What are you listening to - Podcast Edition?
-
wrote on 1 Feb 2025, 20:39 last edited by
Thanks for the recommendation. I listened. I agree Bannon is not crazy. He seems coherent and principled. One does not have to agree with his principles. He's too hard line nationalist for my taste. I have no issue with H1Bs. Bannon did deny any connection with culture regarding quality of tech workers. He blamed the H1Bs simply on the fact that those workers are cheaper. I'm not entirely sure that's the case. Maybe at some companies, but I doubt at the big tech ones. I think they pay their H1B engineers the same as the native ones.
-
Thanks for the recommendation. I listened. I agree Bannon is not crazy. He seems coherent and principled. One does not have to agree with his principles. He's too hard line nationalist for my taste. I have no issue with H1Bs. Bannon did deny any connection with culture regarding quality of tech workers. He blamed the H1Bs simply on the fact that those workers are cheaper. I'm not entirely sure that's the case. Maybe at some companies, but I doubt at the big tech ones. I think they pay their H1B engineers the same as the native ones.
wrote on 2 Feb 2025, 00:32 last edited by@Horace said in What are you listening to - Podcast Edition?:
I agree Bannon is not crazy. He seems coherent and principled.
They still put him in jail.
-
wrote on 2 Feb 2025, 00:33 last edited by
Ted Kaczinsky was principled too.
-
topic:timeago-later,29 days
-
wrote on 2 Mar 2025, 17:34 last edited by
The most recent Sam Harris podcast has Niall Ferguson schooling Sam on some of the positives of the Trump Presidency as well as a realistic assessment of where the US stands in the world - i.e. lacking in fiscal strength and unable to address the myriad challenges it faces. Really well done.
-
wrote on 2 Mar 2025, 17:49 last edited by jon-nyc 3 Feb 2025, 17:51
Schooled? He had replies, I'll grant you that. But honestly maybe 75% of Ferguson's replies were simple whattaboutisms. Occasionally there would be a broader point to the whattaboutism, (e.g., we've left allies in the lurch before) but most were pretty weak in terms of any broader point being made.
And many of his defenses seemed really inconsistent. Example - when Sam asked his opinion about Trump's plan for ethnically cleansing Gaza, Ferguson mentions that if you read Art of the Deal (which I actually did back in the 80s), Trump likes to stake out a maximalist, even crazy position at the start of a negotiation, so when he finally proposes a more sane option that's still a big win, it gets accepted. Ok fair enough. But Sam asks 'then why give away all the important concessions Putin wants before we even sit at the table? Ferguson changes the subject.
-
wrote on 2 Mar 2025, 18:07 last edited by
I will again point out for the god knows how many'eth time that there is nothing wrong with "whataboutism" arguments, and in fact they are exactly what are called for to combat arguments that make claims about "this political side is especially bad/scary because X". An equal and opposite whataboutism about X logically nullifies such arguments. Of course in any given specific, the whataboutism might be weak, but they have to be judged individually rather than as a class. There is nothing wrong with the class.
And it goes without saying that they are employed relentlessly by both sides of any argument here, often by the same people who will dismiss them as a class of argument when others use them.
You will not find "whataboutism", by that name or any other, in any list of formal logical fallacies.
-
wrote on 2 Mar 2025, 18:29 last edited by
Fair enough but they are the argument of a partisan, not an historian. He should be fully capable of discussing current events in their own terms.
-
wrote on 2 Mar 2025, 19:25 last edited by jon-nyc 3 Feb 2025, 19:29
He’s usually quite a bit better than he was on this podcast. My guess is he got a little spooked when JD Vance sniped at him for complaining about Trump’s appeasement, and he wants to make sure he stays in good graces with Musk and the administration’s defenders. Knowing full well about Musk and Sam’s falling out probably factored in also. Basically he knows where his bread is buttered.
As a contrast, listen to him on Bari Weiss’s year end podcast where he was asked to make predictions for the new year. That was his old self.
-
wrote on 2 Mar 2025, 19:35 last edited by
I'm not clear when that podcast was released, but he had no issue pushing back against Vance (who I agreed with in the exchange) at the time.
-
wrote on 2 Mar 2025, 19:42 last edited by jon-nyc 3 Feb 2025, 19:43
Pushed back but also was very much making the point ‘hey I’m one of you not a ‘globalist’
This podcast came out after the Vance incident as he mentions the exchange with Sam.
-
Pushed back but also was very much making the point ‘hey I’m one of you not a ‘globalist’
This podcast came out after the Vance incident as he mentions the exchange with Sam.
-
topic:timeago-later,10 days
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 13:57 last edited by
Not really but I’m tempted just for the lols.
-
wrote on 17 Mar 2025, 00:51 last edited by
Highly recommend Lex’s podcast with Modi. My politics typically don’t align with Modi, but you can’t deny the depth of thoughtfulness and optimism (not for all).
Such a contrast to our politics of scarcity and economic fear.
Link to video -
wrote on 17 Mar 2025, 01:26 last edited by
Has he watched Slumdog Millionaire? I feel like it might change his perspective on India.
-
wrote on 22 Mar 2025, 01:52 last edited by Horace
Spend 90 minutes with American geopolitical operative, and Trump's close friend, Steve Witkoff. Witness the rabid lunatic fringe that is Trump's inner circle, forging the history we are all living through.
Link to video -
Spend 90 minutes with American geopolitical operative, and Trump's close friend, Steve Witkoff. Witness the rabid lunatic fringe that is Trump's inner circle, forging the history we are all living through.
Link to videowrote on 23 Mar 2025, 13:17 last edited by RenaudaSpend 90 minutes with American geopolitical operative, and Trump's close friend, Steve Witkoff. Witness the rabid lunatic fringe that is Trump's inner circle, forging the history we are all living through.
That FuCa Witkoff link should be in Jon’s National Humiliation thread. Pass the barf bag.
A brief summary of the
interviewdisplay: -
wrote on 23 Mar 2025, 15:20 last edited by
I thought it was a good interview with a decent person, though I only listened to the first 30 minutes.
-
topic:timeago-later,9 days
-
wrote on 1 Apr 2025, 17:31 last edited by
Good conversation on Bari Weiss's Honestly today, with Jay Bhattacharya, new head of the NIH. The previous one, under Biden, called him fringe and dangerous, but it's difficult to believe that to be the actual case. He just disagreed with the mainstream at the peak of the panicked reaction to COVID, and paid the reputational price. He seems like the best-case scenario for a scientist you'd hope would be part of RFK Jr's administration.
-
wrote on 2 Apr 2025, 04:42 last edited by
There are independent thinkers, and there are contrarians. The latter consider themselves the former but it’s really just another style of groupthink.
-
There are independent thinkers, and there are contrarians. The latter consider themselves the former but it’s really just another style of groupthink.
wrote on 2 Apr 2025, 12:39 last edited by@jon-nyc said in What are you listening to - Podcast Edition?:
There are independent thinkers, and there are contrarians. The latter consider themselves the former but it’s really just another style of groupthink.
I'm sure you'd allow that Bari is in the former camp, and I'm sure you won't listen to this interview to hear how strongly she disagrees with your characterization of Jay. And I'm sure you don't actually know anything about Jay, including that the former NIH head who called him fringe and dangerous, eventually apologized.