I think that that YouTube's recommendations, Lex Fridman, and I have participated in the curation of a really efficiently enriching narrative. Although you have to take the words of the beneficiaries of a potentially exploitive centralized point of global information distribution (and inseparably, a gravity-well of power by extension) with a grain of salt, especially when they're responding to criticism, I'm really glad that I have a chance to listen to that reply at all.<br><br>The only, I dunno, criticism (?) I could levy against the AI podcast's existence in this medium is that 1-to-3-hour-long videos are taxing on viewers since-- and this might be a bit of an irrational feeling-- I never quite feel like I've gotten the full picture of these conversations until I've watched them all the way through. I think this has a lower impact on my rate of engagement than most, since I'm a (I think rare) viewer that watches 1-to-3-hour-long educational videos at least a few times a week. I know it impacts my offline friends' willingness, and probably those online outside my community willingness to engage, much, much more. Despite that, this channel is by far the most successful of its kind that I've seen (I mean, you only have to hop over to Microsoft Research to find a treasure trove of lectures cutting edge breakthroughs with 150 or fewer views) and I think it largely has a lot to do with the personality of the host:<br><br>- An Authoritative Voice(TM) made credible by MIT<br>- A humble, Socratic, curious, naïve demeanor, seemingly eager to ask questions<br>- A martial artist whose attention is spent on promoting a culture of embodied full-commitment to growth and curiosity despite the challenges it comes with who likely has little sympathy for the unusual rigor of paying attention to a single piece of online content for hours at a time.