Critics of Lex Fridman

[Leo Gura]

7 hours ago, axiom said:

The situation is not helped by former chief scientists of companies like Pfizer explicitly stating that the vaccines are, in his view, designed to curtail global population.

How is this a left idea?

People can have bad ideas, but that doesn't make it a popular leftist position.

The left has some bad ideas, but the right has way more bad ideas.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Danioover9000]

@zurew

7 hours ago, zurew said:

What are those dangerous left wing ideas that are comparable to the dangerous ideas and conspiracies, that are on the right?

   At least to me, foolish immature Progressive/socialistic ideas being implemented, and more dangerous communism and anarchism. 

   The right has far worse and dangerous ideas from the Alt right though. Even the Alt right beats the Alt left for how worse their ideology is!

Edited December 15, 2022 by Danioover9000

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

 @Leo Gura and @Carl-Richard, is it possible that Lex Fridman is himself a grifter, but one that has cleverly disguised himself as a person pursuing good faith conversations, world peace and love and so on?

No.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Leo Gura

[axiom]

43 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

How is this a left idea?

People can have bad ideas, but that doesn't make it a popular leftist position.

The left has some bad ideas, but the right has way more bad ideas.

It’s not a left wing idea. Nor is it a right wing idea. 

I think both sides are more or less equally capable of coming up with bad ideas. Instead of partisanship, we really ought be blaming whoever came up with a fiat monetary system that essentially turns humans into livestock.

Edited December 15, 2022 by axiom

[IAmReallyImportant]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The left has some bad ideas, but the right has way more bad ideas

How do you measure that?

Obviously ideas of the right are build upon existing and established or working ideas. Every idea is somehow build upon shoulder of giants.

The left comes with lofty, unrealistic ideas, which often contradict science/logic and don't work. Of course sometimes the left has also good ideas. It is hard to compare anyways.

Edited December 15, 2022 by IAmReallyImportant

[IAmReallyImportant]

I am neither left nor right, but I look at how true something is.

You @Leo Gura have obviously political interest in supporting left and want to use it to protect your business.

People who are supporting just one side of the spectrum (call themselves conservative or progressive) are proven to have a lower IQ
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/unique-everybody-else/201305/intelligence-and-politics-have-complex-relationship
Everybody knows, that Leo's IQ is not extraordinary high. And this is ok.

And we need logic and rationality in our society, otherwise dumb people will take over and make stupid decisions.

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, axiom said:

we really ought be blaming whoever came up with a fiat monetary system that essentially turns humans into livestock.

Only a fool would criticize fiat money.

You do not understand what you criticize.

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

You @Leo Gura have obviously political interest in supporting left and want to use it to protect your business.

How does being left support my business??

[axiom]

23 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Only a fool would criticize fiat money.

You do not understand what you criticize.

On the contrary, I understand the history and the mechanics of fiat currency very well, and I do not believe that pernicious theft can be defended.

[zurew]

5 minutes ago, axiom said:

On the contrary, I understand the history and the mechanics of fiat currency very well, and I do not believe that pernicious theft can be defended.

What is the alternative system you are suggesting?

[axiom]

@zurew  Probably the most important characteristic of money is that it should be backed. Without this basic principle, fiscal irresponsibility is guaranteed. This is why the US has 30 trillion in debt, stock P/E ratios are at near all-time-highs, and homes are unaffordable. The ability of the Federal Reserve to create money from thin air simply by typing it into a computer screen, loan this freshly-created money out to government at interest, and then keep citizens on the hook to repay it in the form of taxes is deeply immoral if not evil. It funnels wealth to the 1% and imposes an enormous burden on future generations. 

I would advocate bringing back some form of backing for currency such as gold or silver, or potentially the energy used to mine Bitcoin.

[Leo Gura]

I like the idea of backed currency. But that is something we gotta evolve into.

Fiat currency is not a mistake, it is an evolutionary step. You can't get to Bitcoin without fiat.

Edited December 16, 2022 by Leo Gura

[axiom]

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

IFiat currency is not a mistake, it is an evolutionary step. You can't get to Bitcoin without fiat.

Yes, insofar as becoming a heroin addict is an evolutionary step, and you can't get to sobriety without using drugs first.

[Danioover9000]

@Leo Gura

17 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

No.

   Really? So there's no deception from Lex Fridman when he was interviewing Kanye West? Seemed very out of character.

[Danioover9000]

@axiom

10 minutes ago, axiom said:

Yes, insofar as becoming a heroin addict is an evolutionary step, and you can't get to sobriety without using drugs first.

   That's such a bad faith straw manning of what Leo meant. Please be more charitable, the original context was about the evolution of currency. We can't get Bitcoin/cryptocurrency without flat currency and the banking system established first, along with providing millions of people with the internet and computers that enable access to open source or paid websites. Without the internet, computers, banking system and flat currency, and the economic history of currency, we can't even conceive of a bitcoin cryptocurrency modal.

   Also a sub argument point here, the number of thefts and other theft related crimes committed in the bitcoin/cryptocurrency side is way higher than the thefts committed with flat currency systems. There's ironically more accountability with banks acting as third parties in a transaction than billions of live computers, some of which you don't know are algorithms designed by hackers to track and decode your crypto wallet key, and other new digital scams around crypto currency.

[Danioover9000]

@axiom

13 hours ago, axiom said:

@zurew  Probably the most important characteristic of money is that it should be backed. Without this basic principle, fiscal irresponsibility is guaranteed. This is why the US has 30 trillion in debt, stock P/E ratios are at near all-time-highs, and homes are unaffordable. The ability of the Federal Reserve to create money from thin air simply by typing it into a computer screen, loan this freshly-created money out to government at interest, and then keep citizens on the hook to repay it in the form of taxes is deeply immoral if not evil. It funnels wealth to the 1% and imposes an enormous burden on future generations. 

I would advocate bringing back some form of backing for currency such as gold or silver, or potentially the energy used to mine Bitcoin.

   How do you know who/what group/system backing money can be trusted?

   What standards are you using, to justify that printing flat currency, is immoral and evil? Because they are very rich, and many are very poor? Is it because of the nature of loaning and debt?

   Is it valid to state, one sided, that they impose an enormous burden on future generations, but what about the majority of people in the lower to middle class, that also place a burden upon the wealthy?

[Danioover9000]

   An aside, I've been getting some YouTube channels, whenever I comment on some of them, some of this channels comment about me and ask to join or link my Whatsapp. They also have long number and symbol string as well. Is this a scam or some misinformation? I don't know exactly what to report these as.

[axiom]

15 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

 That's such a bad faith straw manning of what Leo meant. Please be more charitable, the original context was about the evolution of currency. We can't get Bitcoin/cryptocurrency without flat currency and the banking system established first, along with providing millions of people with the internet and computers that enable access to open source or paid websites. Without the internet, computers, banking system and flat currency, and the economic history of currency, we can't even conceive of a bitcoin cryptocurrency modal.

Just to be clear here, 'fiat' does not simply mean currency. I am not referring to the idea of a dollar.

'Fiat' refers to government-issued currency that is not backed.

Pure fiat was introduced by Nixon in 1971. Banking systems existed prior to 1971. The internet, computers etc would still exist if he hadn't unpegged the dollar from gold.

Bitcoin is a return to the principle of sound money that existed in the past. The mechanism by which it achieves it (solving the Byzantine general problem) is revolutionary though of course.

By the way, I was not straw-manning Leo at all. He is correct in the sense that humans often need to fail before they can succeed. But I still don't think pure fiat was ever necessary. It's a 50 year old experiment which now seems to be failing.

[axiom]

32 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@axiom

What standards are you using, to justify that printing flat currency, is immoral and evil? Because they are very rich, and many are very poor? Is it because of the nature of loaning and debt?

 Is it valid to state, one sided, that they impose an enormous burden on future generations?

Yes, it is valid to state that the ease with which fiat currency can be brought into existence (by its design) is an enormous burden on future generations. This is because of the inevitable increased taxation required so that governments can pretend to pay back their debt (which by now can never truly be repaid).

The justification for saying this is immoral and evil is that such a mechanism enslaves the population. It ultimately forces people into poverty because taxation becomes too high, and the asset bubbles created by the inflation of the money supply make living an ordinary life unaffordable for growing numbers of people. Life becomes much more about work, survival and worrying about the cost of living.

All the while, the (private!) owners of the Federal Reserve - who cause all of this misery - remain obfuscated from view.

Edited December 16, 2022 by axiom

[Yog]

On 12/14/2022 at 9:45 PM, Danioover9000 said:

So, does this mean that your take falls more in line with what Destiny's position in regards to the algorithm shadow banning certain content creators based on words used and views expressed? Because I get the feeling that Destiny while debating this guy from counterpoints complaining of getting conservative views shadow banned by social media, for instance in this case twitter, doesn't want to appear to agree with the guy by writing off his position, but how he justifies his own position about shadow banning is that it doesn't happen at all, and seems to want to say it's more the fault of how these conservatives market and promote themselves.

Last year a friend of mine got banned from FB for racism and similar accusations and had to write a letter to get unbanned. Just posting this song.
 

Nothing racist or nazi in it. But it's the maker of this music that is nazi. It looks to me that FB made the algorithm ban anything connected to this guy. If it can happen with plain art, a song about the night. I assume it can be pretty much be the same case for conservative political posts or videos.

So if I take my friend's example, it looks like you don't even need to say something wrong in a given piece of content in order to be ban worthy.

Edited December 16, 2022 by Yog