[wickoff]

For me it's the questions. He gets these incredible guests with deep understanding of their respective fields and yet they keep being asked nonsensical question they can't possible give a meaningful answer to.

For example almost every guest some variation of "Do you think one day we'll have superhuman AI?" Then the guest is struggling to come up with some platitude, because there is nothing else to say. It's a waste of time.

He is self-aware too, he sometimes apologizes for asking, yet he keeps doing it anyway.

[m_ke]

Yeah, in the interview with Kahneman he doesn't even really get into any of his work in cognitive psychology and behavioral economics, instead he wastes half the show on hypotheticals about AGI.

We're as close to AGI today as we were 10-30 years ago, as in really far away. There's nothing that any of his guests can add to that debate that hasn't been covered in countless scifi novels. I don't care what Vsauce or Bjarne Stroustrup have to say about it.

[Weidenwalker]

To be fair though, it's quite clear that AGI is the intended overarching theme of the podcast. I'd argue that regardless of how any individual interview goes, Lex is creating incredible value by getting all of these top-notch thinkers to join a shared long-term conversation on what this technology means to us all.

[bacon_waffle]

To each their own. I enjoy observing brilliant people a bit out of their element.

There's plenty material available from/about Lex's guests' work; why not ask them to speculate about superhuman AI or whatever?

[sajforbes]

It's not a problem in of itself. I think the main issue is these are questions frequently asked by other podcast hosts already, and the people here are hoping for something more in-depth on topics the guests are more qualified to discuss.