A big part of it is simply that he’s still very good at being loud and sounding intensely spooky. He also doesn’t do a very good job explaining his reasons and has leveled up his skill in explaining why it seems spooky to him without ever explaining the mechanics of the threat, because he did a good job thinking abstractly and did not do a good job compiling that into median-human-understandable explanation. Notice how oddly he talks—it’s related to why he realized there was a problem, I suspect.
I have seen him on video several times, including the Bankless podcast, and it has never seemed to me that he talks at all “oddly”. What seems “odd” to you?
I don’t know what you’re pointing to with that, but I don’t see any “rationalistic” manner that distinguishes him from, say, his interlocutors on Bankless, or from Lex Fridman. (I’ve not seen Eliezer’s conversation with him, but I’ve seen other interviews by Fridman.)
I mean, he’s really smart, and articulate, and has thought about these things for a long time, and can speak spontaneously and cogently to the subject, and field unprearranged questions. Being in the top whatever percentile in these attributes is, by definition, uncommon, but not “odd”, which means more than just uncommon.
A big part of it is simply that he’s still very good at being loud and sounding intensely spooky. He also doesn’t do a very good job explaining his reasons and has leveled up his skill in explaining why it seems spooky to him without ever explaining the mechanics of the threat, because he did a good job thinking abstractly and did not do a good job compiling that into median-human-understandable explanation. Notice how oddly he talks—it’s related to why he realized there was a problem, I suspect.
I have seen him on video several times, including the Bankless podcast, and it has never seemed to me that he talks at all “oddly”. What seems “odd” to you?
Talking like a rationalist. I do it too, so do you.
I don’t know what you’re pointing to with that, but I don’t see any “rationalistic” manner that distinguishes him from, say, his interlocutors on Bankless, or from Lex Fridman. (I’ve not seen Eliezer’s conversation with him, but I’ve seen other interviews by Fridman.)
I mean, he’s really smart, and articulate, and has thought about these things for a long time, and can speak spontaneously and cogently to the subject, and field unprearranged questions. Being in the top whatever percentile in these attributes is, by definition, uncommon, but not “odd”, which means more than just uncommon.