zlacker

Only about two of them will be more contemporary though, and both are academic talks, not interviews. I get that you don't like Lex Fridman, which is a perfectly fine position to hold. But there is something to be said for seeing two people just sit and talk, as opposed to seeing somebody monologue for an hour. The Fridman interview with Doug is, IMO, absolutely worth watching. And so are all of the other videos by / about Doug. shrug

>>mindcr+(OP)
I don't know this particular interview, but it's not necessarily about not liking Lex. I listened to many episodes of his podcast and while I appreciate the selection of guests from the CS domain, many of these interviews aren't very good. They are not completely terrible but they should have been so much better: Lex had so many passionate, educated, experienced and gifted guests, yet his ability to ask interesting and focused questions is not on the same level.

>>yarpen+56
He's a shitty interviewer. Often doesn't even engage with his guest's responses, as if he's not even listening to what they're saying, instead moving mechanically to his next bullet-point. Which is completely ridiculous for what's supposed to be a long-format conversational interview.

The best episodes are ones where the guest drives the interview and has a lot of interesting things to say. Fridman's just useful for attracting interesting domain experts somewhere we can hear them speak for hours on end.

The Jim Keller episodes are excellent IMO, despite Fridman. Guests like Keller and Carmack don't need a good interviewer for it to be a worthwhile listen.