There were a lot of good parts but I’m disappointed that Lex barely made an attempt to ask questions about the negative aspects of Instagram. As Systrom himself said of the recent Facebook stuff, this is not new information! Instagram’s addictive qualities are a feature, not a bug? Other questions could’ve been “How do you feel about empowering the shallowest people in the world to make huge amounts of money?” Or “Would the world be a better place without Instagram.” Lex went into fanboy mode hard and didn’t display deep inquisitiveness that I love about him!,(reply>), ​@Wouter Post Ya! I think it's very possible that Lex does not know a single "normal" person and doesn't realize how big of a roll Instagram plays in many people's lives. It's tough to suggest to someone that the thing they devoted their life to is actually terrible but I think genuine scientific thinking would force you to at least ponder that idea.,(reply>), I would more than agree with you here.<br><br>I did not watch this podcast even partially since I read your comment, and supposed based on your comment that if what you say is true (and I think chances thereof are gargantuan) , watching the podcast would hurt me immensely.<br><br>I would, indeed considering your assessment on Lex' questions to be valid, suppose the conversation is Fridman's worst 'performance' hitherto, although I must admit I appreciated some of his previous podcasts and think his thinking there was rather specially profound. <br><br>This podcast, from your simple sketch of its content, would supposedly inter alia (alia being a plethora of cultural deformative processes) be leaving undiscussed the moronic culture which the structure of Instagram has for the last few years been solidifying amongst especially the very young, but accross American and international culture, shattering the sensibility of the world populace.<br><br>There is so much to say about these Bernaysian, Macluhanesque, Debordian issues at hand that I am aghast by Fridman's lack of putting those under his scrutiny. It would require a lot of time and energy to explain what exactly these are (some readers and viewers here may understand or agree) and it is extremely psychologically painful on countless levels that Lex should have done at least exactly that, and did not, particularly because he is considered (I suppose from a, regarding that assumption, relatively low-information position in Europe) an intellectual bastion, a leading figure in the meta-reflective posse of Silicon Valley and if even he does not grasp these basics I think that would be ominous for future developments coming from the valley's cradle (or is that tautological?). By all means, someone (perhaps Lex himself? since maybe he is just playing with his viewers  after all with this then joke of an interview and is no fool, or is he?) should make a podcast considering all that. I certainly would make it, if I had the time-energy expenditure position to do so, and while unfortunately I don't have that, perhaps someone else (Lex, are you there?) should. <br><br>But in sum, Silicon Valley hubris appears increasingly horrid considering this rendition of Lex' podcast.<br><br>Cheers to all involved anyway, hope we'll see some interesting perspectives on this issue soon (before it's too late, or is it?)!,(reply>), Here. Also immensely dissapointed with Lex lately. He's been kissing a lot of corporate asses.