Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | throwcatowayne's commentslogin



As a public face, sure. But behind Drake, Nicki Minaj, Taylor Swift, and the rest are a "band" of writers, talented producer musicians, and marketers in which their final music product isn't at the top of the charts without. Those "band" members just don't have public personas anymore.


I'd argue that there's a big difference between having a group of people involved in producing a song and a band.


> he is more intent on building his subscriber count than actually asking tough questions.

It's quite a sad indicator of the state of knowledge in the world where Fridman is considered the more "intellectual" of pop podcasters when the most popular podcasts are crap like Rogan, Shawn Ryan, Candace Owens, and Call Her Daddy.

Because Fridman will literally have a guest with platform A, like Netanyahu, and agree on 95% of his controversial points with little pushback. And then immediately after have on Yuval Harari, with the opposite opinion on those controversial points... and agree with 95% again with little pushback. Fridman softballs and is almost useless except as a megaphone. You'd rather have him cut out and have Netanyahu and Harari debate on their own merits.


> Because Fridman will literally have a guest with platform A, like Netanyahu, and agree on 95% of his controversial points with little pushback. And then immediately after have on Yuval Harari, with the opposite opinion on those controversial points...

Isn't that his whole schtick? Letting people voice their different opinions? Yes his questions are soft. And yes, I'd love to see Netanyahu and Harari debate - can you make that happen?


I don't actually see a problem with that ...

He is uncritical, yes. But he doesn't deny being uncritical.

It's a useful "service" to get people with diametrically opposite viewpoints to talk freely, and he does that well

The interviewer doesn't need to impose their world view on the guest, or the audience -- it's OK to let the audience make up their own minds.

Contradictions aren't inherently bad, either ... "consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds", etc.


Staying their and listening to people make false claims over and over again without challenging them on any of the lies or grandstanding is not a service to anyone. At the very least, no one should be looking at a Lex Friedman interview hoping to hear the truth of any kind.


It's a false dichotomy. Terry Gross does a great job of getting her subjects to talk freely, while still asking hard questions.


> The interviewer doesn't need to impose their world view on the guest, or the audience -- it's OK to let the audience make up their own minds.

What if the guest lies or omits crucial facts? How is the audience supposed to know that? Fact checking is the very basis of responsible journalism.


What if I go to a dinner party and someone lies or omits crucial facts?

I guess take it for what it is -- it's a conversation recorded on YouTube ... maybe don't be fooled by the suit and the mics. Anyone can buy those, there is no certification AFAIK :-)

(I'd also say that 95% of journalism you see on TV is not much different than a conversation recorded on YouTube, i.e. they don't do fact checking themselves.)


The dinner party isn't broadcast to millions of people. With a great audience comes great responsibility. "Just let people talk" doesn't cut it. Of course, there is also lots of bad journalism in traditional media.

> maybe don't be fooled by the suit and the mics. Anyone can buy those, there is no certification AFAIK :-)

:)


It's not useful if you don't push back on people who have agendas and who are willing to lie their teeth off to promote whatever grift they're pushing.


All these optimists want to say it will just "enhance" our abilities, not replace us. Well AI did "enhance" our chess playing skills, but it completely replaced the top skill level. That's ok for a game without economic value by being the best. But with these same people advocating that we can't stop because the potential economic value is so great and economics improves peoples' lives... We will use the replacement AI for economic value, not the inferior "enhanced" chess players.


Jeez, this resonates with me so much. In 2019 I was constantly on the upswing. But in 2020, it's been an intensely downward spiral since. I was under so much stress from a 60hr/wk job, isolated during covid with a partner who turned physically abusive and having constant mental breakdowns, on top of trying to endure it all for a once in a lifetime housing opportunity, and then both of my parents ended up hospitalized in the ER from covid... I remember feeling at the time that my mental gears were breaking and doing permanent damage. Those 6 months felt like such a short time that fundamentally changed me from a cheery person to permanently somber.

I quit my job in 2021, physically incapable of continuing and wanting to end it all, thinking if I just make it through each month it'll eventually get better and it never has. It only got worse like the universe kept ratcheting up the difficulty. My abusive partner only got more abusive as I didn't have a job (but paid all our bills) and couldn't muster any energy towards relationship milestones as the abuse and depression crippled me. Years of enduring this only led to now being abandoned and feeling worse than ever, like there is no upside worth the calamitous downsides in life.


Sorry to hear that, really sorry.

One thing I dont get with similar stories - you felt things are seemingly going to shit in relationship yet no reaction, no quitting but maybe even double down? Abusive people will be abusive with no easy fix in sight, sucking it up for some real estate opportunity is a sure recipe for disaster and misery and no money gained will ever compensate for that. Thats one of 101 of life, there shouldnt be a need to really walk through it to confirm this. Kids do complicate this massively but you dont mention them.

Same for work it seems, working on edge of what you can handle means any little bad thing happening on top can send you over and down the spiral of breakdown.

I dont want to bash anybody and its more for others who will one day experience similar things - listen to your body, its telling you tons of things, and not for just fun. Its your best buddy so dont neglect it, there is no replacement and it really gets weaker with age, sooner than you would like.

I see a lot of high performers ending up similarly - very narrow focus on one brilliance ie work, but deep neglect of the rest. Never a nice story at the end. Nobody will be happy when dying from how much they worked or which investments worked out. If one really has to, set clear short term goals for when to stop it and have a bit of discipline (ie dont get used to better lifestyle that more money brings requiring you to continue).


You will hear success stories of those who got out and made themselves better. You won't hear the numerous stories of those who broke up, realized they're hyperdependent on a romantic relationship and don't have the strength to do without - or those who break up but end up with another abusive partner.

I doubt there is good statistics or research on this, but anecdotally, it doesn't seem uncommon.

You also mention "neglect of rest", and in relationships you might also say neglect of the self - but often it's not explicit neglect, instead it's not even being used to or knowing how to recognize or fulfil those needs. As an example, after my tinnitus got worse, rest is simply so hard to achieve that it doesn't matter if I make it my top priority. People saying I need to rest more obviously annoys me, and claiming I'm neglecting rest would be borderline disrespectful.

Not comparing tinnitus and workaholism, just making a general statement about the use of "neglect" here.


> you felt things are seemingly going to shit in relationship yet no reaction, no quitting but maybe even double down? Abusive people will be abusive with no easy fix in sight

I loved them so much that constantly fighting and being abused was still better than their absence now. I believed we would both turn things around, but it only got worse every few months. Being in this situation felt like a 90/100 misery scale, that I couldn't bear, and leaving would be asking me to volunteer for 95/100

> Same for work it seems, working on edge of what you can handle means any little bad thing happening on top can send you over and down the spiral of breakdown.

Also thought it would be temporary and not do permanent damage. In the midst of crisis, I'm thinking "just get through this month, it will get better" and then before you know it years have went by and all those months accumulated their toll


Every single person who winds up in that situation has said or thought exactly that about someone else. There’s a reason all this advice is a cliche, and there’s a reason we have to keep giving it, and just consider yourself lucky that you still don’t understand why that is. It’s harder to be human than it seems.


Sometimes, you just have to walk out on it all. Pack a go-back, open the door and go. You are not the domain of some vampire of suck to park their life in. You can just leave them and start over. Relationships should not a trap door function.


That sounds really rough. Here if you ever want to talk about it. Sorry.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: