[yumario]

Thank you Lex. I think your podcast are the most interesting in the internet. But...

Readings books is awesome because you are getting the condensed knowledge that someone have spend maybe decades of their lives to compile. When I listen to a podcast the same applies to a lesser extend. The problem is Lex does not ask interesting questions. He dwells into philosophical and common questions i.e "What is the meaning of life", "is math invented or discovered". This questions are interesting but are not in the guest field of expertise which in turn causes them to give a generic response. This devalues the quality of the podcast.

[MattRix]

I disagree with this. One of the reasons I like this podcast so much is that the philosophical questions often lead to guests revealing profound insights into their outlook on life (or at least you get to see more of the interviewee's personality!).

The other thing I like is how Lex is willing to disagree with the interviewee. It leads to much more interesting discussions when someone has to explain their reasoning rather than just stating it outright. I think it helps that Lex seems to always ask the same questions I was thinking of!

[mamp]

I agree with this. I’ve been in the AI field(s) for over 25 years and I really wanted to like this podcast. The people Lex gets on are amazing, but I haven’t been able to get through any of the episodes as they get too philosophical.

I understand it would be difficult to get ones head around the matter produced by each of these giants to ask more specific questions. Would it be worth asking others in the field about the key ideas that require explaining and which topics are controversial?

[jonpon]

While I definitely understand where you are coming from, I think Lex's style can grow on you.

My advice would be to ask shorter questions, sometimes Lex you try to explain what you mean. I would just drop the question and let the other person start talking instead of you trying to fill the silence.

Also I do really enjoy the questions about meaning of life (maybe more discussions on free will would be great too).

In any case, hats off to you Lex for interviewing some of the most interesting people in the field (and those who are not exactly in the field too).

Also I love how you show up with a suit.

[AlanTuring]

Lex here. The amount of positive and thoughtful comments here is humbling. From the bottom of my heart, thank you.

Here are things I didn't realize is the role of the interviewer (my role) but I now know they are:

1. Push towards depth, because not all people go there naturally themselves.

2. Ask for clarifications if I don't understand something. This can make me sound stupid, but it's a worthy sacrifice. I will always sacrifice ego for the chance to understand something basic or hopefully fundamental. In fact, I play dumb sometimes just to force explanation of basics on which the technically deep ideas are built.

3. Disagree respectfully (at times playing devil's advocate) to give a chance to the interviewee to argue their point.

4. Speak whatever question or point I have clearly, concisely, quickly, and then shut up and listen. My role is to give the other person a break and to throw up ideas that spark their passion. I really struggle with this (especially the concise, clear part).

Thank you again for the kind words. I'll keep improving!

[andreyk]

Another AI person here (Stanford PhD student). I concur the philosophical stuff is mostly annoying for me -- for me it comes off as random self-satisfied pseudo-intellectual self-indulgence that makes for nice clickbaity-youtube clips but does not make for actually good conversations. The list of guests is great, but i'd prefer the conversations to me more humble and less wannabe insightful.

[DSingularity]

Sure, keep improving as much as you can. Just take care not to lose what distinguishes your podcast/style in the process!

[nopinsight]

Interesting philosophical thoughts are not limited to philosophers. A philosophical question asked to a top-achieving person in any field often yields a thought-provoking answer. I have heard some of those in Lex’s podcast. A diversity of perspectives is helpful for such questions.

One can tell that Lex does his research and also asks specific questions pertaining to the interviewee’s expertise. I think he strikes a good balance in many/most episodes.