First time asker. The program often invites guests on who are promoting their new books. I find many of those segments and authors fantastic and worthy of more attention. Is it possible to compile and list of authors and their books being highlighted on the show, i.e. a BP reading list? Thank you and please keep up the good work.
I hear you guys say that twitter and other social media (by the way social media is neither social, or media) should be treated like a utility/public square, can you go a little deeper there, what might that look like? And similarly, why not treat social media like a media outlet and make those that publish there follow the same rules that reporters must follow?
Krystal — you’ve referred to EA as sociopathic on this show and KKF. Spell your position out a bit. The basics of EA seem to be about making sure your charitable contributions are doing the most good, insofar that good can be quantified. It seems uncontroversial that some charities will be better than others at realizing real life benefits for people. One argument you’ve used is to say that EA may lead people to take an “ends justify the means” approach. Can’t that argument be applied to charitable giving in general as well? That is basically what the fictional character of Robin Hood did. I don’t recall that story mentioning that he was an Effective Altruist. Is there something specifically about EA that makes you stand so strongly against it or are you against charitable giving in principle? I’ll grant that the very online component of that movement is pretty cringe, but what is it about the philosophical basis of the movement that you find questionable? I would also encourage you to look more carefully at their position on climate change. It is not as you described it on your show.
I was thinking about it, in theory would they not fall under a monopoly status? Only 2 "competitors" which are independent entities that consistently use practices that would be illegal in any other sector along with large profits and little accountability. It could easily be argued that the 2 party monopoly actually has driven the prices up in many sectors it touches or ignores, backroom collusion to keep out competitors, constant misleading ad's, and many more points. I doubt traditionally it would count, but there is a strong argument to be made, any thoughts?