The hype is overwhelming among geeks but practically under the radar of most folks. It may be overhyped and end up to be fluke down the line but there's a personal angle here.
It's related to the idea of [tools of thoughts] raised [last week]. Being able to socratically examine my interests without the burden of the answering entity being a human is immensely appealing.
For a clearer picture of what that's like, imagine examining the following topics with a soon-to-be frustrated friend.
What really is freedom
Having been exposed to Nietszche and Zhuang Zi lately, I'm starting to think I don't understand what freedom really means.
A tempting answer is the lack of constraint, especially cognitive ones. This is where I suspect Zhuang Zi would tell me I'm thinking too small.
Do all progress require nemesis?
Eric Weinstein made a convincing case of the luxury of having an arch nemesis.
I've personally seen friends who thrive on making progress only when they make enemies. Classic tribalistic warfare are also consistent with this narrative.
So does the lack of enemy mean the lack of progress? If that's true (even if somewhat), how does one make enemy wisely?
Joking-mode vs truth-seeking mode
I made a revelation only a dumbass introvert would consider one: an inquiring truth-seeking mental mode gets in the way of making jokes and vice versa.
Perhaps that's why nerds are easy to make fun of in person.
My interest is whether the two modes are always mutually exclusive. Can a person exhibit this two modes simultaneously or are they at best lived up to via rapid switching?