5 ms·

I would love to know what Lex is doing to get the guests that he's had on. It's an impressive list of people and he certainly isn't attracting them with his cha

I would love to know what Lex is doing to get the guests that he's had on. It's an impressive list of people and he certainly isn't attracting them with his charisma or interviewing skills.

ianai 6y ago
Watch where he interviews his dad. Connections, I think.
dogma1138 6y ago
I would think he is rather well respected and well connected in the academic and “corporate R&D” world. He isn’t the best interviewer because he doesn’t have the experience yet but the podcasts are very good because he gives the guests an open stage, he is never adversarial and he never seem to push the interview into a specific direction. Overall it wouldn’t surprise me if many of the guests would just enjoy to sit down and talk to someone who is without sounding too elitists a smart as they are, being able to reach to a lot of other people is just a bonus.
- TOMDM 6y ago
  Because he doesn't have the experience yet? He's been running the podcast for two and a half years, and this episode makes 160. How much experience do you reckon it takes to get "good" at interviewing?
  - bob33212 6y ago
    Some people don't like his style. I don't think they will ever think he is that good. Someone like Oprah would be considered to be far more talented at driving the conversation where she wants it to be. Personally I a huge fan of Lex, I think because the people and topics are what I'm interested in.
    - type0 6y ago
      So much for his style that it makes his podcasts hit or miss (depending on the topic). For some personalities his conversational demagoguery feels nauseating, for others it fits the conversation. In my opinion Sean Carroll (Mindscape) has much more consistent conversational theme that borders on philosophical but still makes it engaging for the listener, where Lex often misses the red thread and rambles in unrelated territory. I don't think his podcasts are bad, just inconsistent, and thinking of how many he manages to do doesn't actually make it that strange. In order to improve Lex needs to curate his ramblings better and learn to read the motivations of his guests.
      - dogma1138 6y ago
        I think the biggest thing that Lex “needs” (that’s a bit strong wording because I do like his podcast) to change is that professional interviewers tend to drive the interview towards the benefit of the audience and the guest (the interviewer very well may have a hidden agenda but the good ones hide it well), Lex’s style is more about his own personal interests and anecdotes his uses this interviews primarily to benefit his own curiosity than to the benefit of the of viewership which why he tends to go on so many tangents I think.
  - dogma1138 6y ago
    Look (or we’ll listen) to Larry King’s early years interviews vs later in his career, so I would say probably a life time. Also keep in mind Lex isn’t a professional journalist he isn’t even what one would call a science communicator. His podcast is still mainly two people having a conversation than a structured interview but he has gotten better at it overall. His early podcasts had quite a few wired moments where you can see that Lex was somewhere else thinking about something these are rarer now.
jasode 6y ago
>and he certainly isn't attracting them with his charisma or interviewing skills. Your criticism is an example of taking your personal opinion that he has no charisma or interviewing skills and then incorrectly projecting it on to guests that don't share your opinion. Think about how the guests must voluntarily agree to be interviewed by Lex. Some might go through these steps: 1) get inquiry email from Lex : "Hi, I have a podcast and I'd love to interview you. [... blah blah blah ...] For reference, here are some links to interviews with previous guests [...]" 2) hmmm... who is this Lex guy?!? Let me look at his previous interviews... 3) Ok, he's non-threatening, engaging, and intellectual with his questions. I can sit down and chat with him for few hours. People oversell the "connections" angle. Yes, he has some connections (Drexel, MIT, ex-contractor at Google, etc) but that just means some warm introductions and a potential guest will politely reply to an email inquiry. Guests can still decline the podcast. Connections don't guarantee the guest will actually agree to talk for 2 hours on camera. E.g. Chris Lattner has been interviewed by Lex 2 times. Unless he's lying, his comment doesn't seem like he shares your opinion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24831157 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24831157 EDIT to reply: "just by cold emailing." I didn't say he was only sending out cold emails. (I mentioned "warm introductions.") In any case, the main point of my comment is that you are (inadvertently?) insulting some of his guests. In other words, have you considered the possibility that many of his guests enjoy Lex's interviewing style?
- superbcarrot 6y ago
  I don't know why you're assuming that he's just sending out emails and finding receptive people on the other end. In my opinion that's the least likely scenario considering the range and calibre of his guests. You don't get to cold-email Eric Schmidt as a relatively unknown person and have him be the guest on the 8th episode of your newly started podcast. You don't get Elon Musk, Ray Dalio, Jack Dorsey, Roger Penrose and the creator of just about every big programming language just by cold emailing.
  - mongol 6y ago
    Yes I wonder about that too. It is really impressive. Was he well connected and famous among the famous before starting his podcast?
casi 6y ago
I really enjoy his interviewing style and calm voice. It is a conversation rather than a list of prepared questions. I get much more from these than say a techcrunch interview.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
zarkov99 6y ago
Just being a decent human being with no agenda but trying to ask interesting questions. It is shocking how rare and precious simply being genuine is these days.
- itsoktocry 6y ago
  Having an agenda is sometimes the only way to get powerful people to answer for controversy. It's crazy to me that people are now claiming that asking "hard questions" is what is ruining journalism. As if we need more of Cuomo interviewing Cuomo on CNN.
  - dmatech 6y ago
    Both styles have their merits. That's why we have both adversarial debates as well as collaborative panel discussions.
  - zarkov99 6y ago
    Sometimes, maybe even most times, one is more interested in the interviewee than the intervier, not matter how brave and righteous the interviewer might believe himself to be.
- bostonsre 6y ago
  Yea.. I'm surprised how negative the comments are here. He seems to be genuinely interested in a wide range of topics. He is able to have intelligible conversations across this wide spectrum and approaches it all with the incredible humility required to learn and teach well. His style is different but I would be hard pressed to think of anyone else that could have these conversations so well.
gigatexal 6y ago
You think his interviewing skills suck? I think he’s doing a great job. Brenden sure doesn’t seem to think the questions are terrible.
sieste 6y ago
> certainly isn't attracting them with his charisma or interviewing skills. As a counterpoint, watch the end of his podcast with Elon Musk, where he made him read the Carl Sagan quote [1]. This was quite brilliant I thought. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVsZD2wF1vw&t=144 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVsZD2wF1vw&t=144
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
alexashka 6y ago
Credentials + persistence + convenient location to get the ball rolling. Large number of views/listens thanks to Joe Rogan + extremely safe interviewing style to keep the momentum going. It's really not all that impressive given the absence of alternatives (try searching Wolfram on youtube and see how many other podcasts show up) - it's more surprising how bad the podcast discovery scene is that almost anyone who self promotes through Joe Rogan and puts in the work becomes a top 100 podcast worldwide.
ChefboyOG 6y ago
Lex is a pretty unconventional interviewer, but I actually think he's pretty fantastic at what he does. In particular, he is one of the best at thinking like a beginner and asking clarifying questions as his guests talk. He interviews a lot of brilliant people who can speak at some depth about topics that need context, and he does a good job of in real time figuring out where they need to clarify without obstructing their explanation. For example, I think he got one of the best interviews I've seen out of Wolfram. I don't know if you've ever interviewed someone, but that kind of awareness and quick thinking is really really hard.
spaetzleesser 6y ago
I think he took Joe Rogan as a template. Be curious, let people talk, maybe know something about the topic, don't judge, don't have an agenda, make the interview about the guest and not about the interviewer. It's kind of interesting that this is a rare thing today.
Grustaf 6y ago
I think he's got excellent interviewing skills, but I am still amazed by his guest list, and I would really like to understand how he has managed to pull this off! Very impressive work.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

I would love to know what Lex is doing to get the guests that he's had on. It's an impressive list of people and he certainly isn't attracting them with his charisma or interviewing skills.

ianai 6y ago

Watch where he interviews his dad. Connections, I think.

dogma1138 6y ago

I would think he is rather well respected and well connected in the academic and “corporate R&D” world. He isn’t the best interviewer because he doesn’t have the experience yet but the podcasts are very good because he gives the guests an open stage, he is never adversarial and he never seem to push the interview into a specific direction. Overall it wouldn’t surprise me if many of the guests would just enjoy to sit down and talk to someone who is without sounding too elitists a smart as they are, being able to reach to a lot of other people is just a bonus.

TOMDM 6y ago
Because he doesn't have the experience yet? He's been running the podcast for two and a half years, and this episode makes 160. How much experience do you reckon it takes to get "good" at interviewing?
- bob33212 6y ago
  Some people don't like his style. I don't think they will ever think he is that good. Someone like Oprah would be considered to be far more talented at driving the conversation where she wants it to be. Personally I a huge fan of Lex, I think because the people and topics are what I'm interested in.
  - type0 6y ago
    So much for his style that it makes his podcasts hit or miss (depending on the topic). For some personalities his conversational demagoguery feels nauseating, for others it fits the conversation. In my opinion Sean Carroll (Mindscape) has much more consistent conversational theme that borders on philosophical but still makes it engaging for the listener, where Lex often misses the red thread and rambles in unrelated territory. I don't think his podcasts are bad, just inconsistent, and thinking of how many he manages to do doesn't actually make it that strange. In order to improve Lex needs to curate his ramblings better and learn to read the motivations of his guests.
    - dogma1138 6y ago
      I think the biggest thing that Lex “needs” (that’s a bit strong wording because I do like his podcast) to change is that professional interviewers tend to drive the interview towards the benefit of the audience and the guest (the interviewer very well may have a hidden agenda but the good ones hide it well), Lex’s style is more about his own personal interests and anecdotes his uses this interviews primarily to benefit his own curiosity than to the benefit of the of viewership which why he tends to go on so many tangents I think.
- dogma1138 6y ago
  Look (or we’ll listen) to Larry King’s early years interviews vs later in his career, so I would say probably a life time. Also keep in mind Lex isn’t a professional journalist he isn’t even what one would call a science communicator. His podcast is still mainly two people having a conversation than a structured interview but he has gotten better at it overall. His early podcasts had quite a few wired moments where you can see that Lex was somewhere else thinking about something these are rarer now.

jasode 6y ago

>and he certainly isn't attracting them with his charisma or interviewing skills. Your criticism is an example of taking your personal opinion that he has no charisma or interviewing skills and then incorrectly projecting it on to guests that don't share your opinion. Think about how the guests must voluntarily agree to be interviewed by Lex. Some might go through these steps: 1) get inquiry email from Lex : "Hi, I have a podcast and I'd love to interview you. [... blah blah blah ...] For reference, here are some links to interviews with previous guests [...]" 2) hmmm... who is this Lex guy?!? Let me look at his previous interviews... 3) Ok, he's non-threatening, engaging, and intellectual with his questions. I can sit down and chat with him for few hours. People oversell the "connections" angle. Yes, he has some connections (Drexel, MIT, ex-contractor at Google, etc) but that just means some warm introductions and a potential guest will politely reply to an email inquiry. Guests can still decline the podcast. Connections don't guarantee the guest will actually agree to talk for 2 hours on camera. E.g. Chris Lattner has been interviewed by Lex 2 times. Unless he's lying, his comment doesn't seem like he shares your opinion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24831157 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24831157 EDIT to reply: "just by cold emailing." I didn't say he was only sending out cold emails. (I mentioned "warm introductions.") In any case, the main point of my comment is that you are (inadvertently?) insulting some of his guests. In other words, have you considered the possibility that many of his guests enjoy Lex's interviewing style?

superbcarrot 6y ago
I don't know why you're assuming that he's just sending out emails and finding receptive people on the other end. In my opinion that's the least likely scenario considering the range and calibre of his guests. You don't get to cold-email Eric Schmidt as a relatively unknown person and have him be the guest on the 8th episode of your newly started podcast. You don't get Elon Musk, Ray Dalio, Jack Dorsey, Roger Penrose and the creator of just about every big programming language just by cold emailing.
- mongol 6y ago
  Yes I wonder about that too. It is really impressive. Was he well connected and famous among the famous before starting his podcast?

casi 6y ago

I really enjoy his interviewing style and calm voice. It is a conversation rather than a list of prepared questions. I get much more from these than say a techcrunch interview.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

zarkov99 6y ago

Just being a decent human being with no agenda but trying to ask interesting questions. It is shocking how rare and precious simply being genuine is these days.

itsoktocry 6y ago
Having an agenda is sometimes the only way to get powerful people to answer for controversy. It's crazy to me that people are now claiming that asking "hard questions" is what is ruining journalism. As if we need more of Cuomo interviewing Cuomo on CNN.
- dmatech 6y ago
  Both styles have their merits. That's why we have both adversarial debates as well as collaborative panel discussions.
- zarkov99 6y ago
  Sometimes, maybe even most times, one is more interested in the interviewee than the intervier, not matter how brave and righteous the interviewer might believe himself to be.
bostonsre 6y ago
Yea.. I'm surprised how negative the comments are here. He seems to be genuinely interested in a wide range of topics. He is able to have intelligible conversations across this wide spectrum and approaches it all with the incredible humility required to learn and teach well. His style is different but I would be hard pressed to think of anyone else that could have these conversations so well.

gigatexal 6y ago

You think his interviewing skills suck? I think he’s doing a great job. Brenden sure doesn’t seem to think the questions are terrible.

sieste 6y ago

> certainly isn't attracting them with his charisma or interviewing skills. As a counterpoint, watch the end of his podcast with Elon Musk, where he made him read the Carl Sagan quote [1]. This was quite brilliant I thought. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVsZD2wF1vw&t=144 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVsZD2wF1vw&t=144

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

alexashka 6y ago

Credentials + persistence + convenient location to get the ball rolling. Large number of views/listens thanks to Joe Rogan + extremely safe interviewing style to keep the momentum going. It's really not all that impressive given the absence of alternatives (try searching Wolfram on youtube and see how many other podcasts show up) - it's more surprising how bad the podcast discovery scene is that almost anyone who self promotes through Joe Rogan and puts in the work becomes a top 100 podcast worldwide.

ChefboyOG 6y ago

Lex is a pretty unconventional interviewer, but I actually think he's pretty fantastic at what he does. In particular, he is one of the best at thinking like a beginner and asking clarifying questions as his guests talk. He interviews a lot of brilliant people who can speak at some depth about topics that need context, and he does a good job of in real time figuring out where they need to clarify without obstructing their explanation. For example, I think he got one of the best interviews I've seen out of Wolfram. I don't know if you've ever interviewed someone, but that kind of awareness and quick thinking is really really hard.

spaetzleesser 6y ago

I think he took Joe Rogan as a template. Be curious, let people talk, maybe know something about the topic, don't judge, don't have an agenda, make the interview about the guest and not about the interviewer. It's kind of interesting that this is a rare thing today.

Grustaf 6y ago

I think he's got excellent interviewing skills, but I am still amazed by his guest list, and I would really like to understand how he has managed to pull this off! Very impressive work.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]