6 ms·

Revolutionary Ideas in Science, Math, and Society [video]

128 points by espeed 8y ago

hirundo 8y ago
> Eric Weinstein is a mathematician, economist, physicist, and managing director of Thiel Capital. Eric tweeted otherwise earlier today [1]: > Attention: I found out from Wikipedia that as of the 17th, I'm NOT a mathematician anymore despite a PhD, but an economist. I now state that I've never taken a class in economics. In physics I have a semester of mechanics. No E&M/QFT. > I'm the Impostor your mama warned you about. [1] https://twitter.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1108814304785006592 https://twitter.com/EricRWeinstein/status/110881430478500659...
- dmix 8y ago
  You cant be sarcastic on the internet without someone taking it seriously.
  - hirundo 8y ago
    I think he's saying that he's formally trained as a mathematician, but not so much as an economist or physicist. I suppose he could still be considered a self taught economist / physicist.
    - nydel 8y ago
      it's a well-constructed (i got it) & well-executed joke (it got me).
      - petulla 8y ago
        He has published papers in economics https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/Weinstein-GUI_NSF_SG_Complete_INET.pdf https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/Weinstein-GUI_N...
    - adaptiveValleys 8y ago
      He doesn't consider himself a physicist either.[1] [1] https://youtu.be/2wq9x2QcZN0?t=2025 https://youtu.be/2wq9x2QcZN0?t=2025 At 33:45 of the podcast after he gives the kinetic-potential energy analogy to describe his distrust of Pinker's optimism.
- taneq 8y ago
  Can you just... stop being a mathematician like that? I'm not sure it's allowed.
peisistratos 8y ago
I listened to Jordan Peterson and what he was talking about was not particularly radical - instead of a modern, rational, scientific, agnostic view of the world he had more pre-Enlightenment Dark Ages notions about the Bible, the supernatural and such. As premier learning institutions aim to be devoted to rationality, the scientific method etc., it's not a conspiracy keeping him away, he's just preaching things they are not about. I'm sure he could go to some backwoods corner of Arkansas or Kentucky or something where people would be more receptive to these ideas about the supernatural. It's also putting a number of people into the same boat. People may agree or disagree with Steven Pinker about various topics, but at least he makes rational arguments. Search the New York Times and he is treated as an intellectual worthy of respect, although points may be right or wrong. I don't see him being excluded from anything. If anything, the nurture over nature argument is what is blocked from the establishment discourse.
- s3r3nity 8y ago
  Have you looked at JP's background or work in any way? He's a clinical psychologist + professor of psychology at a pretty reputable university (U of Toronto) with decades of experience, including an active clinical practice (until 2017 I think.) I don't claim to have read _everything_ he has written, but claiming that he doesn't base his arguments in a rational, scientific grounding is a real stretch at best, and disingenuous at worst.
  - pryce 8y ago
    I've worked in Clinical Psychology and one of my consultants kept a copy of a demented new-age 'channelling spirits' book "Seth Speaks" by Jane Roberts [1] on her desk and was adamant that I read it. My point is that "whether someone bases their arguments on rational, scientific grounding" cannot be determined by looking at their qualifications or their employment, especially when they are speaking outside of their field. Jordan Peterson's most famous claims - firstly about a conspiracy of Postmodern Marxism (which is a non-sequitur to anyone who has even a basic understanding of postmodernism or marxism) and the claims underlying his rise to internet fame - fearmongering about C-16 bill including being extremely misleading about the specifics of it - are absolutely not based on "rational, scientific grounding", and his CV doesn't change this. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_Material https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_Material
FreedomToCreate 8y ago
Does Joe Rogan even consider himself a part of the intellectual dark web. He has definitely interviewed guys who spend there time pondering things, but does joe really pursue intellectual thought has a professional interest?
- shrimp_emoji 8y ago
  I think he just has hypocognitive and worldview-comforting conversations with people like Eric inbetween bow hunting trips on tropical islands and floating in an isolation tank.
- freedomben 8y ago
  I think Joe Rogan and Dave Rubin are really more facilitators than intellectuals. They are excellent interviewers. They may not contribute evolutionary biological ideas/theories but they're both super important. I get the impression that they would agree that's their role, but of course I'm nobody to speak for them :-)
  - maroonblazer 8y ago
    Dave Rubin is not an excellent interviewer. He's a sycophant more akin to Charlie Rose (also an overrated interviewer). He spends more time talking about the fact that they're having conversations then actually having the conversations. EW is great, btw.
  - kodz4 8y ago
    There is this underlying notion that they are informing and educating the masses, the curious among the masses atleast. I have a feeling there is something wrong with that notion. Can't really put a finger on it...
- micimize 8y ago
  He's the one that shouts "Intellectual Dark Web, Assemble!"
brianpgordon 8y ago
Eric Weinstein is one of those rare people with whom I disagree a lot but to whom I can actually listen without a vein popping out of my temple and my teeth starting to grind. I guess I just appreciate his cerebral conversational style that lets you engage with the ideas.
- soheil 8y ago
  What parts do you disagree with him on? He is pretty rational, the way he constructs his arguments from from fundamentals leaves really not much up to personal preference or debate.
  - brianpgordon 8y ago
    Mainly that he's a hardcore capitalist to the bone, while I tend more toward favoring a mixed economy and social democracy with an ultimate post-singularity endgame of true socialism. There are some other minor things that he talks about that don't really resonate with me, like conspiracy theories that he propounds under the cover of "emergent behavior," and concerns about AGI which I don't share.
joe_the_user 8y ago
Video begins with this Eric touted as a founder/coiner of "The Intellectual Darkweb" which as far as I can tell is something like a new political brand. I don't think it's appropriate for any political branding to appear as a part an exposition of Science & Math positions (or otherwise) on HN. IE, HN usually isn't a platform for any political position. Vaguely skipped forward and found speculation about like Tom Lahrer as a marker for intelligence. I like Tom Lahrer but this all seems way outside the concrete AI and compiler articles I come to HN for.
- freedomben 8y ago
  The Intellectual Darkweb absolutely belongs on HN when they're talking about interesting stuff. There are people from the left and right in the IDW - it's quite intellectually diverse. That said, I don't agree with the premise that because somebody is open about their political beliefs, they can't say or do "anything that good hackers would find interesting." [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - joe_the_user 8y ago
    I don't think the claim that the "intellectual darkweb" includes a broad range of political positions holds up to any scrutiny - the many prominent members of the group (Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro) are strongly identified with right wing politics and not one left wing of similar significance appears.
    - rwz 8y ago
      Well, there's also Sam Harris, Brett Weinstein. Both are strongly left wing.
      - ekianjo 8y ago
        Indeed. Its far from being a right wing group.
      - 8y ago
bob_theslob646 8y ago
Lex seems like a very nice guy, but he is terrible at interviewing guests. Listening is definitely a skill.
- danielbigham 8y ago
  I think Lex is a great interviewer. Eric definitely threw him off a number of times, but I can't fault him.
  - espeed 8y ago
    That was intentional on some level, an embodied metaphor to underscore one of the unifying messages Eric was trying to convey -- be wary of your fixed frames of reference, that's not from where radical leaps come.
- gclawes 8y ago
  He's a mildly-odd high-end AI researcher with a somewhat cynical Russian outlook, I neither expect nor want highly polished interviews from him. In fact, it's exactly because he's somewhat idiosyncratic that he's fascinating to watch have a conversation.
  - adaptiveValleys 8y ago
    I agree. He interviews a lot of fascinating people with highly-specialized backgrounds. To research their work and understand it enough to have great conversational flow and remain highly insightful would take a lot of time. But since this isn't his full-time job, I think trading-off asking very good questions for the flow of the dialogue is worth it.
akoster 8y ago
Did anyone else confuse this podcast interviewee with Eric Weisstein at first glance? http://www.ericweisstein.com/ http://www.ericweisstein.com/ http://mathworld.wolfram.com http://mathworld.wolfram.com
- sigil 8y ago
  All the time!
- espeed 8y ago
  Not this podcast, but I did a few years ago when I started googling Eric Weinstein's references on guage theory and the Wu-Yang Dictionary. See... Gauge Theory and Inflation: Enlarging the Wu-Yang Dictionary [video] https://youtu.be/h5gnATQMtPg https://youtu.be/h5gnATQMtPg
c256 8y ago
I like much of what I’ve “seen” from Lex Fridman, but I think the title here is a little misleading. This is a conversation with a guy who works on AI at MIT, but the label made me think it was some project or report from CSAIL, which it does not seem to be (disclosure: I haven’t yet watched the full video, so maybe I’m mistaken.)
YjSe2GMQ 8y ago
The idea with periodically detonating thermonuclear weapons on US soil, to remind people how bad things can get, is incredible (from 25:00 onwards). I recently showed my Russian friend an article in The Economist about the arrest of Michael Calvey [1], which concluded in a pessimistic tone that just about anyone can be arrested and go to jail there. To my surprise he said "well, yes, it's true". I couldn't comprehend why would anyone like to live in such conditions. But then I realized that an arrest and an unfair sentence in Russia is nothing. Neither is a 10*C global warming, economic meltdown 30x stronger than 2008, neither is twenty 9/11s in a week, when compared to a nuclear wasteland. We're all in more dire circumstances than Mr Calvey is in. [1] https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/02/23/the-arrest-of-michael-calvey-in-russia-rattles-foreign-businesses https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/02/23/the-arrest-of-mi...
- espeed 8y ago
  On US soil you'd have fallout from the soil getting sucked up into the atmosphere. See... "Why World War II Matters - Victor Davis Hanson" [video] https://youtu.be/opDuw4OZ3QI https://youtu.be/opDuw4OZ3QI Harvard Belfer Center: "Nuclear 101: How Nuclear Bombs Work Part 1/2" [video] https://youtu.be/zVhQOhxb1Mc https://youtu.be/zVhQOhxb1Mc
  - YjSe2GMQ 8y ago
    It's possible, I actually don't know much about those weapons. Perhaps a better idea is to do it at the sea, with front row seats in Los Angeles, IDK. But that's kind of the point - we should have more collective wisdom about devices that can reign global destruction in a matter of hours, or less.
    - espeed 8y ago
      NB: Updated my comment with video references.

128 points by espeed 8y ago

> Eric Weinstein is a mathematician, economist, physicist, and managing director of Thiel Capital. Eric tweeted otherwise earlier today [1]: > Attention: I found out from Wikipedia that as of the 17th, I'm NOT a mathematician anymore despite a PhD, but an economist. I now state that I've never taken a class in economics. In physics I have a semester of mechanics. No E&M/QFT. > I'm the Impostor your mama warned you about. [1] https://twitter.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1108814304785006592 https://twitter.com/EricRWeinstein/status/110881430478500659...

dmix 8y ago
You cant be sarcastic on the internet without someone taking it seriously.
- hirundo 8y ago
  I think he's saying that he's formally trained as a mathematician, but not so much as an economist or physicist. I suppose he could still be considered a self taught economist / physicist.
  - nydel 8y ago
    it's a well-constructed (i got it) & well-executed joke (it got me).
    - petulla 8y ago
      He has published papers in economics https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/Weinstein-GUI_NSF_SG_Complete_INET.pdf https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/Weinstein-GUI_N...
  - adaptiveValleys 8y ago
    He doesn't consider himself a physicist either.[1] [1] https://youtu.be/2wq9x2QcZN0?t=2025 https://youtu.be/2wq9x2QcZN0?t=2025 At 33:45 of the podcast after he gives the kinetic-potential energy analogy to describe his distrust of Pinker's optimism.
taneq 8y ago
Can you just... stop being a mathematician like that? I'm not sure it's allowed.

peisistratos 8y ago

I listened to Jordan Peterson and what he was talking about was not particularly radical - instead of a modern, rational, scientific, agnostic view of the world he had more pre-Enlightenment Dark Ages notions about the Bible, the supernatural and such. As premier learning institutions aim to be devoted to rationality, the scientific method etc., it's not a conspiracy keeping him away, he's just preaching things they are not about. I'm sure he could go to some backwoods corner of Arkansas or Kentucky or something where people would be more receptive to these ideas about the supernatural. It's also putting a number of people into the same boat. People may agree or disagree with Steven Pinker about various topics, but at least he makes rational arguments. Search the New York Times and he is treated as an intellectual worthy of respect, although points may be right or wrong. I don't see him being excluded from anything. If anything, the nurture over nature argument is what is blocked from the establishment discourse.

s3r3nity 8y ago
Have you looked at JP's background or work in any way? He's a clinical psychologist + professor of psychology at a pretty reputable university (U of Toronto) with decades of experience, including an active clinical practice (until 2017 I think.) I don't claim to have read _everything_ he has written, but claiming that he doesn't base his arguments in a rational, scientific grounding is a real stretch at best, and disingenuous at worst.
- pryce 8y ago
  I've worked in Clinical Psychology and one of my consultants kept a copy of a demented new-age 'channelling spirits' book "Seth Speaks" by Jane Roberts [1] on her desk and was adamant that I read it. My point is that "whether someone bases their arguments on rational, scientific grounding" cannot be determined by looking at their qualifications or their employment, especially when they are speaking outside of their field. Jordan Peterson's most famous claims - firstly about a conspiracy of Postmodern Marxism (which is a non-sequitur to anyone who has even a basic understanding of postmodernism or marxism) and the claims underlying his rise to internet fame - fearmongering about C-16 bill including being extremely misleading about the specifics of it - are absolutely not based on "rational, scientific grounding", and his CV doesn't change this. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_Material https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_Material

FreedomToCreate 8y ago

Does Joe Rogan even consider himself a part of the intellectual dark web. He has definitely interviewed guys who spend there time pondering things, but does joe really pursue intellectual thought has a professional interest?

shrimp_emoji 8y ago
I think he just has hypocognitive and worldview-comforting conversations with people like Eric inbetween bow hunting trips on tropical islands and floating in an isolation tank.
freedomben 8y ago
I think Joe Rogan and Dave Rubin are really more facilitators than intellectuals. They are excellent interviewers. They may not contribute evolutionary biological ideas/theories but they're both super important. I get the impression that they would agree that's their role, but of course I'm nobody to speak for them :-)
- maroonblazer 8y ago
  Dave Rubin is not an excellent interviewer. He's a sycophant more akin to Charlie Rose (also an overrated interviewer). He spends more time talking about the fact that they're having conversations then actually having the conversations. EW is great, btw.
- kodz4 8y ago
  There is this underlying notion that they are informing and educating the masses, the curious among the masses atleast. I have a feeling there is something wrong with that notion. Can't really put a finger on it...
micimize 8y ago
He's the one that shouts "Intellectual Dark Web, Assemble!"

brianpgordon 8y ago

Eric Weinstein is one of those rare people with whom I disagree a lot but to whom I can actually listen without a vein popping out of my temple and my teeth starting to grind. I guess I just appreciate his cerebral conversational style that lets you engage with the ideas.

soheil 8y ago
What parts do you disagree with him on? He is pretty rational, the way he constructs his arguments from from fundamentals leaves really not much up to personal preference or debate.
- brianpgordon 8y ago
  Mainly that he's a hardcore capitalist to the bone, while I tend more toward favoring a mixed economy and social democracy with an ultimate post-singularity endgame of true socialism. There are some other minor things that he talks about that don't really resonate with me, like conspiracy theories that he propounds under the cover of "emergent behavior," and concerns about AGI which I don't share.

joe_the_user 8y ago

Video begins with this Eric touted as a founder/coiner of "The Intellectual Darkweb" which as far as I can tell is something like a new political brand. I don't think it's appropriate for any political branding to appear as a part an exposition of Science & Math positions (or otherwise) on HN. IE, HN usually isn't a platform for any political position. Vaguely skipped forward and found speculation about like Tom Lahrer as a marker for intelligence. I like Tom Lahrer but this all seems way outside the concrete AI and compiler articles I come to HN for.

freedomben 8y ago
The Intellectual Darkweb absolutely belongs on HN when they're talking about interesting stuff. There are people from the left and right in the IDW - it's quite intellectually diverse. That said, I don't agree with the premise that because somebody is open about their political beliefs, they can't say or do "anything that good hackers would find interesting." [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- joe_the_user 8y ago
  I don't think the claim that the "intellectual darkweb" includes a broad range of political positions holds up to any scrutiny - the many prominent members of the group (Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro) are strongly identified with right wing politics and not one left wing of similar significance appears.
  - rwz 8y ago
    Well, there's also Sam Harris, Brett Weinstein. Both are strongly left wing.
    - ekianjo 8y ago
      Indeed. Its far from being a right wing group.
    - 8y ago

bob_theslob646 8y ago

Lex seems like a very nice guy, but he is terrible at interviewing guests. Listening is definitely a skill.

danielbigham 8y ago
I think Lex is a great interviewer. Eric definitely threw him off a number of times, but I can't fault him.
- espeed 8y ago
  That was intentional on some level, an embodied metaphor to underscore one of the unifying messages Eric was trying to convey -- be wary of your fixed frames of reference, that's not from where radical leaps come.
gclawes 8y ago
He's a mildly-odd high-end AI researcher with a somewhat cynical Russian outlook, I neither expect nor want highly polished interviews from him. In fact, it's exactly because he's somewhat idiosyncratic that he's fascinating to watch have a conversation.
- adaptiveValleys 8y ago
  I agree. He interviews a lot of fascinating people with highly-specialized backgrounds. To research their work and understand it enough to have great conversational flow and remain highly insightful would take a lot of time. But since this isn't his full-time job, I think trading-off asking very good questions for the flow of the dialogue is worth it.

akoster 8y ago

Did anyone else confuse this podcast interviewee with Eric Weisstein at first glance? http://www.ericweisstein.com/ http://www.ericweisstein.com/ http://mathworld.wolfram.com http://mathworld.wolfram.com

sigil 8y ago
All the time!
espeed 8y ago
Not this podcast, but I did a few years ago when I started googling Eric Weinstein's references on guage theory and the Wu-Yang Dictionary. See... Gauge Theory and Inflation: Enlarging the Wu-Yang Dictionary [video] https://youtu.be/h5gnATQMtPg https://youtu.be/h5gnATQMtPg

c256 8y ago

I like much of what I’ve “seen” from Lex Fridman, but I think the title here is a little misleading. This is a conversation with a guy who works on AI at MIT, but the label made me think it was some project or report from CSAIL, which it does not seem to be (disclosure: I haven’t yet watched the full video, so maybe I’m mistaken.)

YjSe2GMQ 8y ago

The idea with periodically detonating thermonuclear weapons on US soil, to remind people how bad things can get, is incredible (from 25:00 onwards). I recently showed my Russian friend an article in The Economist about the arrest of Michael Calvey [1], which concluded in a pessimistic tone that just about anyone can be arrested and go to jail there. To my surprise he said "well, yes, it's true". I couldn't comprehend why would anyone like to live in such conditions. But then I realized that an arrest and an unfair sentence in Russia is nothing. Neither is a 10*C global warming, economic meltdown 30x stronger than 2008, neither is twenty 9/11s in a week, when compared to a nuclear wasteland. We're all in more dire circumstances than Mr Calvey is in. [1] https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/02/23/the-arrest-of-michael-calvey-in-russia-rattles-foreign-businesses https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/02/23/the-arrest-of-mi...

espeed 8y ago
On US soil you'd have fallout from the soil getting sucked up into the atmosphere. See... "Why World War II Matters - Victor Davis Hanson" [video] https://youtu.be/opDuw4OZ3QI https://youtu.be/opDuw4OZ3QI Harvard Belfer Center: "Nuclear 101: How Nuclear Bombs Work Part 1/2" [video] https://youtu.be/zVhQOhxb1Mc https://youtu.be/zVhQOhxb1Mc
- YjSe2GMQ 8y ago
  It's possible, I actually don't know much about those weapons. Perhaps a better idea is to do it at the sea, with front row seats in Los Angeles, IDK. But that's kind of the point - we should have more collective wisdom about devices that can reign global destruction in a matter of hours, or less.
  - espeed 8y ago
    NB: Updated my comment with video references.