This interview is 2 months old, but I haven’t seen it discussed so far and given the news about reddit’s new cryptobeaniebabies, here it goes. This is a critique of the tech hype cycle, LLMs, VR, the metaverse failure, NFTs and cryptocurrencies with a refreshing historical awareness of past attempts that failed, like second life and VR games. Adam Conover’s interviewee is Dan Olson https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7v5qq/meet-the-guy-who-went-viral-on-youtube-for-explaining-how-nfts-crypto-are-a-poverty-trap

    • Gsus4@feddit.nlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You mean Adam Conover’s interviews? Me neither, this is completely new to me too, he’s like a literate Joe Rogan and less formal Lex Friedman :)

        • Gsus4@feddit.nlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I didn’t know Dan, but when I heard he actually studied theology, I finally understood his meticulous understanding and debunking of the crypto delusion, NFTs and tech hypecycles in general, now I’m watching “line go up” :)

  • Peanut@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Does nobody remember how utterly uninformed Conover’s previous takes on ai were? And I still know whole communities of people who basically live in vr. They are doing just fine.

    Look here if you just want to hate on tech and tech enthusiasts. Don’t look here for a reasoned and thoughtful conversation.

    Also can we stop trying to paint AI enthusiasts in a bad light by acting like everyone into AI is an NFT grifter?

    It’s intellectually dishonest.

    The way it’s usually presented would make you think we have Yann LeCun and Melanie Mitchell in full fratboy drip promoting their NFTs.

    • Gsus4@feddit.nlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yes, he probably does not have the right technical background for this, but he has a broader view of the impact of technology on society (e.g. Lex Friedman does have the technical backgound, but he never seems to challenge the process in which innovation seems to herd people into bandwagons), but the discussion is meta enough to cover common trends in tech and the hype cycle that overlay legitimate research.

      It’s a flawed interview (they spend too long venting about Zuckerberg) but they make some good points. My other complaint is that I would have preferred to have read about the main points in a page in 10 minutes instead of 1h, but if you’re doing dishes it’s enjoyable :)