Would love to hear them debate again to see what has surprised them in the last decade (if anything). For example, does Peter see AI / machine-learning as transformative? What does Eric see as the future of privacy and reverse-face-searching (clearview, facecheck_id, pimeyes, yandex etc)?
What is theil saying other nations dont need technology like india ? Whose maximum minds are in tech worldwide young man open your mouth only when it makes sense
It is technology world but it has to be made simpler for everyday users they are still not there with safety aspects given in consumers hands, but can be created.
Eric Schmidt spouts lots of nonsense there. First he says government creates gdp and not innovation/technology. Then he denies it. You can clearly see that Schmidt is not a principled thinker
Thiel makes great points, way better points than Eric. But in fairness, props to Eric for staying calm and shame on Thiel & the moderator for making this such a messy discussion. Thiel just consistently interrupts Eric at every point, in a very rude manner. The guy can’t even let Eric finish
This was a very interesting debate as I have never seen two people speak so passionately about technology. Innovation in technology could really change the world, we just need to start paying more attention and putting more effort into the tech companies that are just as passionate about technological innovation and its importance.
Google is not the savior of mankind, it’s an digital dictionary plus encyclopedia. That’s all. TH-cam is entertaining, perhaps educational to a certain extent. That’s all.
they both have interesting points. too bad we couldnt hear their argument cuz theil kept cutting Eric off and going off on too many tangents for there to be a back and forth conversation. he treated this like a lecture, which is not constructive. Debates should reveal best arguments from both sides and lead to each learning a new perspective. I guarantee peter did not gain any new perspective here.
I know certain demographics like this type of popularist approach to an argumentation process, which Peter is a good example of (constantly throwing punches); however, if you really listen to Eric talk, you understand that he actually did try to answer to Peter's accusations and made his own sound arguments in a, most of the time, civil way. This is not to say that many of Peter's arguments were solid, I simply love his energy and when he "attacked" Google on the lack of invenstments from them. But, he chose to communicate most of his arguments through the lens of Romantic interpretations of process and innovation -myths like David and Goliath, a bit like how Apple came to be in the IBM era. Peter's young companies needed that.
Now it’s 2021 and Microsoft, apple, and google are worst off than amazon. Amazon has redefined both the world of bits and the real world. Whilst Microsoft and Apple keep releasing new products with minimal upgrades and googles just stuffing their piggy bank.
Eric Schmidt actually thinks of everything through the lens of coding. I read his book and he really lacks common sense in regards with the real world. There's a line in his book where he says every company can copy Google's formula and succeed.
잡스나 게이츠는 기업인일 뿐이고 현실을 직시했을 뿐이다. 잡스나 게이츠가 철학자처럼 굴었으면 이미 중소기업 사장도 못되고 망했을 걸. 기업인들은 정해진 틀안에서 세금만 잘내고 법을 지키며 사업만 영위하면 된다. 말 몇마디 한걸 심각하게 해석해서 나쁜놈 취급할 필요가 없다.
철학자는 철학자의 일을 할 뿐입니다. 자본주의에 관한 대안이 필요하다고 늘 주장하는데 막말로 빌 게이츠의 마소가 얼마나 치사한 수를 써가며 시장을 독점했는지 등등은 너무 잘 알려진 사실이죠. 평등과 자유는 처음부터 모순적인 관계라는 겁니다. 그리고 지젝은 그것을 원래 세상은 그런거야! 라고 받아들이는 순간 전체주의의 가능성이 보인다고 말하는 것이죠. 아렌트가 전체주의를 분석하면서 말했던 것도 이 지점이죠. 이데올로기를 파헤치는 작업을 하지 않으면 그것이 이데올로기인줄 모른다는 것. 그렇다고 마소와 애플을 당장 무너뜨려야 한다고 지젝은 주장하지 않습니다. 대안을 어떻게 내놓을 것인가를 묻고 있는거죠
Eric's is a computer programmer is really not in the same league as Peter who is a former chess master, studied/practiced law, traded derivatives, paypal, clarium, palantir, social networking etc. Broaden yourselves guys. Eric is completely lost here and has literally nothing to talk about.
Thiel is an incredible man and makes some good points both here and in Zero to One, but is wrong about increasing food prices. Food shortage is almost always politically driven, there is no shortage of food. As for food production, the majority of the industry has got it wrong, no technology beyond what we already have is needed to increase production to keep up with a growing population, and the current way of doing things is akin to a drug addiction that degrades the landscape. Management practices that increase production without degrading the land already exist, they’re just not widely adopted. It’s a pity that these rich technology people can’t be informed of that but I guess when tech has solved everything else for them and made them so wealthy everything begins to look like a nail.
Gross. Both of them. Libertarians are just self serving crony corporatists. They don't want less regulation for any other reason than it makes them less money. They don't really care about human wellness, they just want control and private space stations
Would love to hear them debate again to see what has surprised them in the last decade (if anything). For example, does Peter see AI / machine-learning as transformative? What does Eric see as the future of privacy and reverse-face-searching (clearview, facecheck_id, pimeyes, yandex etc)?
this aged like Benjamin Button
This is gold
🎉 agreed I’ve watched this 20x
What is theil saying other nations dont need technology like india ? Whose maximum minds are in tech worldwide young man open your mouth only when it makes sense
It is technology world but it has to be made simpler for everyday users they are still not there with safety aspects given in consumers hands, but can be created.
Eric slayed Peter.
Anyone hating on thiel here is a complete retard
Eric Schmidt spouts lots of nonsense there. First he says government creates gdp and not innovation/technology. Then he denies it. You can clearly see that Schmidt is not a principled thinker
Thiel's a libertarian, ie, believes in right wing magical thinking.
Theil is an arsonist. Unhinged.
Thiel seems overrated. He seems combative for no good reason, and loves to put words in people’s mouths.
Thiel is smart, but an asshole. I feel like he’s a complete sociopath.
Peter is right. She’ll made a 43 billion ducking dollars this year. A catastrophic failure in energy innovation.
Peter Thiel was a savage with substance in this one.
Peter Thiel is a fraudster charlatan. He creates fake stocks, and does NOT belong in my business.
Peter is so very very smart… wow, astounding!
What role do beachside clubs and rap music producers have to do in all this?
철학이 필요한 이유
the reason why thiel interupts is because eric is directly saying he is wrong
In hindsight, Thiel got vindicated on almost every issue.
The host was disturbing. Great discourse between the two!
Thiel makes great points, way better points than Eric. But in fairness, props to Eric for staying calm and shame on Thiel & the moderator for making this such a messy discussion. Thiel just consistently interrupts Eric at every point, in a very rude manner. The guy can’t even let Eric finish
This was a very interesting debate as I have never seen two people speak so passionately about technology. Innovation in technology could really change the world, we just need to start paying more attention and putting more effort into the tech companies that are just as passionate about technological innovation and its importance.
Google is not the savior of mankind, it’s an digital dictionary plus encyclopedia. That’s all. TH-cam is entertaining, perhaps educational to a certain extent. That’s all.
looking at FAANG stocks, Amazon has risen the most. FB is second. Seems like Theil was right about which companies are innovating at least...
they both have interesting points. too bad we couldnt hear their argument cuz theil kept cutting Eric off and going off on too many tangents for there to be a back and forth conversation. he treated this like a lecture, which is not constructive. Debates should reveal best arguments from both sides and lead to each learning a new perspective. I guarantee peter did not gain any new perspective here.
I know certain demographics like this type of popularist approach to an argumentation process, which Peter is a good example of (constantly throwing punches); however, if you really listen to Eric talk, you understand that he actually did try to answer to Peter's accusations and made his own sound arguments in a, most of the time, civil way. This is not to say that many of Peter's arguments were solid, I simply love his energy and when he "attacked" Google on the lack of invenstments from them. But, he chose to communicate most of his arguments through the lens of Romantic interpretations of process and innovation -myths like David and Goliath, a bit like how Apple came to be in the IBM era. Peter's young companies needed that.
Now it’s 2021 and Microsoft, apple, and google are worst off than amazon. Amazon has redefined both the world of bits and the real world. Whilst Microsoft and Apple keep releasing new products with minimal upgrades and googles just stuffing their piggy bank.
I just came here because i saw a clip of this in a video by Garry Tan. Only one word is enough to describe Peter: *LEGEND*.
I like peter, exactly my kind of guy. Howerer he needs some kind of flexibility I think.
Eric Schmidt actually thinks of everything through the lens of coding. I read his book and he really lacks common sense in regards with the real world. There's a line in his book where he says every company can copy Google's formula and succeed.
Thiel = facts. Eric = feel good babble.
잡스나 게이츠는 기업인일 뿐이고 현실을 직시했을 뿐이다. 잡스나 게이츠가 철학자처럼 굴었으면 이미 중소기업 사장도 못되고 망했을 걸. 기업인들은 정해진 틀안에서 세금만 잘내고 법을 지키며 사업만 영위하면 된다. 말 몇마디 한걸 심각하게 해석해서 나쁜놈 취급할 필요가 없다.
철학자는 철학자의 일을 할 뿐입니다. 자본주의에 관한 대안이 필요하다고 늘 주장하는데 막말로 빌 게이츠의 마소가 얼마나 치사한 수를 써가며 시장을 독점했는지 등등은 너무 잘 알려진 사실이죠. 평등과 자유는 처음부터 모순적인 관계라는 겁니다. 그리고 지젝은 그것을 원래 세상은 그런거야! 라고 받아들이는 순간 전체주의의 가능성이 보인다고 말하는 것이죠. 아렌트가 전체주의를 분석하면서 말했던 것도 이 지점이죠. 이데올로기를 파헤치는 작업을 하지 않으면 그것이 이데올로기인줄 모른다는 것. 그렇다고 마소와 애플을 당장 무너뜨려야 한다고 지젝은 주장하지 않습니다. 대안을 어떻게 내놓을 것인가를 묻고 있는거죠
@@trianglebermuda5535 궁금한게 있는대 지젝이 토론에서 진적 있나요? 있다면 그 상대방은 누가 있나요
It's a great conversation. Just wow
Eric's is a computer programmer is really not in the same league as Peter who is a former chess master, studied/practiced law, traded derivatives, paypal, clarium, palantir, social networking etc. Broaden yourselves guys. Eric is completely lost here and has literally nothing to talk about.
6 years later, Peter Thiel was spot on.
전체주의하고 갑자기 연결시킬때는 논증이 좀 부족한거 같음
저도 처음에 엥? 했는데 전체주의 구조에 대해서 듣고오니 이해가 되더라구요 파시즘과 스탈린주의의 기제가 서로 어떻게 다르게 작동되었는지 들어보시걸 추천드려요
@@user-hz3lq1fh5o 간단하게 말하면 그런 거죠...정치인과 기업인의 공통분모가 뭐가 있겠어요? 자신의 기획에 사람들을 참여 시키는 것 아니겠어요? 그 점을 지젝은 논거로 잡고 예를 든 것이지요.
@@user-hz3lq1fh5o 파인만은 과학자인데, 왜 그 비논리적 진술이 맞다고 생각하는지 요약하는게 선행돼야하지 않음?
Is this moderator part of the debate too because he sure loves to interrupt the geniuses before him.
Schmidt is used to having conversations in which people suck up to him and bow to his intellectual authority. Peter put on a clinic.
On one hand Eric says America's politics are bad and on the other he talks about static leadership is bad.
그냥 빌게이츠를 매우 싫어하는 사람인듯...잡스 칭찬하는 척 하면서 빌게이츠 까네
Thiel is an incredible man and makes some good points both here and in Zero to One, but is wrong about increasing food prices. Food shortage is almost always politically driven, there is no shortage of food. As for food production, the majority of the industry has got it wrong, no technology beyond what we already have is needed to increase production to keep up with a growing population, and the current way of doing things is akin to a drug addiction that degrades the landscape. Management practices that increase production without degrading the land already exist, they’re just not widely adopted. It’s a pity that these rich technology people can’t be informed of that but I guess when tech has solved everything else for them and made them so wealthy everything begins to look like a nail.
So the problem is adoption of technology..if the technology rn was that advanced and good, it would be adopted by all.. It just isn't.
There is good and evil in technology. Good people have no need to tell you they are not evil.
Surveillance authoritarian . Werner . German US and New Zealand citizen so where is his loyalty. ?
"Monopolies are legal as long as you don't abuse it"........nice idea
30:47 bingo!
Thiel is emotional, what the hell, comes off a bit unhinged
Eric Schmidt is a complete moron! The problem is he can hide it very well, but not when in front in someone like Peter Thiel...
Thiel would’ve died on this stage if they asked
Gross. Both of them. Libertarians are just self serving crony corporatists. They don't want less regulation for any other reason than it makes them less money. They don't really care about human wellness, they just want control and private space stations