least it is patient. It's a quality to uphold.
Post reply on HN