HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

It's not culture, it's the fact that Java enables huge structures to run that has become it's problem. Listen to James in the last chapters of this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT__Nrr3PNI

Just because Java can run bloated is not a good reason to do so. I have written my own HTTP/DNS server with built in DB from scratch and it's 150KB (around 10.000 LoC) and that's how you use Java properly.

⬐ philipwhiuk

> I have written my own HTTP/DNS server with built in DB from scratch and it's 150KB (around 10.000 LoC) and that's how you use Java properly.

So you've probably got 90,000 bugs left to fix then.

Seriously these "I built my tiny thing I claim implements X protocol" are very tedious. You think BIND is deliberately overcomplicated or do you think, maybe, just maybe your tiny server has lots of hidden problems.

⬐ bullen

I took responsability and over 10 years I fixed the bugs.

It hosts a MMO with 350.000 customers at 10x perf./watt than all AAA studios.

⬐ CyberDildonics

This person also claimed that a rise in electricity prices will mean people won't be able to afford to play half life 2 and starcraft 2:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32523818

> These days I live in NetBeans. It does everything I want, very cleanly simply and efficiently. It’s the nicest environment I’ve ever lived in.

https://www.dodgycoder.net/2012/09/q-with-nine-great-program...

It wasn't XEmacs, but rahter the genesis of Emacs itself (I got that wrong).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT__Nrr3PNI&t=1642s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosling_Emacs

Got to love all the St. Thomas requests on developer forums.

⬐ worthless-trash

For anyone following along, that quote is from the first link.

The comparison and conversion can and will depend on many factors, the first and most likely is that the version of emacs he wrote didnt have standard lisp, not that elisp is much more standard.

When a non free ($395 in 1980 money) vs free (as in GNU/GPL) version of emacs, its not surprising that GNU emacs was the crowd favourite.

I'm not convinced that goslings move to an IDE as the gos emacs creator is a fair datapoint when comparing modern emacs though.

⬐ pjmlp

Yeah, that there is that detail that our community is plagued by people that won't pay for their tools while feeling entitled to get a salary.

Imagine if all professions would behave the same way.

Or as James Gosling put it: "He was a jerk."

https://youtu.be/IT__Nrr3PNI?t=3115

⬐ kylewins

I felt like there was much more to say in the interview, need a part 2 asap

⬐ corpMaverick

I hadn't seen an image of James Gosling with white hair. Felt the sudden weight of the years. Then when he mentioned he worked on the Pascal compiler, and I realized that he was just a student when Nicklaus Wirth was already a legendary computer scientist.

⬐ ryanmarsh

11:30 - ~14:40 seems James has some form of synesthesia

⬐ teddyh

Richard Stallman on James Gosling:

“[…] a friend of mine told me that because of his work in early development of Gosling Emacs, he had permission from Gosling in a message he had been sent to distribute his version of that. Gosling originally had set up his Emacs and distributed it free and gotten many people to help develop it, under the expectation based on Gosling’s own words in his own manual that he was going to follow the same spirit that I started with the original Emacs. Then he stabbed everyone in the back by putting copyrights on it, making people promise not to redistribute it and then selling it to a software-house. My later dealings with him personally showed that he was every bit as cowardly and despicable as you would expect from that history.”

— Richard Stallman, lecture at KTH (Sweden), 30 October 1986

⬐ mherrmann

I suspect there may also be another side to this story.

⬐ giancarlostoro

RMS is very critical of things and as much as I have great respect for him I cant just take his side without all the facts. I dont even know a single person paying for emacs today either way. Seems like an old beef thats dead as dead can be considering GNU Emacs seems to have won out. Unless you are Walter Bright, you do you sir, you are awesome! I guess same with Linus who uses Micro Emacs if I remember correctly.

I always wanted to get more into emacs but I spend more time fighting the setup to bother anymore. I love Spacemacs but I am leaning more towards Neovim + Spacevim since its pretty damn nice.

⬐ imglorp

RMS is a very black and white, tunnel visioned, ideologue: there's no gray. You can ask him his thoughts about a great new general technology and he'll stop you before you describe it and ask how it pertains to open source; if you don't answer exactly in alignment he will immediately dismiss you and shut down the conversation without hearing the question. (edit, I tried this once in person). He's absolutely correct, having given us the route to modern software reuse, but at the same time a highly dysfunctional person.

⬐ morelisp

There’s no way RMS asked you how something pertains to open source. :)

⬐ imglorp

True, verbatim would be capital-F Free software.

⬐ giancarlostoro

I agree with you entirely. I think the sweet spot is more obvious to me and you: software applications don't really need to be open source, but if the Operating System is, it allows a lot of flexibility, not to say people can't be flexible on proprietary operating systems, but I think for systems utils and kernels open source has strong benefits.

What I really think we're all missing out on is companies pushing more legacy GPU drivers out under an open source license, or opening up a spec for the community to build a correct open source derived driver from at the very least. It's a shame I can have a really irrelevant GPU that would be perfect for a Linux OS (I'm talking ATI level of old) and yet I can't get proper drivers and they wont be releasing any updates but I'm sure the old drivers are probably still functional enough to make my experience on Linux slightly more pleasant.

Engineers need to get paid, and not a lot of people become as successful as quickly with fully open sourced works.

⬐ tyingq

Here's at least part of it: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/dhrcxw/james_g...

And a transcript if you don't like video: https://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/20... The Stallman stuff starts on page 30.

⬐ tomcam

Gosling: Right. I mean, you can't sue a homeless person, right, which is, you know, he-- Yeah, he had sort of weird views on, you know, economic models at the time.

Weber: And personal hygiene.

⬐ tyingq

Rough wording for sure, but Stallman was living in his office.

⬐ dctoedt

Gosling's version paints a decidedly different picture than the GGP's quote from RMS.

I wonder if RMS was mad at Gosling for having the temerity to allow Unipress to sell his (Gosling's) version of Emacs, instead of leaving the Gosling version free for everyone as required by RMS's personal purity code?

⬐ ptrott2017

For a more balanced view of what this is quote refers to see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosling_Emacs

⬐ homarp

you can read the threads on usenet at that time: March 20, 1985 is the launch of GNU emacs - first "clean" version of emacs is July 15, 1985

Fen Labalme message: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/net.emacs/Vxp_Is2A5Cs/l6AmKi...

Unipress message about the "portions of the GNU Emacs program are most definitely not public domain" https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/net.emacs/ZmwEvkr9Jfs/...

RMS explaining what code he used: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/net.emacs/eyFgYVrEe0Q/Avxp17...

and then some more discussions: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/net.emacs/DRVCmoISBEU/efLdK-...

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/net.emacs/PXHNtn7v4Rc/OFi1Ef...

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/net.emacs/-2IaisY2N0Q/r4Fd9N...

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/net.emacs/dytp5TT-02I/zUI4Ul...

and one from GvR https://groups.google.com/d/msg/net.emacs/HJOjV7_2cyY/Bm6oUm...

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/net.emacs/ilF9KtBimCk/WwO5NS... has the cost of getting an EMACS tape from RMS "GNU Emacs can be obtained from anyone who has a copy or by sending $150 payable to me"

On old emacs source code: https://github.com/larsbrinkhoff/emacs-history

⬐ teddyh

Those links seem to completely confirm Stallman’s side of the story.

⬐ txru

Gosling's perspective of the same time:

https://old.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/dhrcxw/james_g...

Here's the relevant part:

"Hsu: So then your-- But your display algorithm got incorporated by Richard Stallman into GNU Emacs.

Gosling: Well, actually, it was more than that. He just took all of the source code.

Hsu: Oh, okay.

Gosling: Right. It was, it started out as all of the source code and he just edited the copyright notices.

Hsu: Really? So he just essentially stole your program.

Gosling: Yeah, so--

Hsu: <laughs>

Gosling: Ah--

Hsu: And claimed it as his own? <laughs>

Gosling: Yeah. So, so what had happened was I have this, like, point in my-- in grad school where I realize I'm either Mr. Emacs for life or I graduate. So I decided I wanted to graduate so I kind of went around to all the usual suspects and said, "Is there anybody willing to take over the maintenance of Emacs?" And, and everybody said, "Well, I really love Emacs and everybody here at," you know, MIT or UCLA or whatever, "We all love Emacs, but we actually have day jobs." And they-- And so I couldn't find anybody who would do it. I even asked Stallman and his, his answer wasn't just no, it was more like a frothing hell no. And, you know, mostly because it was for Unix.

Hsu: Mmm.

Gosling: And one of his big things was Unix and using Unix was, back then his attitude was that Unix was the spawn of the devil and he made that really clear. But I did find a couple of guys who were willing to do it but they would need to, like, earn money from it and I had, you know, from the very beginning been very careful about putting copyright notices on Emacs, you know, and the deal that I had with everybody was, you know, write me a letter and I'll send you a mag tape, you know, and the letter was basically agreeing to this license. And the reasons that I had done that was-- So this, this guy Mike Shamus, the guy who, the professor, the theory professor, he'd also gotten a law degree and had gotten involved in a bunch of intellectual property issues. And there was this weird thing that had happened at Carnegie Mellon where Carnegie Mellon was sort of unique in its sort of charter documents in that if a-- At a lot of universities if a student produces some piece of work it's partially owned by the university, so you just, you can't just give stuff away. And they usually have, you know, weird clauses that have evolved and for software around open source stuff that that way you can do it. But back then open source wasn't a thing, but you couldn't give stuff away. But at, but Carnegie Mellon was sort of unique in that it had these rules that said if a student produced some work then the student owned it, which was really strange. And but there had been this one case where Carnegie Mellon has, it's kind of a small university, but it's got sort of two world class departments. One is the School of Computer Science and the other is Performing Arts. And I mean, the Performing Arts Department there is just astonishing. But one of the students there, it was like their master's project or something, they wrote a rock opera and I think it was "Godspell," not exactly sure. But then that, but it turned into a big financial blockbuster and the university tried to retroactively change their rules about intellectual property and that turned into a big saga. And, and one of the things that came out of that was this sort of lingering apprehensiveness about intellectual property rights. And in the Computer Science Department, there was another student who had built a piece of software that had gotten really popular on the internet and it was a text formatter called Scribe. It was done by Brian Reed. And he also got into a bunch of, you know, the university tried to pull stunts with him. And so after that history, I decided that I should be careful and I talked to Mike Shamus about it and he said, "You know, do, you know, put this header on all your source files and make sure you get a letter back from folks that basically says that they acknowledge the dut-dut-dut-dut" and so I was really careful about that. But then when I had decided, you know, I wanted to graduate rather than being Mr. Emacs, I found these two guys who ran this little company called Unipress, it was literally two guys in a garage, and I said, "Look, this needs to be free for universities and not ridiculous for everybody else." And they said, you know, "Fine. We're just two guys in a garage. We don't need much. And this seems to be awfully popular, so we think we can actually, you know, pay our rent and feed ourselves." So that was fine and they were doing really well. And then Stallman freaks and he gets a copy of my source code, does a whole lot of editing. He doesn't actually-- You know, he edits, like, almost all of the copyright headers, but he doesn't edit all of them and he only kind of thinly edits it and then he re-releases it as GNU Emacs. And then IBM and Digital Equipment pick that up and start distributing it. So these, so the two guys in the garage who had been doing okay suddenly find that IBM and DEC are distributing their thing for free and they're dying. So they decided to sue DEC and IBM and they got a, you know, and that turned into a big, big court case. They won. It was kind of a pyrrhic victory. You know, so IBM and DEC paid them some damages, but that didn't stop GNU Emacs. You know, they didn't get GNU Emacs pulled, so it just sort of carried on and these guys sort of shifted their business, which always made me feel kind of bad for them because they really got shafted. And, yeah, so and at the very beginning of GNU Emacs it was literally line for line, I mean, they actually, you know, there were expert witnesses who, you know, by eyeball, you know, searched through the source code and went, "Yeah, it's the same." They actually found that some of the early GNU Emacs source files that were being distributed, they hadn't, he hadn't actually changed all of the copyright notices. So it was like, duh. But then it sort of took on its own life and it's become the GNU Emacs that everybody uses.

Weber: But Stallman was not involved. No one went after him because he had no money, right?

Gosling: Right. I mean, you can't sue a homeless person, right, which is, you know, he-- Yeah, he had sort of weird views on, you know, economic models at the time.

Weber: And personal hygiene.

Gosling: Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, I realize I'm a radical. I like to actually have a bed to sleep in and food and I will occasionally sleep in my office, but not as a regular thing. And I haven't done that for a long time."

⬐ sk2020

Richard Stallman also earned quite a bit of infamy by blasting CSAIL with his “nuanced” views of pedophilia. Frankly, I don’t think much of his judgment of character.

⬐ k__

That's really disgusting behavior.

⬐ dctoedt

> That's really disgusting behavior.

Whose — Gosling's, or RMS's?

⬐ watwut

RMS it is not first time he is loose with truth.

⬐ justin66

teddyh's, for injecting this vapid negativity into the discussion.

⬐ pmcollins

James Gosling has contributed more to humanity than the overwhelming majority of people who have ever lived. I think he deserves better than this narrow, one-sided libel.

⬐ fishmaster

Really? By inventing Java?

⬐ moonchild

I don't particularly like java. Most don't. But it's undeniably well designed.

Some of its design choices have fallen out of favour in recent times—I still disagree with their elision of unsigned integers—but they're generally at least defensible.

⬐ yarg

Generally - but signed bytes (at least as implemented) are really fucking stupid.

⬐ ncmncm

No, it is not well designed. Just about every major feature has something incidentally or fundamentally wrong. It is proof that a language does not need to be good to succeed. But it does need a miracle.

Java took off because it offered developers a path out of serfdom to Microsoft, at a time before the smartphone era somewhat reduced their market power. Once it had enough users to benefit from network effects, its future was assured. It took Sun putting billions of dollars into promoting and supporting it to get there.

Sun's commitment to Java probably killed the company, in the end.

There were better-designed languages at the time, and there have been plenty of much better-designed languages since, that have or will fail to displace it. Rust might be counted among these.

⬐ winrid

Rust and Java are so far apart it's not even funny.

Can you give some examples of parts that are not well designed?

⬐ saghm

Not GP, but there's a type unsoundness bug with the fact that you can assign an array of a subtype to an array of a super type (apologies if my syntax is off; I haven't written Java in a while):

class Animal {} class Cat extends Animal {} class Dog extends Animal {}

Animal[] cats = new Cat[1]; Animal dog = new Dog(); cats[0] = dog;

This will compile fine but throw an error at runtime. The only possible way to avoid runtime errors with assigning a Cat array to an Animal array is if you only put Cats in it, at which point it would make more sense to just use a Cat array, so it would have been better design to make assigning a Cat array to an Animal array a compiler error.

⬐ moonchild

Huh, I'm surprised the problem is present. Presumably this is valid?

  Animal[] a = new Animal[2];
  a[0] = new Dog();
  a[1] = new Cat();

If you can upcast Cat to Animal, why can Cat[] not be converted to Animal[] in the same way?

⬐ saghm

> If you can upcast Cat to Animal, why can Cat[] not be converted to Animal[] in the same way?

Basically, because it's not type safe (for the reason I gave above). It doesn't really help expressivity to be able to assign a Cat[] to an Animal[], but as you can only use it safely if you only put cats in it, so you might as well just make the variable Cat[] instead of Animal[]. See the section on arrays in this wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covariance_and_contravariance_...

⬐ Viliam1234

Depends on whether you intend to write into the array, or only read it.

If you could make sure the array is read-only (which you can't, in Java), it would make sense to say that "Cat[]" is a subclass of "Animal[]".

The problem happens when you write. "Animal[]" means that you can put any kind of animal (not just Cat) into the array; and this is not true about "Cat[]"; therefore, "Cat[]" shouldn't be a subclass of "Animal[]".

Unfortunately, Java treats "Cat[]" as a subclass of "Animal[]", and then runtime errors can happen when you write to the array. And because of backwards compatibility, this problem is not going to go away.

Later they got it right with generics. "List<Cat>" is not a subclass of "List<Animal>". (But both of them are subclasses of "List<? extend Animal>", which means: a read-only list of Animals.)

⬐ throw0101a

Guy Steele,[1] Java spec co-author, LL1 Mailing list (2003-08-21):

> And you're right: we were not out to win over the Lisp programmers; we were after the C++ programmers. We managed to drag a lot of them about halfway to Lisp. Aren't you happy?

* https://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/...

A follow-up noted:

> Yes! Java broke C++'s monopoly, and now C# is breaking Java's, and this sequence of broken monopolies dispelled the belief that have to use "the standard language", and now I code in Python for a living.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_L._Steele_Jr%2e

Steele is/was well-acquainted with the bad parts of Java—he helped design Scheme after all. But in the alternative timeline where Java was not created, Java (and other machine-independent runtimes) would have not have become popular, and everyone would still be statically compiling C++.

⬐ rauhl

> But in the alternative timeline where Java was not created, Java (and other machine-independent runtimes) would have not have become popular, and everyone would still be statically compiling C++.

I don’t know if that’s actually true. Computers were getting more and more powerful in the 90s, and hence more capable of supporting memory-managed and dynamic languages. Had Java not existed, I think that there’d be a very good change that Smalltalk or Lisp would have taken off instead. Indeed, looking at the late 90s, I think that there’s a good chance that the world would have gone with Smalltalk, and the computing industry would actually be light years ahead of where we are now.

⬐ piokoch

Yeah, like it or not, but technologies that changed the World and gave tremendous boost in adoption of IT were C, SQL, Visual Basic and Java.

⬐ mavelikara

"We were not out to win over the Lisp programmers; we were after the C++ programmers. We managed to drag a lot of them about halfway to Lisp." - Guy Steele

⬐ throw0101a

Source:

* https://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/...

⬐ Koshkin

Well, the "overwhelming majority of people" have not done even that...

⬐ karim

Absolutely. Java was the first mainstream language with automatic memory management and garbage collection. You have to remember that before that people were building line of business applications in C or C++.

Java made it possible for average engineers to turn out relatively reliable applications, in a fraction of the time it'd have taken them with any other option (apart from Smalltalk but it was already niche by then).

⬐ fishmaster

> Java was the first mainstream language with automatic memory management and garbage collection

Wouldn't this be Lisp?

⬐ kazinator

No, no. Mainstream is actually a stream in Scotland, pronounced a lot like "mine stream", and also the name of the surrounding region and a village therein. The programmers living in Mainstream are True Scotsmen, and the first garbage collected language that these True Scotsman Mainstream programmers used was in fact Java.

⬐ blendo

Also, Java’s JDBC was hugely helpful in standardizing sql/rdbms database access for enterprise programmers.

⬐ nesarkvechnep

You must be a Java programmer.

⬐ disown

> James Gosling has contributed more to humanity than the overwhelming majority of people who have ever lived.

Not more than stallman though. Nowhere close to stallman.

> I think he deserves better than this narrow, one-sided libel.

Richard Stallman has contributed more to humanity than the overwhelming majority of people who have ever lived - including gosling. I think he deserves better than this narrow, one-sided libel. See how that goes. Or how about we let people have their say? Regardless of how much they contributed to humanity.

⬐ shard972

So you were happy for everyone to have their say about stallman and the consequences that be-felled him?

⬐ pcestrada

I can attest to many mortgage payments successfully made thanks to Java.

⬐ Koshkin

The 1980s are far, far from "the early days or computing."

⬐ dang

Ok, they're at least history, so maybe we'll switch to that above.

⬐ chrisseaton

Is the host going to a funeral after recording the podcast with no time to change?

⬐ anifru

No he just always wear suits because he likes the feeling of wearing one. His first episode on JRE (he's been on ~5 IIRC), he talks about it

⬐ Insanity

never occurred to me that people might relate it to a funeral. Interesting, but probably cultural?

⬐ liability

Lex Fridman is to tech interviews what Reviewbrah is to cheeseburgers.

⬐ jasode

>Is the host going to a funeral after recording the podcast with no time to change?

I've seen your comment go from heavily downvoted (I didn't downvote it) -- to upvoted.

To me, your comment seems mean-spirited and detracts from anything else positive that can be said about the actual content of the interview.

Personally, it didn't occur to me to be bothered by the business suit. For others that agree with gp's funeral comment and upvoted it, can you explain what bugs you about the outfit?

Is the attire signaling pretension?!? If you weren't aware, some of his other videos show how insecure he is with his place in life and how his accomplishments don't compare to those he admires. He's not a pretentious guy. The business suit just seems like a consistent "visual identity" since he goes on the road for interviews. He doesn't have a full studio and the "star power" to attract guests to his home location.

EDIT to reply: "> I was always taught it was disrespectful to wear a black tie because it's reserved for people grieving."

Interesting. I've been to several Catholic/Protestant/Jewish funerals and have never heard of that etiquette rule. I've also seen non-grieving people wear black colored ties to business meetings and formal dinners. Some like the "Men in Black" look.

⬐ chrisseaton

Not the suit - the tie. I was always taught it was disrespectful to wear a black tie because it's reserved for people grieving. Different communities are different though I guess. And maybe he's grieving in some regard, I suppose.

⬐ watwut

Definitely not universal.

⬐ ciarannolan

The host of this show is known for wearing that exact outfit pretty much everywhere.

⬐ jgalt212

clearly the talk show format of 10 minutes with a guest with a few commercials interspersed in is very far from ideal, but just as far from ideal is 1h51m with a guest.

Has someone posted a shorted edited version of this yet?

⬐ II2II

I just turned it on while doing housework and paused to listen more carefully to the interesting bits. Sometimes it's nice to listen to a person's own words on their own terms, rather than having those words filtered through the lens of someone else's perspectives.

Granted, this one is a bit special to me. I attended the same university as Gosling (decades later) so I could visualize the places and experiences he was talking about, while digging through old memories of my own. It's strange to think that a PDP that I saw in a trash heap may have been the machine he programmed on, and a prof that was teaching PDP assembly in the late-1990's may have been someone he learnt from.

⬐ non-entity

> It's strange to think that a PDP that I saw in a trash heap may have been the machine he programmed on

I certainly hope you don't mean a literal trash heap.

⬐ II2II

This was over 20 years ago, and the machine itself would have been about 20 years old at that point. At that time, it would have been the norm to dispose of such a machine in such a manner. It was certainly too big to grab for the collection of vintage personal computers I had at the time![1] (To be more specific, it was a disorderly pile of pieces on a dock where equipment was frequently left to be disposed of.)

Of course, I can't be certain it was the machine Gosling used. I don't know how many PDP's the university had. My recollections are also sufficiently vague that I don't remember the exact model, just that it was a PDP composed of many boards. Anyway, the bit about Gosling possibly using it was just a fancy I had while listening to the interview.

[1] Calling those personal computers vintage seems weird now. None of those computers would have been older than 15 years at that point in time, but a 1982 computer would have less in common with a 1997 computer than a 2005 computer with a 2020 one.

⬐ wazoox

Actually Lex does this on his other channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/LexClips/videos

Here is the 9 minutes part on Emacs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA7aB-oxjVc

More are to come.

⬐ notyourwork

> clearly the talk show format of 10 minutes with a guest with a few commercials interspersed in is very far from ideal,

Why is this clearly not ideal? I think you're being overly critical of the production. If the format isn't ideal for your consumption, you don't have to watch it.

⬐ lhoff

I listend to the interview as a podcast. It could have gone on for another hour if you ask me. I really like the long form interviews. It allows the guest to not just make there point but to tell the story how they came to that conclusion. That way its easier, at least for me, to internalise that knowledge.

There is a podcast run by the german newspaper "Die Zeit" [1] where the concept is that the interview goes on until the guest thinks everything is said. The episodes usually last between 4 and 8 hours. The longest taking 9h 40 minutes.

There is one episode with Ian McEwan that is recoded in english if someone that doesn't speak german is interested. That one just takes 2h so its not really a good example.

[1]https://www.zeit.de/serie/alles-gesagt [2]https://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/2019-12/ian-mcewan-intervie...

⬐ gen220

Wow, this is fantastic.

It’s not a medium with much popularity potential (very few people have >1 hour to spare on something as leisurely as an interview). But for the few people who would care for it, I think it’s super valuable that these things exist.

It’s kind of like the “Slow TV” idea, except instead of touring Norway’s mountains and rivers, you’re touring the landscape of somebody’s thoughts. Very brave on the subject’s behalf. Many people, even public personalities, wouldn’t enjoy such scrutiny.

⬐ JimTheMan

Lex is killing it with the interviews! Stay true to yourself lex and you will go far!