props to the interviewer. good questions, and a good job maintaining a natural conversational flow. And of course, Eric's answers are great as per usual.
4 роки тому+5
Great insights from Eric are no surprise, what surprised me is how good the questions were.
Hey Its a very nice interview, maybe you can use a different title so that more people get this recommended? I got this recommended after almost a year
Her: "He's so smart, I wonder what he's thinking about right now..." Him: "There's stuff on her face, there's stuff on her face, there's stuff on her face, there's-"
@@sleepless1587 Well in his case it's a medical condition, although it does seem to be co-morbid with autism. Somehow it never quite seems logical/ignorable to an aspie.
The biggest limitation , or failing if you will, of ALL forms of currency ( be they physical, fiat, or digital ) is that when \ if shit goes to hell and a hand basket ... you can't eat it, drink it, or sleep in it. When the basics to survive become scarce ... things devolve to barter and those commodities become the most, and only valuable thing. People lose faith in ALL "intermediary" expressions of value and will only exchange one essential commodity for another. That's why its advisable to watch, learn, understand, and then dabble in this stuff but ... its more important to make sure you have a sound base of physical assets such as; real estate, arable land, gold, or stocks\ futures in commodities such as; fresh water, wheat, OJ, copper, etc.. There are some surprising ways to invest in these items that are not all direct in an investment portfolio. Having established that ... feel free to play with; financial stocks, bit coin, big tech, marijuana, Infrastructure, medical, etc..
The flaw of Bitcoin is the artificial scarcity created from mining it and the waste of electric power to make it as though it were a real thing. I am dumbfounded this is not more of an issue with economists.
The electricity is a stand in for the central bank or regulatory authority that would otherwise be needed to manage a currency and prevent things like double spending and counterfeiting. There’s no free lunch.
I like this guy, he seems to have a libertarian perspective, even though he would not want to be labeled as one. His comments on Austrian economics sort of point to his aversion of being part of some kind of thought group. But I think it's weird that he describes the Austrian econ perspective as if it's a mathematical equation, because from my understanding it's a theory of liberating markets to act freely, rather than by compulsion from central authorities. If it's a cult, then it's a good one. It's the kind of thinking that creates technology like this in the first place
It's not a cult by any definition. It might be a Dogma, but he chose a more insulting description. Something he said about that made no sense. He gave no reason as to why Austrian economics should be a continuation of survival of natural selection, or whatever he referred it to us. There's a market like force in natural selection, and there's a market force in economics. He gave no reason why one has to be an extension of the other. He might as well have just made that s*** up. I suspect it's because he's still sympathetic to the progressive perspective that Humanity's future can be shaped by elites, and that leaves no room for market dominance. I suspect he imagines leveraging the success of markets in a better form of statism. Who knows, maybe in a world of Super Hyper intelligent AI, management by that will beat the markets
5:45 "public goods are a source of market failure" i would have loved for him to expand on that. He didn't seem to push back on public goods in his podcast with Vitalik
wikipedia has you covered here. you can check out things like "tragedy of the commons" and the free rider problem. I think he's referring more to economic theory rather than his opinion which is why he doesn't expand
Hello. Eric, The blockchain has many interesting aspects and is the driving force behind where this next lane will go. The( creator) of bitckin is unknown? A griup perhaps? A covert alpha? Bet. Quite the red flag to the average. Purpose when known. a new gold standard will never run much of the markets. It is not freeley given weight of futures credit or borrowing power. The volotility of countries corperations mining the last of a fi ite bitcoin number means its end is near. As a perpetual cycle crypto has not proven itself able to move forward in the afore mentioned fashion. Instead it is a great form of gambling. Little more than a side bar stock market without dirivitives. To move in to the future a gold standard will nevr sustain but to be entertained? Our species endulges in its own futility and jovial redisense. Our current state will always remain the driving force of the economic world. Self correcting sustainable and always a dollar to be made lent and borrowed. Anonymous is so black ops. So iran contra dont you agree? Still subsidized. Interesting. Good luck.
Stop being so maximalist and talking about Bitcoin the whole time. Its just a stupid coin, talk about blockchain innovation in general. Web3, DeFi, interoperable blockchains, stake-based oracles, decentralized universal IDs, derivatives markets as smart contracts. Bitcoin was a prototype, but its DeFi that is special.
Exactly. Bitcoin is nearly useless as a blockchain tech and represents more of a ponzi scheme with people hoping to get rick quick by buying and hoping other people do the same so that they can dump their bags of full of fundamentally futureless tech at the higher price at someone. But it stopped working and ponzi is deflating. All the real blockchain devepment and innovation happens outside Bitcoin, Ethereum being the prime example. Ironically, the success of blockchain will be the demise of Bitcoin, because given choice nobody would use Bitcoin, considering how terrible and hopelessly stagnant it is as a blockchain tech. It is terrible even as a payment token. But, of course, the real power of blockchain is in composability and many different services interacting with one another without needing to trust one another. And Bitcoin literally does not even do that (it is not usable as a platform for decentralized computation). In a sense, Bitcoin is not even a blockchain the tech people mean when they talk about blockcain. I want to say that BTC is the Myspace of crypto, but I strongly believe that BTC is only alive because it is the only option in some exchanges and dark net markets and if and when other options are added to every place where people are forced to use Bitcoin, then Bitcoin would die completely in 10-20 years, unlike MySpace that at least had something real going for it. It is amazing how bad and futureless Bitcoin is as a blockchain tech, yet how people buy bags of it hoping that somehow it will be widely used as a blockchain.
Listening of Eric for 10 minutes makes me thinking for a week, watching you for 60 seconds makes me smile for a week :) So now when i ponder i start to giggle to this thought...
Explain this to me, how markets are the engine of liberation? For whom? We could say understanding peoples biology etc is too, but at the same time, it is a cage used to trap by exploitative people. Relying on the market is on some level to me like relying on something like eugenics to get what we (although not representative, so we is an exclusive ignorant group) want through the process of genetics. Understanding markets and being aware as not to be a primitive easily manipulated being by others seems like a much better engine of liberation. We need to understand markets and how market forces are used against us, to manipulate us, to exploit us. Do we submit to the difficulty of understanding genetics and natural selection? If we did, we'd have no recourse against proponents of eugenics as though that were the path to liberation. It is not even simply scarcity that market trends go on. It is a mindset and mental perception of scarcity. Why would we want scarcity and why would we want to allow market trends and those who have the data and the tools to observe and manipulate them to have control over us. That is not liberation. It is somewhere close to the naturalistic fallacy is what it sounds like.
@@HomeAtLast501 While Eric does have his theory of Geometric Unity, which is a fundamental theory of physics, he is almost always careful to point out that he is not a physicist as he only has degrees in mathematics. I think that the reflexive ascription of genius status is partially due to the fact that both math and physics are known to be relatively difficult fields of study. That paired with the fact that for people who have barely studied it at all, hearing someone who normally speaks very clearly and understandably suddenly become almost unintelligible when discussing math and physics makes it apparent that there is quite a lot going on underneath the surface there. Also, the fact that the unintelligible conversation seems to be perfectly cogent to experts in the fields of mathematics and physics indicates that he's at least not bluffing nor incredibly confused. He may ultimately be incorrect in his theories, but if you listen to enough conversations of his, it becomes clear that he is rather intelligent. Whether you ascribe the word genius to him probably depends more on your definition of genius. In all honesty, if I were to ascribe genius status to Eric for anything it would more be due to his insightful modes of thinking that he employs in a variety of topics as opposed to anything like IQ or amount of education or level of accomplishment. But again, that may simply be a difference in definition of what makes someone a genius.
@@HomeAtLast501 I take your point. When Eric uses a lot of jargon I do tend to get somewhat lost, but the general trend that I have noticed is that the jargon is more often used in conversations with individuals who are also experts in the fields of math or physics. When he discusses these things with non-experts, he tends to tailor his conversation style to that individual. Again, a general trend that he doesn't always follow, but when he does simplify concepts I find them more intelligible than most other explanations I've heard on the same issue. Inevitably, different people will find different modes of explanation more or less helpful and I find Eric's to be one of the most helpful for me. If there are other individuals that you think more clearly explain math and physics I would be interested to know who they are!
@@HomeAtLast501 As I said, it's a general trend I've noticed. I admit that there are definitely exceptions such as the video you've posted. I've gained more clarity than confusion through listening to him, but I could see how that might not being the case for everyone.
that's right , the whole discussion around privacy today is wrong , we never discuss the privacy when talking about gold because it is intrinsic property and it should be intrinsic property of crypto
Weinstein doesn't understand Austrian economics. He's asked what he disagrees with about AE and then explains that math can't explain human behavior. Yup, that's true. It's also exactly Ludwig von Mises's theory in Human Action, the seminal text of AE.
She should have done some research on him and found out that he's deathly afraid of makeup, unless she did and she just wanted to wear that to ruffle his feathers.
Good interview and a good line of questioning! I think that you have a bright future! Looking forward to seeing more in-depth interviews from you in the future!
The thing that makes Bitcoin Bitcoin is the blockchain and concept of digital scarcity. Without the blockchain you have no Bitcoin. If he is not on the side of digital scarcity than he is advocating for another form of a central bank. He is very intelligent but he is fundamentally wrong.
Bitcoin is terrible even as a blockchain tech though. Ironically, the success of blockchain will be real demise of Bitcoin, because given choice people would not use Bitcoin, as it can't compete as a blockchain tech (like it is always doomed to have have orders of magnitude higher transaction costs and times), and people don't pay more to get less.
Great. Now do a 3-hour version of the same interview and come loaded with the most heavy-duty questions you got.
Check out The Portal with Weinstein and an Etherium dev.
ua-cam.com/video/8TwNNgiNZ7Y/v-deo.html
i know I am kinda off topic but do anybody know of a good place to watch new tv shows online?
@Immanuel Kaleb i would suggest flixzone. Just google for it =)
@August Johnny yup, I have been watching on flixzone for since march myself :D
@August Johnny thanks, I went there and it seems like they got a lot of movies there :) I appreciate it !!
props to the interviewer. good questions, and a good job maintaining a natural conversational flow. And of course, Eric's answers are great as per usual.
Great insights from Eric are no surprise, what surprised me is how good the questions were.
Hey Its a very nice interview, maybe you can use a different title so that more people get this recommended? I got this recommended after almost a year
I remember that interviewer from band camp. I think she played the flute
She can play MY flute
Bitcoin to the next step!
Her: "He's so smart, I wonder what he's thinking about right now..."
Him: "There's stuff on her face, there's stuff on her face, there's stuff on her face, there's-"
@@sleepless1587 Well in his case it's a medical condition, although it does seem to be co-morbid with autism. Somehow it never quite seems logical/ignorable to an aspie.
Lol
The biggest limitation , or failing if you will, of ALL forms of currency ( be they physical, fiat, or digital ) is that when \ if shit goes to hell and a hand basket ... you can't eat it, drink it, or sleep in it. When the basics to survive become scarce ... things devolve to barter and those commodities become the most, and only valuable thing. People lose faith in ALL "intermediary" expressions of value and will only exchange one essential commodity for another.
That's why its advisable to watch, learn, understand, and then dabble in this stuff but ... its more important to make sure you have a sound base of physical assets such as; real estate, arable land, gold, or stocks\ futures in commodities such as; fresh water, wheat, OJ, copper, etc.. There are some surprising ways to invest in these items that are not all direct in an investment portfolio. Having established that ... feel free to play with; financial stocks, bit coin, big tech, marijuana, Infrastructure, medical, etc..
The flaw of Bitcoin is the artificial scarcity created from mining it and the waste of electric power to make it as though it were a real thing. I am dumbfounded this is not more of an issue with economists.
Well lot economists are bitten by the "gold bug" so this is another form of it
The electricity is a stand in for the central bank or regulatory authority that would otherwise be needed to manage a currency and prevent things like double spending and counterfeiting. There’s no free lunch.
I like this guy, he seems to have a libertarian perspective, even though he would not want to be labeled as one. His comments on Austrian economics sort of point to his aversion of being part of some kind of thought group. But I think it's weird that he describes the Austrian econ perspective as if it's a mathematical equation, because from my understanding it's a theory of liberating markets to act freely, rather than by compulsion from central authorities. If it's a cult, then it's a good one. It's the kind of thinking that creates technology like this in the first place
Check out “The Portal.”
It's not a cult by any definition. It might be a Dogma, but he chose a more insulting description. Something he said about that made no sense. He gave no reason as to why Austrian economics should be a continuation of survival of natural selection, or whatever he referred it to us. There's a market like force in natural selection, and there's a market force in economics. He gave no reason why one has to be an extension of the other. He might as well have just made that s*** up. I suspect it's because he's still sympathetic to the progressive perspective that Humanity's future can be shaped by elites, and that leaves no room for market dominance. I suspect he imagines leveraging the success of markets in a better form of statism. Who knows, maybe in a world of Super Hyper intelligent AI, management by that will beat the markets
billandpech people who say abolish the Fed are cultists. It’s wacko.
Great interview!
5:45 "public goods are a source of market failure" i would have loved for him to expand on that. He didn't seem to push back on public goods in his podcast with Vitalik
probably because he knew he couldn't argue it with him haha
wikipedia has you covered here. you can check out things like "tragedy of the commons" and the free rider problem. I think he's referring more to economic theory rather than his opinion which is why he doesn't expand
Pronounced his name wrong
Not violence, but chaos of trying to solve mathematical problems.
His hair looks like a bird's-nest
Probably hoping to catch a bird.
wow!
Who is the interviewer?
ah, just after to watch the intro: Reporter, CoinDesk Leigh Cuen.
09:25 none of "the few of you" realize how monumental BitCoin is.
Well I understood about 1 percent of that
Interviewer girl has very lovely eyes
Meanwhile, in the real world . . .
She's so beautiful.
Not aging well. Won't end well. EOS? Lot's of confusion still in this space.
Ladies and gentleman, here is a fine display of intelligence vs faux-intellegince at play, I'm sure you know who is the wanna-be.
Hello.
Eric,
The blockchain has many interesting aspects and is the driving force behind where this next lane will go. The( creator) of bitckin is unknown? A griup perhaps? A covert alpha? Bet. Quite the red flag to the average. Purpose when known.
a new gold standard will never run much of the markets. It is not freeley given weight of futures credit or borrowing power. The volotility of countries corperations mining the last of a fi ite bitcoin number means its end is near. As a perpetual cycle crypto has not proven itself able to move forward in the afore mentioned fashion. Instead it is a great form of gambling. Little more than a side bar stock market without dirivitives. To move in to the future a gold standard will nevr sustain but to be entertained? Our species endulges in its own futility and jovial redisense.
Our current state will always remain the driving force of the economic world. Self correcting sustainable and always a dollar to be made lent and borrowed. Anonymous is so black ops. So iran contra dont you agree? Still subsidized.
Interesting.
Good luck.
SORRY HUNNY, HE ONLY LIKES ASIANS
Stop being so maximalist and talking about Bitcoin the whole time. Its just a stupid coin, talk about blockchain innovation in general. Web3, DeFi, interoperable blockchains, stake-based oracles, decentralized universal IDs, derivatives markets as smart contracts. Bitcoin was a prototype, but its DeFi that is special.
Exactly. Bitcoin is nearly useless as a blockchain tech and represents more of a ponzi scheme with people hoping to get rick quick by buying and hoping other people do the same so that they can dump their bags of full of fundamentally futureless tech at the higher price at someone. But it stopped working and ponzi is deflating.
All the real blockchain devepment and innovation happens outside Bitcoin, Ethereum being the prime example. Ironically, the success of blockchain will be the demise of Bitcoin, because given choice nobody would use Bitcoin, considering how terrible and hopelessly stagnant it is as a blockchain tech. It is terrible even as a payment token. But, of course, the real power of blockchain is in composability and many different services interacting with one another without needing to trust one another. And Bitcoin literally does not even do that (it is not usable as a platform for decentralized computation). In a sense, Bitcoin is not even a blockchain the tech people mean when they talk about blockcain. I want to say that BTC is the Myspace of crypto, but I strongly believe that BTC is only alive because it is the only option in some exchanges and dark net markets and if and when other options are added to every place where people are forced to use Bitcoin, then Bitcoin would die completely in 10-20 years, unlike MySpace that at least had something real going for it. It is amazing how bad and futureless Bitcoin is as a blockchain tech, yet how people buy bags of it hoping that somehow it will be widely used as a blockchain.
You pronounce his last name like you'd stay "Einstein".
not like Epstein? btw Epstein didnt kill himself.
THANK YOU. Came here to leave the same comment.
Which is how he pronounces it
I know some of us are trying to avoid saying it, but damn she’s cute!! As soon as I saw her I knew I wouldn’t be able to concentrate on this.
she's cute as fuck.
When did Hermione start conducting interviews?
sourdonkeyjuice thought it might be Kate Bush 40 years ago
Eraser head is one smart dude.
Does he not know about Monero?
brother...it now looks like your going out of you way to make your hairdo looks as crazy as possible
trying to immitate Einstein
Listening of Eric for 10 minutes makes me thinking for a week, watching you for 60 seconds makes me smile for a week :)
So now when i ponder i start to giggle to this thought...
Good interview. Eric Weinstein is God tier in some of his answers, e.g. about markets being the engine of liberation, etc.
He said "if".
Explain this to me, how markets are the engine of liberation? For whom? We could say understanding peoples biology etc is too, but at the same time, it is a cage used to trap by exploitative people. Relying on the market is on some level to me like relying on something like eugenics to get what we (although not representative, so we is an exclusive ignorant group) want through the process of genetics. Understanding markets and being aware as not to be a primitive easily manipulated being by others seems like a much better engine of liberation. We need to understand markets and how market forces are used against us, to manipulate us, to exploit us. Do we submit to the difficulty of understanding genetics and natural selection? If we did, we'd have no recourse against proponents of eugenics as though that were the path to liberation.
It is not even simply scarcity that market trends go on. It is a mindset and mental perception of scarcity. Why would we want scarcity and why would we want to allow market trends and those who have the data and the tools to observe and manipulate them to have control over us. That is not liberation. It is somewhere close to the naturalistic fallacy is what it sounds like.
@@HomeAtLast501 While Eric does have his theory of Geometric Unity, which is a fundamental theory of physics, he is almost always careful to point out that he is not a physicist as he only has degrees in mathematics. I think that the reflexive ascription of genius status is partially due to the fact that both math and physics are known to be relatively difficult fields of study. That paired with the fact that for people who have barely studied it at all, hearing someone who normally speaks very clearly and understandably suddenly become almost unintelligible when discussing math and physics makes it apparent that there is quite a lot going on underneath the surface there. Also, the fact that the unintelligible conversation seems to be perfectly cogent to experts in the fields of mathematics and physics indicates that he's at least not bluffing nor incredibly confused. He may ultimately be incorrect in his theories, but if you listen to enough conversations of his, it becomes clear that he is rather intelligent. Whether you ascribe the word genius to him probably depends more on your definition of genius.
In all honesty, if I were to ascribe genius status to Eric for anything it would more be due to his insightful modes of thinking that he employs in a variety of topics as opposed to anything like IQ or amount of education or level of accomplishment. But again, that may simply be a difference in definition of what makes someone a genius.
@@HomeAtLast501 I take your point. When Eric uses a lot of jargon I do tend to get somewhat lost, but the general trend that I have noticed is that the jargon is more often used in conversations with individuals who are also experts in the fields of math or physics. When he discusses these things with non-experts, he tends to tailor his conversation style to that individual. Again, a general trend that he doesn't always follow, but when he does simplify concepts I find them more intelligible than most other explanations I've heard on the same issue. Inevitably, different people will find different modes of explanation more or less helpful and I find Eric's to be one of the most helpful for me. If there are other individuals that you think more clearly explain math and physics I would be interested to know who they are!
@@HomeAtLast501 As I said, it's a general trend I've noticed. I admit that there are definitely exceptions such as the video you've posted. I've gained more clarity than confusion through listening to him, but I could see how that might not being the case for everyone.
that's right , the whole discussion around privacy today is wrong , we never discuss the privacy when talking about gold because it is intrinsic property and it should be intrinsic property of crypto
Neutron stars
Weinstein doesn't understand Austrian economics. He's asked what he disagrees with about AE and then explains that math can't explain human behavior. Yup, that's true. It's also exactly Ludwig von Mises's theory in Human Action, the seminal text of AE.
She should have done some research on him and found out that he's deathly afraid of makeup, unless she did and she just wanted to wear that to ruffle his feathers.
"that once it gets out of the lab behaves entirely differently"
Good interview and a good line of questioning! I think that you have a bright future!
Looking forward to seeing more in-depth interviews from you in the future!
#AwarenessConsciousness
The most interesting property is how you pronounced wrong his name
God, she's so awkward.
The thing that makes Bitcoin Bitcoin is the blockchain and concept of digital scarcity. Without the blockchain you have no Bitcoin. If he is not on the side of digital scarcity than he is advocating for another form of a central bank. He is very intelligent but he is fundamentally wrong.
Bitcoin is terrible even as a blockchain tech though. Ironically, the success of blockchain will be real demise of Bitcoin, because given choice people would not use Bitcoin, as it can't compete as a blockchain tech (like it is always doomed to have have orders of magnitude higher transaction costs and times), and people don't pay more to get less.
Hey lady, you need to work on your eye-contact skills. That's part of your goddamned job