Loved the clarity of what Stephen Wolfram gets wrong about LLMs... The analogy with chemistry is super-helpful too. Thank you for an absorbing conversation.

I really appreciate you, Prof. Chomsky, having responded to the question "Why do you answer every email?"(with barely a fraction between query and reply): "Because I take people seriously. I think people deserve respect." That is why, or at least a part of why, you're often extended a level of deep admiration, and for passionate truth, which seems never to evanesce! For caring for all of us, even us Canadians!, you're doing it well. Thanks for your time, ALL of it you've given over the decades. C'est une l'homme fantastique et tu, à votre disposition pour les humble Peace, love and respect to Prof. Chomsky, his host and everyone who still wants to know that those with children shall still see them grow.

Nice to hear clever fellows chat, Tyler's next question is always a surprise.

GREAT opening question!! ON Wilhelm von Humboldt!

Is this one of Noam's last public talks before his stroke? Netanyahu is here and Noam kept coming to mind here in Washington where I am and I am on break from New York which makes it easier to hear. I have been missing Noam and wondering how he is doing out of love but you know there has not been much word on the topic of his health.

wow noam chomsky thanks for making this available . When was it recorded?

Incredible mind still, love uncle Noam!

Great interview

In cantor's time they are associative sets

you have to listen to Noam at 1.25 speed these days

A person under attack will have a behaviour and will make a range of choices that differ from what she would have done in freedom. The dynamic range of choices shrinks, energy is spent creating a defense, lowering risks, and so on. Well, the same applies to tiny countries like Nicaragua and Cuba. Too bad they do no have, today, a EU style social democracy with regulated open markets. But when, how, would theyhave managed a smooth evolution, a progression, just as say Estonia or Polland have done? It is easy to ask overly simplistic questions as if the ever had a full choice.

4:40 Rousseau

interviewer: what did i miss about nicaragua vs panama comparison? chomsky: you missed the reality of what happened. same with cuba / dominican republic comparison conversation. other than these uninformed/unresearched questions, i enjoyed this interview a lot.

The most important thing I took away from this interview is that I will never call a frankfurter a hot dog again

Kissinger - Mao's fanboy, wow, something new!

This might be the last interview with prof chomsky

If the term libertarianism has gone to "the right" so much (you know the property rights, free market, non aggression principle etc) that the left is forced to say "left libertarian", they might actually be better off just saying "peaceful anarchism" to avoid this annoying left and right thing in the language. What is "Right libertarianism" now used to be "liberal", but the term liberal now has almost no association with free markets and property rights. To the point it'd be very funny if say Ron Paul called himself a Right Liberal which is why he doesn't. That's why I wonder why bother using "Left Libertarian" when from the left's perspective the word has been polluted in the current context. Hearing libertarian probably makes way more people think of Ron Paul than Chomsky, but on the other hand hearing anarchist probably makes more people think Emma Goldman than Murray Rothbard (citation needed), who was alive much more recently even. Then again anarchist can have a negative connotation of its own, which would be the weaker part of my argument.

Dominican Republic was invaded in 1965 by the U.S. to be put in its place. Panama was also invaded in 1989. They are wealthy for the oligarchies that control those countries.

Ok fine, now interview Nancy Maclean.

I think this is the last chomsky interview ever?! Either in video or in print. Is he dying?

Look I have the utmost regard for Chomsky, except for one weird but extremely important thing: he thinks it is highly likely that natural selection had nothing to do with the evolution (he would prefer of course, to use the words 'cultural emergence') of language. On this particular point, (but this point alone, I must hasten to say!) he is completely wrong. I suggest that is because he has never ever been a trackways reader, never gathered and hunted, never gleaned the narratives told by the patterns of footprints or trackways left behind by humans and other terrestrial animals. For those of you who don't believe me, read my two published papers, "The Social Trackways Theory of the Evolution of Human Cognition (2013), and ditto the Evolution of Language (2017)" by Kim Shaw-Williams. The basic take home message for those of you that have never had occasion to visually analyze physical patterns of the trackways of any animal's daily journeys left behind by it's terrestrial activities in it's environment is this: (1) only us humans have ever developed the cognition/neural structures required to be able to understand the information contained in trackways, and (2) think of substituting signed and spoken symbols for footprints, in order to 'tell' or 'write' the story of one of the journeys that happened in your past memory, or might happen in your imagined future. Of course 'language itself did not evolve: what evolved was the COGNITIVE CAPACITY that INEVITABLY led to the cultural 'emergence' of language. THOUGHT CAME BEFORE LANGUAGE...but using a language certainly helps us to 'think'...in other words, to keep our communications of our thoughts/memories/stories to ourselves and other humans in narrative/logical (UNDERSTANDABLE/READABLE) order.....

Actually there is that "talking dog" that spells out meanings with its feet! see Meet Copper the talking dog who uses sound buttons to chat with owner | SWNS vid and Dog Communicates with Human by Talking Buttons vid channel. Erich Jarvis, Ph.D. has proven the auditory cortex can UNDERSTAND even though the language communicate as vocal communication is not there. Pretty fascinating.

I own a car to navigate a complicated road system. I do not expect the car to analyze the chemistry of the gasoline in its tank. Chat GPT and Bard are fantastic. I use them daily. Lives or saved. They improve the human condition. I've not had an occasion to ask either model to tell me anything about language. Although, both could provide a chemical analysis of gasoline.

Is it true that noam associated with jeffery epstein...if so it shows very, very bad judgement

I definitely admire and respect Chomsky, but he does trade in some of this useless, vain sentimentality that you get in a certain kind of left intellectual nowadays - "left, not liberal" types. His answers to those questions asking about his longevity, the writers he admires, and the mistakes he's made were particularly grating. edit: I just wanted to come back and say that the "helpful links" in the transcript are wonderful.

Chomsky seems to be so full of himself that it has become an art form.

I don't like how little you challenged Chomsky on certain points here, he is a brilliant thinker but like all of us is entrenched in positions that he cannot possibly defend in an honest fashion. I understand his age and stature demand a respect, however he is rumoured to be intolerant of true debate and I see nothing in any of his public appearances to dissuade me of that position.

Jesús. Chomsky made some doozy claims. If I wasn't well read I might have bought his claims. But he was either stupid or liar. But love how Tyler asks 1 simple follow up and moves on. But wonder why no one puts chomsky on blast Cuz he is making absurd claims at times. But he an original and so hard to pin him down.

Chomsky might be good with other subjects which I don’t have expertise to judge, but he is full of misinformation about Maoist. He claimed Maoist saved hundred millions from 1949 to 1979. That’s a either a intentional lie or a ignorant naive biased belief. I am from China and research deep about China modern history and talk to many people who been through that period. Maoist caused hundreds millions died in the most inhumane ways possible, and billion people suffered and humiliated. Please do some research yourselves about Great Famine in Chiba and Culture Revolution. What he said about other subjects sounds very intelligent and convincing, I have no deep knowledge to validate, but if he could get so wrong with Maoist, be very careful about what he says on other subjects, do your own research.

Noam Chomsky is a well-respected linguist, but I don't think that philosophers really believe he's contributed anything that valuable to the field of philosophy more broadly. His political ideas and theories don't really have any grounding. I don't doubt he can do research and state facts, but his models of the world and lack of really understanding economics has led him to believe false things.

An intelligent man who has occasionally said and done the most evil of things -

Novel tea. SF/EF