Awful interviewers! I want to see Eric in conversation on this topic but with a good interviewers who know when to shut up. Who would be a good alternative?
… while sabotaging it by himself. Why not start with the narrow but clearly defined topic of BTC instead directly trying to escape from this planet/ solar system. Why to hit some DTM rhen from beginning?!
It seems to me the whole issue Weinstein has, whether he wants to say it directly or not, is that BTC maximalism currently prefers ossification of the protocol, not building on it. Not to shill ETH, but that's literally what separates its community from BTC. You can't "solve everything" with BTC because you can't build a new voting system on top of it. You can't better allocate funding to public goods. You can't reconstruct markets for artist reimbursement to improve efficiency. You can't work anonymously and remotely for a decentralized organization (DAO) with anyone in the world and redefine and reinvent what the "work week" and "corporations" look like. You CAN do all of that with Ethereum, or at least people are actively working to build towards that future. So of course Peter and Travis are going to just stare blankly back at Eric when he asks how BTC can fix things outside of just being a new form of money. The entire BTC maximalist community is built on ossifying the protocol and NOT on changing or building new things. It's literally just "buy and hodl and maybe you'll have some financial freedom later".
I left with the same sentiment. Eric would be better matched conversationally with Robert Breedlove, Michael Saylor, Peter Diamandis, Plan B, William Clemente III, or similar.
@fuk urseth his point is clear, for what the fuck are you hodling those btc, if is all you'r doing in your life?! get a real perspective in life, after you can provide for yourself and your family, all this value must be used in some way , to create and made things and experiences that have a meaning to you
eric they pretend to love you now but just wait till you say something wrong about bitcoin just like elon and they rip your head off for it be careful man these bitcoiners can be dangerous to your health and career... o and also your wallet too lol
@fuk urseth you dont get the point, the questions are: How to change the "system"? / what is wrong with the system? Eric suggested show the CPI is calculated wrong, but do whatever u think challenges the "system" and can be proven time and time again. imagine triing to convince the church in the middle age that the earth inst a plate and cyrcles around the solar system. Bitcoin as decentralized store of value is not the "hole" solution, you need mathematical / physical proves, if your not smart enough to solve this yourself but you made a killing in bitcoin, why not hire some professionals to research. it looks like the bitcoin millionaires are just like the fiat milllionaires and keep the mooney for themself, and dont improve the bitcoin network against CPI or whatever fight.
He can't convince them to go along with what he wants, the conversation to convince them is "too boring" and then lastly his response is to "buy me a sales team". He may be a god at math but he came across as a complete moron here.
@@Trees36547 agreed, Eric was really not selling his position. Why should bitcoiners fund your moon expidition? Why should we go after the economists? All he did was strawman the whole time and i dont think he really did say anything insightful at all.
Eric was making a point o being a difficult prick. Like when he unbelievably went into dictionary definition of money forgery when Peter was only making a half rhetorical point, about his opinion on money printing. Eric was being a total douche
@@Trees36547 they all did 😀😀😀 and that’s my problem with Bitcoin people in general.. No matter how much they try - they always sound like they are still trying to convince you to buy Bitcoin 😀 and I am just never convinced - even if I did have the money ;)
PRO TIP: don't open the podcast by complaining how hard it was to schedule the guest (as if it is their fault they couldn't come earlier) Ouch! Maybe, just maybe thank them for sharing their time and unique opinions with you and your subscribers...
This conversation makes me appreciate podcast hosts like Joe Rogan even more. The constant defensiveness and unwillingness to entertain and explore Eric's views prevented a much more interesting conversation from taking place.
I agree, but at the same time Eric's line of conversation is very academic, barely comprehended by the most of the audience. Eric has the fault that if he is not understood or misunderstood is the fault of the listener and not his. I believe he has to be able to educate his audience otherwise it will remain in the cloud of the "elitism" which I believe he enjoys with the only difference...he wants his own cloud!!
I know. listening to them makes me bearish on cypto, in the sense of a contrarian indicator sort of thing. You just think, people who are like this cannot be correct.
@@MH7919 lol Not sure dude. The rate of loss is pretty extreme. My brain would have to be better at printing new brain cells than Biden is at printing USD. Not sure that's even possible.
I feel for Eric. He probably felt like he was talking to a wall. They kept him around their perspectives and never really fully explored his perspective on Bitcoin. I felt frustrated watching this.
That's what you took from the interaction. What Peter is essentially telling Eric is that for his ideas to grow steam, it needs distillation. A lot of bitcoiners understand that CPI is garbage to begin with, so to think Peter doesn't comprehend his underlying assertions is arrogant on your part. The problem Peter has is the execution and if Eric's way of going about it would matter in grand scheme of things( most people don't care if an intellectual battle is won as its not their circle of competence to begin with.)
It’s evident Eric has a more open mind to where this great project goes, his stance is one of genuine interest not just of wealth. He wants to explore the full range of what crypto is capable of, as stated early on, Paul is more influenced by his desire to preserve and generate wealth and it clouds his ability to abstract these ideas away from himself.
He certainly has the patience of a saint when he chooses to. I've also seen him not, and let people have it immediately. This doesn't happen unless he either knows and respects the person and can trust that disagreement is just a blip in their relationship, or if he suspects the person he's talking to is a bad actor. Here he seems to have gone in with a decision to respect and be patient. I really admire the depth of his character, especially considering his level of intelligence. Most of his life has likely been like he's communicating with children. Must be frustrating as hell for him. lol
This could be too simplistic, but what I took away from Eric is that we bitcoiners are all about “opting out” but there are systemic things that need to be directly addressed. We are taking our ball and leaving the current system for a new playground. We trash talk as we walk away, and puff our chests, but we are *merely* opting out and are off to create a new game on a new playground, but meanwhile the old system is still running things. I think he’s saying merely opting out is not good enough because elements of the old system needs to be addressed or the new system will always be hamstrung. We need to go toe to toe, punch the other kids in the mouth, and directly address what’s wrong with their playground; and he believes the approach of traditional economists are currently the biggest thing wrong with the existing system.
Well said, I agree. What is the bottom line thing to be accomplished? I think that is what Eric is asking. The scope of Eric's answer to that question is broader than most people can comprehend (and I am guilty). At least he is asking if cancelling the Fed, etc., is not the target then what is? The step missing is that there needs to be a consensus on the target, then Peter pointing out that it needs to be less academic and more folksy so that we can gain broad adoption by the bitcoin-er masses. Only at that point can we ask what are the concrete steps to proceed.
I feel like Eric suffers from a nostalgic delusion that the system was competently run in the past. The US was positioned to benefit from the fact that the previous powers bombed themselves out of relevance at the beginning of the last century. And it seems like he perceives the resulting prosperity as an output of institutional competence rather than a mad coke binge that has spiraled until now. Taking our ball and finding a new playground is the sane move IMO
I agree that's what Eric said. But if BTC builds the better system, like a Black Hole, its greater density will suck the energy out of the legacy system. Frontal attacks rarely work. The go around or orthoganol attacks work.
Hard listen, that exposes where the space is lacking. Hopefully someone/group will pick it up and dive deeper. Lambos are the very opposite of where we could eventually be.
This. I noted the moment, 1:21:50 when Eric realizes they lack a grand vision. One thing I think about Bitcoin sometimes is that a lot of people have realized its valuable, but nobody is quite sure why. We're all trying to describe the elephant by touching pieces of it, but nobody has quite yet seen the fucking beast and said, here's the plow we'll harness it to that will change the world. And maybe no such plow exists, I don't know, but it could exist.
I think that is how it grows in the beginning. These cryptos seems to gain in value closer to Metcalfes law which I do not see discussed yet in the conversation. BTC has value because the network continues to grow, the narrative continues to grow.
Eric's patience and ability to clearly articulate the same interesting idea again and again 100 different ways is unfortunately the only impressive thing about this 2.5 hours.
1:54:49. It's your issue dude! Take some initiative. I've watched countless videos of yours, and you're always complaining about how everyone else isn't fighting the fight you want fought. Go fight the fight yourself. Rally people behind you. You want the Bitcoin community's backing? Do what Michael Saylor did, make the rounds on RU-vid, explain your case about how incompetent the economists are. You want specific help, specifically state what sort of help you're looking for. You're just coming across as a complainer who is dressing it up in pseudo intellectualism. If you uniquely see what the problem is, then it's your unique task to deal with it. Stop trying to offload your God given burned to others. Every man is responsible to the degree he can see, if you're the one with the sight, you're the one with the responsibility to champion the vision.
Although I think Eric is overall pretty brilliant in this talk, I do agree with you that this is Eric's one short coming and he may not realize it, which is he's not an organizer. He probably won't develop that skill unless someone like Peter Theil helps him get there. Eric may be at his limit being an evangelist. However that's very valuable, he's a great thinker.
You needed Breedlove in this conversation. Weinstein is operating on a higher philosophical plane than the rest of the conversation. Thank you for this!
Eric is on such a higher frequency then these two, he's constantly trying to lift up the conversation and they constantly dumb it back down . It's a shame they can't see through their own basic level perceptions to take the conversation elsewhere
Are you TRYING to sound culty? The more of this Wienstien brother I get exposed to the more I think he's a grifter who relies on people's fear of being thought stupid if they pount out the things he's saying make little sense.
Something is wrong with Peter in this video. Or Eric is so above his league it shows his true colors that I had not seen before. In any case this chat is very unbalanced. Anyways, Travis does alright imo.
@@vakeone and every time a topic comes up he can't discuss he says I don't want to effing talk about that. Why not? Tell us why you think that's wrong. He doesn't care about falsification he cares about appearing smarter than he is.
@@LoneWolfDion Exactly, I don't understand how people can't see this. He dodges questions, re-phrases questions to his terms, then answers his new question. He can't accept the terms if they aren't presented by him.
The guy interviewing is obviously intelligent, the problem is he is too self absorbed in a trap I like to call intellectual masterbation, it’s a pseudo intellectualism where people regurgitate what innovators and people that think outside the box would say but without the original connection. It’s erudite but within a box, specialized and worn out. So he’s smart, but smart isn’t enough when talking on this scale. You have to be creative, intuitive, borderline mad, and eccentric to do these sorts of conversations justice, having a decent IQ and some knowledge isn’t enough, and in fact can be extremely limiting. You can’t pour water into a full cup, and you can’t solve problems with the same level of thinking that caused it in the first place.
Breedlove's a hack, his conservative libertarian ideal could only be realized through unfettered capitalism, resulting in the absolute consolidation of capital in a tiny cabal, as described by Marx, and demonstrated by Neoliberalism. A strong, robust, cohesive, prosperous society requires some form of government, with the power to regulate the market for the benefit of all stakeholders, ie. the working classes, not just the bourgeoisie, capitalist classes.
Eric’s stance here seems similar to the Lex Fridman interview where he pushes Lex on why he doesn’t give MIT mgt the middle finger. He seems to want a bottom up revolution by fringe intellectuals backed with fu 💰 And he’s right of course. Economics, physics and cosmology need attraction of fearless brilliance; not law and business school
Yes, that's what exactly I thought after listening to this conversation. Bitcoin definitely has the opportunity to bring the F U money which would be a great start. But the problem he wants to solve is way too big for Bitcoin alone to solve.
Law and business schools need actual brilliance as opposed to assholes contemplating critical race theory and human resource management. People who are innovating new legal and business structures which actually solve real problems, as opposed to shuffle wealth around.
Eric was remarkably patient. I share his frustration. The thing to do when you get filthy rich is to do what only rich people can - upset the status quo. Funding a think tank with goals like Eric has is one of those things.
The bell curve is real ( distribution law ). A lot of People with crypto money care 0% for making the case of Bitcoin ( etc. ) come to real life. Only making the money, nothing wrong here......but that is ALL????
Peter needs to feel less threatened and just let the man engage in the thought experiment. This was not posed as a debate, its supposed to be an interview. Eric could have taken this so much deeper. The role of the interviewer should be to amplify not detract from the conversation. Please spend some time watching Tom Bilyeu on Impact Theory.
It's like Eric didn't want to have an actual conversation about anything, he just knee-jerk shut everything down. "I don't want to talk about that." Grandstanding and pretending he's holding the higher intellectual ground because he's somehow "above" talking about Austrian economics or Hayek or whatever. The youtube comments are all about how "peter is outgunned and cant keep up with Erics huge IQ". The whole thing was a joke. Nothing of value here.
Eric Weinstein is brilliant. The interviewer is embarrassing. Doesn't seem be able to open his mind to Eric's ideas and suggestions. I hope he doesn't reflect the wider bitcoin community, although he refers to some of them.
Quite an interesting conversation but I find that the endgoal was missing from the talk. What happens once you've proven wrong the economist? What kind of society does Eric want to emerge out of his war?
If I were to take the worst case interpretation I can see, it's about an autistic guy in his 50s finally proving that he was right to the guys who bullied him in college, and he can't let it go and needs an "I told you so" moment, even if it counts for nothing in an argument most people can't understand. If I were to take a more charitable view, it's that probably Eric understands a more accurate and honest way to calculate our taxes and social security and such, but the government doesn't care because they have the monopoly on violence and stealing stuff, and are perfectly happy being dumb so long as they get to keep the money, and the stooges he's against are in on if not central to that. I hate to say it, but at the end of the day, currency is perhaps a matter of force and who is able and willing to use it. What's more, while I hate central banking and money printing, what if that's the safe way to steal from us? What if you when get rid of the safe way, ie running the printers around the clock in the back room, the alternative is thugs with clubs and guns coming around to claim your gold or bitcoin or whatever the old fashioned way? Arbitrarily taxing 75% of your savings right out od your bank accounts, or random extortionate property taxes you would have to sell to afford? What if the world is more peaceful because theft is done with stealth instead of brutality, and if you get rid of the stealth you bring back the brutality?
Eric doesn't necessarily have an answer but explores it deeply in this podcast (skip the intro) ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-_b4qKv1Ctv8.html
Someone who really knows what they are talking about is able to explain it to people who have no idea about the subject...sounding smart and being smart are two very different things...although I can't speculate on IQ, maybe the IQ gap is actually huge, but I don't really give a fuck about someone's IQ when it comes to expressing ideas.
this is like btc talking to safemoon - Eric needs to talk to someone more qualified or an entire group of people like - jeff booth, m sailor and others
Eric always tells others that he is bored of certain topics but never considers that everyone else may be bored of hearing about gauge theory for the ten thousandth time.
Turns out Peter is just full of controversial sound bites to grab people’s attention but can’t offer enough original ideas to continue the conversation.
@@StanislavKozlovsk I much prefer Peter to Pomp. Pomp lives up to his name, Peter has many moments of humility. Of the two I know which one I would much prefer to have a beer (a pint) with
antonopolous thinks covid is real and that we should all wear masks and be vaccinated. if he’s that stupid to believe the above, you should want nothing to do with what he has to say..
I agree, would really love to see Eric and Andreas get down to where the rubber meets the road. Unless Eric is just going to keep playing devil's advocate non stop. Was kind of annoying to see him say "he's really not that smart", then when Peter agrees say "actually he is pretty smart though"
"The ethos of software is: we are here to destroy things that look old". Bravo! Bravissimo! After 25y in the software business, I could not have phrased this truth any better. It goes so far as software destroying other software, just for the sake of doing something "new".
Bitcoin is the same system installed by the City of London, it is a fiat based gambling casino, its a rigged game, a pyramid scheme. The government is involved, places Bitcoin is "allowed" to be purchased is the same places the of the USD controllers. I set up a wallet but can't purchase without giving up my social security number. That means its not private, its not peer to peer, and its not confiscatable, therefore it is corrupted and the "white paper" setting up Bitcoin is meaningless.
@@TobeornottooB Ever heard of a Sha356 ? Public / private key cryptography? It’s not hard to understand, that’s what Bitcoin is built on. Totally secure. If you let your bitcoin be stored by someone else, then not secure. If you lose the private keys, then you lose your bitcoin, the private key is the only way to move bitcoin on the block chain
The conversation that bitcoiners needed to hear. Many intelligent individuals like Eric are cheering on Bitcoin, and the community just resorts to spouting memes in defense of their own personal interests. Do you want to change the world, or just change your fortune?
I don't know what you were watching, but Weinstein did his usual piss-poor communications job while falling back on being patronising. We know you're clever Eric... the challenge is to explain yourself to people who aren't as clever as you are. You failed.
@@winsomehax Exactly. I'm reading the comments and i can't help but think a lot of them are enamored by Eric's alleged intelligence rather than being appalled at how he wasn't able to distill such "complex" ideas into simple digestable forms. So much for intelligence. Being a teacher and a good teacher lies in how well you disseminate complex ideas.
I guess his aim is clearly not to "dumb down" the complex things he is talking about so we can understand... He is completely rejecting the job to be a good teacher. He absolutely knows his audience is small and most people cant understand his points. But he doesnt care. He is not an educator. He's purposely provoking the curiosity of a few.... I guess I should do a ton of research and verify that what he said makes sense... Let's not trust he is making sense, let's verify.
@@bisiriyutajudeen5728 he made two clear suggestions. 1. Dismantle the authority of the economists by proving their models and method are Hocus pocus compared to more advanced math and models 2. Pick some human life changing priorities and invest real dollars in them - his personal pick is advanced physics science research.
Eric: “Spend your bitcoin fighting for my ideas” Peter: “We don’t understand your ideas. You haven’t explained them properly.” Eric: “Bah this is boring, I thought bitcoin is supposed to solve everything.”
@@anandasamaHe mainly asked the question "what battles are you fighting ?" And the only real answer when it comes to bitcoin community as of now is "None" I think that's why he is frustrated, and I can understand it
@@maximem2200 only after he was dissatisfied with the answer of "reliable money". I'd guess the source of his frustration is the "and then" part isn't so obvious yet.
i get the feeling that Peter tried to tell Eric, if you want to go to war you need an army, and to get an army you need to make people able to follow you or at least rally them. i think the person Eric needs to talk to if he wants to go to war without an army is Max Keiser. seems right up his alley.
@@BogdanManciu indeed. i wanted to say "fuck off, not your personal army!" but i always thought economists know what's the real inflation they just lie about it. and the thought of them not even being able to calculate it is novel and very pleasurable to entertain...
There’s a difference between being an articulate advocate of Bitcoin and a thoughtful intelligent man able to relate to fundamental inquiries. Eric pulled the veil off Peter as anything other than a carnival barker for Bitcoin.
All respect to Peter. He is way above his intellectual pay grade to carry this discussion with Eric. I hope that Eric continues this fight and finds his allies in this community.
Tbf Peter acknowledged that from the beginning and sought to bring someone, who could unpack the issues Eric was explaining. Eric's problem is that hes smart enough to understand things but not smart enough to explain them to the layman. Hes so far up the dunning Krueger scale that he cant comprehend how dumb most people are.
It's the first time I see bitcoin maxis sharing their views. It's really uninspiring. I see a lot of elitism, self-service and cynism here. No wonder Eric was frustrated. I love how he called them out so many times. There are so many great new blockchain projects that work on changing the statusquo. If you do not innovate you go backwards.
Between this episode and the "Weinstein Series" with Robert Breedlove, to me, the conversation that Eric wants is most likely to take place with Michael Saylor. Specifically because Saylor has set-up the Saylor Academy and is planning long term uses for his personal Bitcoin, alongside Microstrategy's holdings. He sees the benefit of reducing the costs of PHDs and advancing technology, physics, and other STEM fields. I believe this is what Eric wants to discuss most.
Eric is ahead of the curve with his perspectives for a rebirth in civilisation. He sees Bitcoin as the trojan horse leading us into the next Paradigm. We need to ask different questions to a man with his vision.
I wish you would have stopped thinking yourself smarter than Eric, stop being cute and clever, and stop trying to teach him something.. So that instead, you could have unlocked his knowledge and his perspective on something so important to you.. Your bias is showing.. Eric was begging you to innovate this conversation and you failed for like an hour.. Let's see if you can turn it around by the end
Eric’s monologue at 2:19:00, the vision he had for what unstoppable decentralized computing and cyber worlds can do, is literally the pitch for ethereum lol
His vision is from 2010/2011. That was the mindset then. Bitcoin was huge, the possibilities were endless. Then we fell into the trap of Greg Maxwell, limited OP_RETURN sizes, and dictators running communication channels. Here we are!
@@KyleDunnIt He did, though. Lower inflation means they can manipulate tax brackets and continue to claim that you owe such and such when you actually owe much less. Put more simply, economists were wrong about last month's job numbers, because they're full of academic theory that's bogus.
Frustrating that Peter can't keep up with the conversation. Seems like he's just totally lost. Would be great to have Vitalik, AAntonopolis, Nic Carter, Alex Becker and Richard Heart in a 3 hr round table with EW. Now, THAT would be amazing!
These guys were basically stumbling around the concept of governance. Eric's point was, 'if BTC burns down the system what do we build and how do we decide?' He has a fair point, and that is why I am not a BTC maximalist. I wouldn't touch anything that tries to compete as decentralized money, but there are other good consensus protocols that can solve different problems. The reality is he is right, we need to build an entirely new economy and governance structure based off of peer to peer, not just money.
I think I get Eric's idea but isn't he just impatient. Bitcoin is disrupting technology but that doesn't mean it happens overnight. Talking about Star Wars didn't Luke suffer from his own arrogance and confront Vader only to be beaten and crushed? He didn't become á Jedi overnight. But Eric wants Luke to fight him now. Eric bitcoin will do its own thing in its own time.
Agreed !! Going head on full blast ,is a sure way to loose the race !! It leaking into the system a little bit at a time is the way in my opinion.. The only attention bitcoin gets from the elites is price action attention The longer it stays that way the better imo... but I'm just a pleb but sounds like a bad idea to me ,it's too early
The average bitcoin investor is not going to "pick a fight" with academic economists. The average bitcoin investor just wants to have a reasonable retirement without having all of their life savings inflated away. If anything, they may want the inflation thesis to play out so that their bitcoins will have more purchasing power.
@@3thereal Bitcoin and Ethereum and Dogecoin are essentially identical cryptocurrencies. They have zero inherent investment value. They merely have a perceived investment value and sometimes a transactional utilty value for commerce. Art is a better investment as if others don't value it enough to buy it off you then you can still look at it and appreciate it aesthetically. Elon Musk temporarily affected the percieved investment value of Bitcoin. The investment value is an illusion. It is inherently worthless. Gold still wins as it has practical uses besides being just rare: conductivity, jewelry. Bitcoin may be okay as an investment until 2022 when the midterms will be won by the Republican Party and the inflationary policies of Biden will be restricted and the US economy have a delayed surge out of the pandemic Lockdown, transferring into Gold ahead of their win whilst Gold is undervalued as a store as Bitcoin is temporarily preferred will gain a boost that will compensate for any perceived late losses from jumping off Bitcoin whilst it is still on the rise, as Gold will rise after 2022 as funds decamp from crypto into Gold. There is zero long term future for crypto to change the world.
@@____uncompetative " will be won by the Republican Party and the inflationary policies of Biden will be restricted" might want to go back and see who started up the printing press there, bud.
@fuk urseth I think he is talking about the end of ww2. That is arguably the last war that the average american even slightly understands why the fuck we are even there. Ww2 makes some sense. After that, not so much. Out of sight, out of mind. Also literally no threat of it ever reaching our land since then. Anybody afraid of Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam invading the United states. Dont think so. I dont agree with a lot of what the guy says either just another academic who likes to hear himself talk but atleast he is searching for new ideas.
He's talking about the world, not just america. Relative world peace in the last 75 years is pretty obvious ..ww3 hasn't happened yet, i know cause we aren't using rocks yet
The nervous nature of the other two to Eric’s presence was palatable, even through video. Not dissing, but observed. I agree, so in the end what!? What are we doing here.. ?
relatively painful to watch... the linear bitcoin maxi thinking with all the classic arguments are showing and contributing to a one-sided conversation. Maybe next time get someone like Nic Carter to moderate
Brilliant episode. Eric Weinstein really challenged you guys using Socratic questioning. His basic point was that you maximalists should stop talking your own book because while you have this amazing invention and technology, you don't know what to do with it or how to use it properly. He really tore you a new one on this.
Please do tell us what his best point was. Is it better than any point random people on twitter make on a daily bases ? Any new revelations or angle we haven't all already heard before ?
He’s a literal devils advocate in flesh form, not to break down an argument but to make it more resilient. He’s challenging the community to think past “fed bad mmkay” and “to da moon”. It’s like giving a remote tribe in the Amazon access to a ufo machine, and them building a hut on top of it. Blockchain technology has the ability to literally change every aspect of society possibly for the better, and all we can focus on is if Bitcoin is in a bill or bear market. It’s one of the reason I believe in Cardano, because Charles gets it.
So basically, Eric wants someone to give him money so he can live his dream of battling economists on a big stage.. And somehow it's a limitation of Bitcoin that he hasn't found anyone that owns BTC willing to finance him?
No he doesnt understand why no one that has made F U money from bitcoin/whales aren't doing it themselves since it is A) Morally correct B) Mathematically correct and C) In their own financial interest.
@@DG-kr8pt the thought of an economic theory "rebound relationship" isn't very attractive for anyone. Especially if you have doubts that the field of economics has anything more impactful to add to reality versus the long list of more important problems to solve (education, energy, etc). High caliber math applied to the social science foundations in economics seems like a house of cards made from different suits.
Peter has never been a good listener. He was looking for validation of Bitcoin and he could not accept Eric’s scepticism. Still, I think Eric’s deeper thinking theories came across. All was not lost in this conversation.
Bitcoiners are just so cringey sometimes - always making simplistic jokes about highly complex issues. My advice to Peter is please do not try to take on Taleb.
Eric was great and brilliant -- I loved the concept. I wish Peter would have let Eric get to his point (which was very easy to understand) and beyond. I don't know why Travis was there. Bitcoiners are a community, decentralized yes, but still a community. I want to like this video for Eric, but I can't because of Peter's willing and deliberate ignorance and Travis's pointless expositing. :/
Holy cow Peter you just completely missed the point. Here's one way to sell it to the bitcoiners capable of creating the memes to take down the CPI economists: If you create a public understanding of the fact those economists don't know what they are talking about and are holding the economy to ransom, then bitcoin price go up. win win. simple. you don't have to understand the precise theory, just that the economists can be proven wrong. pass it on to a bitcoiner with sufficient economic understanding and wealth. that's all Eric said.
This is powerful stuff. One of the deepest, most visceral conversations I've witnessed in this topic. I don't think that Eric wanted, or expected, Peter to match him intellectually, or give him any answers. Instead, Eric needed his platform to declare war to the Fed, a summons to engage in active hostilities. The message will certainly be received by the intended audience, and it is likely that future (and more productive) discussions will take place behind closed doors. Genius move. I'm still unsure whether Bitcoin is ready (established and mature enough) to become Eric's ally, on what will become a very bloody battle; it would, nonetheless, be a 'make it or break it' type of endeavour...
I wondered if this would be another Eric video where he ultimately says he wants to leave the planet ... and I was not disappointed! LOL what a loon ... maybe Elon can build him a custom individual rocket to blast off and go to wherever he thinks life will 'have a chance' ... actually, I'm surprised he doesn't just want to go into space, even just orbit around the earth, to return when humanity has blown itself up so his noble self can hit the reset button. 😂😂😂
Eric's criticism of Bitcoin is that it's boring, but it needs to be boring. Eric's criticism of Bitcoiners is that they are not activists because they don't buy him a research institute to bring down the current economic academic mainstream, but Bitcoin doesn't need a research institute for that - just time to exist (boringly) and prove the academic mainstream wrong.
I think you misrepresent him. He's not trying to beat them, he's challengeing them, as current leaders of the space and future members of the 'Fuck You Money Class' to ask better questions.
+ I agree with Eric that the actions and the aspirations ( dreams ) of the crypto community are too small. Wishing only to be rich while our world is not stable and if it "crashes" we would very well go extinct, we can't afford that. I am talking about the growth of governmental powers in the West/free world. So I am doing my part, specific actions but very few individuals have the power to create a change in society at all, I am not one of those people, but some of the people in the crypto community has this power. Being richer than yesterday does not exclude protecting the society we live in. I am all for making money and providing to family in a mostly capitalistic society. Please use accordingly and sit, think about where we are headed to and the words of Eric about it.
The only solution that Bitcoin provides is to be the secure savings account for the world, which in our current system, is a BIG THING. At the end of the day, the goal of humans is to ensure that they can take care of their loved ones. You need money to do so. We save so that we can buy resources for our and our family’s survival. We currently have the wrong goal. The goal of the world should be to make our essential resources UNLIMITED. When that is achieved, who cares about money.
Yeah, the natural price of things must approach zero. All cost is friction, which technology eliminates. Given exponential technological development, we will get exponential abundance, and we will all move up Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
Anyone else wishing Eric would talk with Richard Heart? Couldn't help but have HEX in the back of my mind the whole time... Side note, how is Peter even taken seriously after his decimation by RH?
Eric is heartily describing Thucydides Trap, wants to enter as a contender ( with a group of minds that relate to him economically) by challenging the current dominant economic powers and win. The only way to beat a trap is to avoid it, but the only way to challenge the current power structure is to engage. So how do you challenge or re establish dominant economic power and avoid the Trap? The interesting thing he said around this was referring to how long we have been taking a nap since WW2. From WW1 to WW2 is where our current economic power structure evolved, so is BTC peaceful transition or the precipice of war? Is it just a distraction of hope before the nap is over?
Eric speaks like a fortune cookie - he has this every conversation where he is the guest...so frustrating - they do everything they can to accommodate him and he keeps saying - 'this is boring, this is the wrong conversation' and then 'when will you build something' you list examples of people building something and its back to 'this is the wrong conversation - he literally has an open mike for hours...
So true. You ever see the south park episode when all the ppl who drove electric cars farted would smell their farts and fill San Fran with smug? That’s Eric.
Valid points and I mostly agree. There is an arrogance there. However, he is essentially saying that bitcoin-ers do no explain what the ultimate goal is besides a yacht. I felt like he was repeatedly trying to push his premise of destroying the intrenched economic theory of today. That sounds good to me. Peter rightfully challenged Eric to explain in layman terms. Maybe the problem is that it is not an easy thing to do without the audience having a minimum level of economic theory comprehension. I do agree with Peter that it would take an enormous effort to convince the bitcoin-er community as whole to follow 1 persons lead (Eric).
Eric is a professional complainer and loves to get people to fight fog. "Put some money behind it". Well actually, I want to take money out of it. Job #1 is taking control of the money from anyone - that's what Bitcoin represents. Once you have that, then you are 90% there. When you allow money printing you allow the fantasy to continue. What Eric wants is to be recognised as the smart boy who figured it out, but wants everyone else to do the grunt work for him. "Bitcoin fixes this" is meme... a shorthand... when you have sound money you expose the rest of the system to reality BEFORE reality comes along and kicks in the door. It doesn't matter what Twitter silliness goes on. That's all just fun and in the process it exposes huge numbers of people to the idea that printing money is corrupt... that politicians are not fit guardians of monetary policy. Eric can't stand this, because in his heart... he sees himself as the king of an elite group of high IQ serious thinkers. He isn't. Never was. And moreover he doesn't understand how revolutions and movements work and change things. Eric wants someone to give him fiat money to do research in the fiat world. He wasn't getting it there. That's why he ended on being frustrated and "fucking tired of this". Peter correctly challenged him to come back with a whiteboard. He won't. Also: Eric, if by some chance you read this, you spent the entire conversation attacking jokes/laser eyes on twitter. You sounded like an insecure, over-sensitive puffed up academic trying to make those who mocked him ashamed.
Wow. Thank you! Ever since I was introduced to this fat asshole by the troglodyte Joe Rogan , I have been thinking exactly what you wrote here. Yet, it always feels like everybody and their grandma got his back whenever he publishes something. Whatever happened to critical thinking, huh?
As much as Eric annoys me with some of his confident statements, I think he really elucidates and crystallizes sometimes; and when he says "bitcoiners are idealistic but also appreciate the esthetic of being a dick" was so perfect and true. We know we're at war. I am anyway. I don't care about attracting nice and blue-pilled people or "the masses". I'm confident that time will prove bitcoin superior not only to fiat, but to proof of stake and most other nonsense out there. I honestly think stoic tough love is the most effective long term persuasive tactic. Short term, it's often counterproductive I agree. It's even counterproductive to my social life. But again, I'm at war with the state because the state is at war with me. And anyone who doesn't see the world that way is very annoying and deserves my wrath. Or more specifically they deserve my truth. A dick is what some would call me, but I think there's a small audience (and don't we all only really care about our small audience?) out there that actually thinks I'm funny and effective. The masses will follow. I don't care about them. It's the diamonds in the rough I'm speaking to. The ones with a chance of having sense smacked into them with some harsh reality, and the hardest money man has ever known.
This is the most uncomfortable attempted discussion I have ever witnessed. The giga brain wants to share very detailed math points and future impacts of where this is going getting interrupted and hijacked over and over and over and over by 1 sided mouths. Hope Eric will discuss his thoughts with others in the future.
I know his fanboys will hate me for this but I find Eric utterly insufferable. His constant reframing of any statement or concept, his ego and elitism. Eric seems to look down from his ivory tower (and his nose) at the rest of humanity. If you look up pilpul in the dictionary it should have a photo of Mr. Weinstein.
