Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should see JRE#917, Steven doesn't really care about the whole marijuana issue and Joe completely bullies and flames him for like thirty minutes. That one was not well-reasoned or patient, but other than that, I've found almost all of Joe's podcasts to be very good. He's definitely one of the greatest interviewers on the planet right now.
He did apologize for that. His excuse was that he had a lot to drink and smoke. Also I think him being on good terms with the guests made him more comfortable with being an asshole
Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
61–70 of 600 posts
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#62His 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.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#63Earlier 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".
He is a world famous standup comedian. He does MMA coverage and podcasting as side gig for fun. I doubt that his life depends on the podcast.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#64I really don't think that his actions were clearly thought out and he won't get a pass any time soon.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#65His 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.
Interviewing Nick Bostrom was cringe worthy. I don't know what Joe was trying to achieve - maybe forming an argument against the simulation theory? But it was so bad. The youtube comment section is amusing. But mostly Joe gets it spot on and does a great interview. What this does to popular discourse? When a small % of the population watch these types of long form interview and get deep, thoughtful and insightful ans…
Bostrom really failed there. He simply did not explain the argument very well. Everything Bostrom said is clear to someone who already understands the argument or has experience with statistics, but it was not at all a good explanation for someone who doesn't have the necessary intuitions to understand why they are more likely to be a simulated agent.
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why anyone would listen to anything with a bigot like Crowder is beyond me. If you can’t defend your conservatism without devolving into racist and homophobic slurs, you really shouldn’t be taken seriously.
Where does Crowder come in at all in this conversation?
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#67His 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…
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#68His 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…
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
He certainly spouts some "bollox" but I don't think I agree about "authoritative". He tends to show a lot of humility and asks a lot of questions rather than making statements
Re: Edward Snowden on The Joe Rogan Experience [video]
#70The 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 effectively the government has kept this subject from creeping into the public debate. The scary part is the secret laws and precedents that elected officials aren't allowed to even tell their constituents about. Government officials are not reliable; this is far to much unaccountable power even if people involved were allowed to discuss what is happening.
Why aren't the not-technically-interesting parts of this wiretapping program legal for government agencies to talk about? If they need to be hidden, why not go straight to the logical conclusion and classify a bunch of other laws?
Democracies can't handle this level of secrecy. The whole thing is going to fall apart one way or another - the path America is going down isn't stable at all; something is going to have to change radically. Either the intelligence agencies will gain supremacy over the government, the government itself will go rogue or the secrecy will have to end.
EDIT I'm going to bed before I see the whole video, but around 1:46:00 - the bit with J. Clapper. Case in point that the whole system of checks and balances can't work.
EDIT2 And around 2:10:00. Barbaric stuff; it is like centuries of accumulated Common Law and parliamentary legal tradition never happened. People need to be able to occasionally talk about this stuff in formal setting.