
Increments
Vaden Masrani, a senior research scientist in machine learning, and Ben Chugg, a PhD student in statistics, get into trouble arguing about everything except machine learning and statistics. Coherence is somewhere on the horizon.
Bribes, suggestions, love-mail and hate-mail all welcome at incrementspodcast@gmail.com.
Latest episodes

Mar 7, 2024 • 1h 53min
#64 - Libertarianism I: Intro and Moral Issues (w/ Bruce Nielson)
A libertarian expert Bruce Nielson discusses varieties of libertarianism, taxation as theft, public goods issues, and the concept of a perfect libertarian society. They explore George's role in helping government respect property rights, the complexities of the libertarian utopia, and taxes as membership fees. The podcast delves into the intersection of libertarianism and homeowners associations, highlighting coercion, consent, and incrementalism in reducing government involvement.

Feb 14, 2024 • 1h 7min
#63 - Recycling is the Dumps
Close your eyes, and think of a bright and pristine, clean and immaculately run recycling center, green'r than a giant's thumb. Now think of a dirty, ugly, rotting landfill, stinking in the mid-day sun. Of these two scenarios, which, do you reckon, is worse for the environment?
In this episode, Ben and Vaden attempt to reduce and refute a few reused canards about recycling and refuse, by rereading Rob Wiblin's excellent piece which addresses the aformentioned question: What you think about landfill and recycling is probably totally wrong. Steel yourselves for this one folks, because you may need to paper over arguments with loved ones, trash old opinions, and shatter previous misconceptions.
Check out more of Rob's writing here.
We discuss
The origins of recycling and some of the earliest instances
Energy efficiency of recycling plastics, aluminium, paper, steel, and electronic waste (e-waste)
Why your peanut butter jars and plastic coffee cups are not recyclable
Modern landfills and why they're awesome
How landfills can be used to create energy
Building stuff on top of landfills
Why we're not even close to running out of space for landfills
Economic incentives for recycling vs top-down regulation
The modern recycling movement and its emergence in the 1990s
> - Guiyu, China, where e-waste goes to die.
That a lot of your "recycling" ends up as garbage in the Philippines
Error Correction
Vaden misremembered what Smil wrote regarding four categories of recycling (Metals and Aluminum / Plastics / Paper / Electronic Waste ("e-waste")). He incorrectly quoted Smil as saying these four categories were exhaustive, and represented the four major categories recycling into which the majority of recycled material can be bucketed. This is incorrect- what Smil actually wrote was:
I will devote the rest of this section (and of this chapter) to brief appraisals of the recycling efforts for four materials — two key metals (steel and aluminum) and plastics and paper—and of electronic waste, a category of discarded material that would most benefit from much enhanced rates of recycling.
- Making the Modern World: Materials and De-materialization, Smill, p.179
A list of the top 9 recycled materials can be found here: https://www.rd.com/list/most-recyclable-materials/
Sources / Citations
Share of plastic waste that is recycled, landfilled, incinerated and mismanaged, 2019
Source for the claim that recycling glass is not energy efficient (and thus not necessarily better for the environment than landfilling):
Glass bottles can be more pleasant to drink out of, but they also require more energy to manufacture and recycle. Glass bottles consume 170 to 250 percent more energy and emit 200 to 400 percent more carbon than plastic bottles, due mostly to the heat energy required in the manufacturing process. Of course, if the extra energy required by glass were produced from emissions-free sources, it wouldn’t necessarily matter that glass bottles required more energy to make and move. “If the energy is nuclear power or renewables there should be less of an environmental impact,” notes Figgener.
- Apocalypse Never, Shellenburger, p.66
Cloth bags need to be reused 173 times to be more eco-friendly than a plastic bag:
Source for claim that majority of e-waste ends up in China:
Puckett’s organization partnered with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to put 200 geolocating tracking devices inside old computers, TVs and printers. They dropped them off nationwide at donation centers, recyclers and electronic take-back programs — enterprises that advertise themselves as “green,” “sustainable,” “earth friendly” and “environmentally responsible.” ...
About a third of the tracked electronics went overseas — some as far as 12,000 miles. That includes six of the 14 tracker-equipped electronics that Puckett’s group dropped off to be recycled in Washington and Oregon.
The tracked electronics ended up in Mexico, Taiwan, China, Pakistan, Thailand, Dominican Republic, Canada and Kenya. Most often, they traveled across the Pacific to rural Hong Kong. (italics added.)
NPR interview on the fact that some manufacturers will put recycling logos on products that aren't recyclable.
Bloomberg investigative report on tracking plastic to a town in Poland that burns it for energy.
Video about the apex landfill
Guiyu, China. Wiki's description:
Once a rice village, the pollution has made Guiyu unable to produce crops for food and the water of the river is undrinkable. Many of the primitive recycling operations in Guiyu are toxic and dangerous to workers' health with 80% of children suffering from lead poisoning. Above-average miscarriage rates are also reported in the region. Workers use their bare hands to crack open electronics to strip away any parts that can be reused—including chips and valuable metals, such as gold, silver, etc. Workers also "cook" circuit boards to remove chips and solders, burn wires and other plastics to liberate metals such as copper; use highly corrosive and dangerous acid baths along the riverbanks to extract gold from the microchips; and sweep printer toner out of cartridges. Children are exposed to the dioxin-laden ash as the smoke billows around Guiyu, finally settling on the area. The soil surrounding these factories has been saturated with lead, chromium, tin, and other heavy metals. Discarded electronics lie in pools of toxins that leach into the groundwater, making the water undrinkable to the extent that water must be trucked in from elsewhere. Lead levels in the river sediment are double European safety levels, according to the Basel Action Network. Lead in the blood of Guiyu's children is 54% higher on average than that of children in the nearby town of Chendian. Piles of ash and plastic waste sit on the ground beside rice paddies and dikes holding in the Lianjiang River.
Ben's back-of-the-napkin math
Consider the Apex landfill in Las Vegas. This handles trash for the whole city, which is ~700K people. The base of the landfill is currently 9km2 , but they've hinted at expanding it in the future. So let's assume they more than double it and put it at 20km2 . The estimates are that this landfill will handle trash for ~300 years "at current rates". I'm not sure if that includes population growth, so let's play it safe and assume not. So how much space does each person need landfill wise for the next 300 years? We have 20km2 / 700K people = 28.5 m2 per person for 300 years. For 400M people, that's roughly 12,000 km2. The US is roughly 10,000,000 km2. That's 0.012% of the US needed for landfills for the next 300 years. We definitely have the space.
Socials
Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani
Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
Help us fill up landfills and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here.
Click dem like buttons on youtube
What do you like to bring to your local neighbourhood tire-fire? Tell us over at incrementspodcast@gmail.comSupport Increments

Feb 1, 2024 • 2h 46min
#62 (Bonus) - The Principle of Optimism (Vaden on the Theory of Anything Podcast)
Vaden has selfishly gone on vacation with his family, leaving beloved listeners to fend for themselves in the wide world of epistemological confusion. To repair some of the damage, we're releasing an episode of The Theory of Anything Podcast from last June in which Vaden contributed to a roundtable discussion on the principle of optimism. Featuring Bruce Nielson, Peter Johansen, Sam Kuypers, Hervé Eulacia, Micah Redding, Bill Rugolsky, and Daniel Buchfink. Enjoy!
From The Theory of Anything Podcast description: Are all evils due to a lack of knowledge? Are all interesting problems soluble? ALL the problems, really?!?! And what exactly is meant by interesting? Also, should “good guys” ignore the precautionary principle, and do they always win? What is the difference between cynicism, pessimism, and skepticism? And why is pessimism so attractive to so many humans?
Socials
Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani
Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
Help us solve problems and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here.
Click dem like buttons on youtube
Which unsolvable problem would you most like to solve? Send your answer via quantum tunneling to incrementspodcast@gmail.comSpecial Guests: Bruce Nielson and Sam Kuypers.Support Increments

Jan 17, 2024 • 1h 43min
#61 - Debating Free Will: Frankenstein's Monster and a Filmstrip of the Universe (with Lucas Smalldon)
Lucas Smalldon, a blogger and critical rationalist, dives into the intriguing debate of free will versus determinism. He unpacks whether our thoughts are genuinely our own or shaped by genetics and environment. Drawing on the metaphor of Frankenstein's monster, he explores how instinctual desires influence moral decision-making. The conversation critiques traditional views on morality, urging a deeper understanding of human behavior and accountability, all while illuminating the complexities of mental health and societal influences.

Jan 4, 2024 • 1h 59min
#60 - Creativity and Computational Universality (with Bruce Nielson)
Bruce Nielson, creator of the Theory of Anything Podcast, joins to dissect the intricate relationship between creativity and computation. He delves into whether theorem proving can be considered creative and examines the groundbreaking strategies of AlphaGo in its match against Lee Sedol, particularly the surprising 'Move 37.' Nielson also tackles the philosophical debates surrounding determinism and the nature of innovation. With insights on animal intelligence and redefining creativity, this conversation challenges our understanding of both human and machine-generated creativity.

Dec 22, 2023 • 1h 26min
#59 (C&R, Chap 8) - On the Status of Science and Metaphysics (Plus reflections on the Brett Hall blog exchange)
Dive into a lively analysis of why induction might be a philosophical dead end! Discover how historical giants like Kant and Newton shaped our understanding of science. Explore Kepler's elliptical orbits and the tension between finite observations and limitless theories. The hosts express their frustrations over a failed blog exchange, dissecting themes in Austrian economics and critique the concept of irrefutable theories. It’s an engaging exploration that blends humor with deep philosophical insights!

Nov 29, 2023 • 1h 41min
#58 - Ask Us Anything V: How to Read and What to Read
Alright people, we made it. Six months, a few breaks, some uncontrollable laughter, some philosophy, many unhinged takes, a little bit of diarrhea and we're here, the last Ask Us Anything. After this we're never answering another God D*** question. Ever.
We discuss
Do you wish you could change your own interests?
Methods of information ingestion
Taking books off their pedestal bit
Intellectual influences
Veganism (why Ben is, why Vaden isn't)
Anti-rational memes
Fricken Andrew Huberman again
Stoicism
Are e-fuels the best of the best or the worst of the worst?
Questions
(Andrew) Any suggested methods of reading Popper (or others) and getting the most out of it? I'm not from a philosophy background, and although I get a lot out of the books, I think there's probably ways of reading them (notes etc?) where I could invest the same time and get more return.
(Andrew) Any other books you'd say added to your personal philosophical development as DD, KP have? Who and why?
(Alex) Are you aware of general types of insidious anti-rational memes which are hard to recognise as such? Any ideas on how we can go about recognising them in our own thinking? (I do realise that perhaps no general method exists, but still, if you have any thoughts on this...)
(Lorcan) What do you think about efuels? Listen to this take by Fully Charged.
References
Lying and Free Will by Sam Harris
Doing Good Better by MacAskill
Animal Liberation by Peter Singer
Mortal Questions by Thomas Nagel
Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs
Peace is Every Step and True Love by Thich Nhat Hanh
Seeing like a State by James Scott
The Truth Behind Cage-Free and Free-Range | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW
People
Producers of rational memes:
Everything: Christopher Hitchens, Vladimir Nabokov, Sam Harris, George Orwell, Scott Alexander, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Steven Pinker
Sex and Relationships: Dan Savage
Environment/Progress: Vaclav Smil, Matt Ridley, Steven Pinker, Hans Rosling, Bjorn Lomborg, Michael Shellenburger, Alex Epstein
Race: Glenn Loury, John Mcwhorter, Coleman Hughes, Kmele Foster, Chloe Valdery
Woke: John Mcwhorter, Yasha Mounk, Coleman Hughes, Sam Harris, Douglas Murrey, Jordan Peterson, Steven Hicks, James Lindsay, Ben Shapiro
Feminism: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Christina Hoff Summers, Camille Paglia
(Note: Then follow each thinker's favorite thinker, and never stop. )
Producers of anti-rational memes:
Eric Weinstein
Bret Weinstein
Noam Chomsky (See A Potpourri Of Chomskyan Nonsense: https://lingbuzz.net/lingbuzz/001592/v6.pdf)
Glenn Greenwald
Reza Aslan
Medhi Hassan
Robin Diangelo
Ibraam x Kendi
George Galloway
Judith Butler
Socials
Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani
Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
Help us fund the anti-book campaign and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help therapy costs here.
Click dem like buttons on youtube
What aren't you interested in, and how might you fix that? Tell us at incrementspodcast@gmail.comSupport Increments

Nov 15, 2023 • 1h 1min
#57 (Bonus) - A calm and soothing discussion of The Patriarchy
We we're looking for a nice light topic for our patron only episode, so Vaden naturally chosen to chat about the patriarchy. I guess he didn't get into enough trouble in his personal life talking about it so he wanted to make his support and admiration for the patriarchy public.
This is a sneak preview into the land of patreon bonus episodes, so be sure to fork over some cold hard cash if you'd like a bit more mansplaining in your life.
We discuss
Harassment of women in various spheres of life
The patriarchy as a set of facts versus a causal explanation
Why conflating these two notions of the patriarchy harms progress
Domains where women are doing better than men (hint: education, mental health, and psychopathy)
Why it's so hard to talk about this
Why Canada is different than Afghanistan (OR IS IT)
Socials
Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani
Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
Help us pay for men's rights posters and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help with upholding the patriarchy here.
Click dem like buttons on youtube over hur.
Who is a better meninist? Tell us at incrementspodcast@gmail.com Support Increments

Nov 1, 2023 • 1h 22min
#56 - Ask Us Anything IV: Certainty, Emergence, and Popperian Imperatives
Perhaps you thought, in your infinite ignorance, that the release of the previous episode marked the end of the age of the AMA! But nay my friends, the age of the AMA has just begun! We'll answer your questions until the cows come home; until Godot arrives; until all the world's babies are potty-trained. Or, at least, until we stop laughing.
We discuss
Potty training, taking babies seriously, and adult diapers
Why Vaden never daydreams, fantasizes, or minds spending 10 hours in a car
Whether the subjective notions of certainty, belief, or confidence deserve a spot in the objective world of epistemology
Whether sports are authoritarian
Whether spreading Popper's epistemology is a moral imperative
The role of school and educational institutions
Whether emergence is the result of the interplay between physical reality and the reality of abstraction
Questions
(Tom) Can any thinking take place completely independent of any certainty (explicitly acknowledged or inexplicit) whatsoever? Or can we introduce alternative terms to 'certainty' and 'confidence' to describe how individuals process their convictions, consent, and agreement? If 'certainty' and 'confidence' connote justificationism, can a fallibilist dismiss these terms entirely?
(Tom) Can fallibilism, anti-authoritarianism, anti-justificationism, and critical rationalism overall operate effectively in the highly competitive space of sports, especially professional sports?
(Andrew) If our best theory of how to make rapid progress comes from Popper's epistemology, should making it more widely known/understood be considered a moral imperative? If not, why? If so, thoughts?
(Andrew) This one has been hanging about in my notes for a couple of years so I'm not sure it's a great question any more, but something zingy about the interplay between reality, abstractions and their effects on each other has pushed me to add it here: Is emergence the result of the interplay between physical reality and the reality of abstractions?
Socials
Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani
Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
Help us pay for diapers and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help with Diarrhea removal here).
Click dem like buttons on youtube over hur.
Who is more annoying in the mornings? Tell us at incrementspodcast@gmail.comSupport Increments

Oct 9, 2023 • 54min
#55 - Is all thought problem-solving?
Our argument at the end of last episode spilled over into discord, DMs, and world news, so we felt compelled to dedicate a full episode to addressing the question "Is all thought problem solving?" Some arguments make history, like whether atomic bombs were required in WWII, whether all philosophy is simply a language game, and whether the chicken did indeed come before the egg. Will this be one of them?
We cover:
How Vaden listens to podcasts and why he thinks Andrew Huberman sucks (but studies show that Andrew Huberman is great!)
Popper's evolutionary take on problem-solving
Problems defined as "disappointed expectations"
Whether all volitional thought is problem-solving
Are irrefutable theories ever valuable, or should they all be discarded a-priori?
References
All life is problem-solving
In Search of a Better World
Episode 51 of Increments, where we discuss "implicit definitions".
Quotes
Men, animals, plants, even unicellular organisms are constantly active. They are trying to improve their situation, or at least to avoid its deterioration. Even when asleep, the organism is actively maintaining the state of sleep: the depth (or else the shallowness) of sleep is a condition actively created by the organism, which sustains sleep (or else keeps the organism on the alert). Every organism is constantly preoccupied with the task of solving prob- lems. These problems arise from its own assessments of its condition and of its environment; conditions which the organism seeks to improve.
In Search Of A Better World, p.vii
At bottom, this procedure seems to be the only logical one. It is also the procedure that a lower organism, even a single-cell amoeba, uses when trying to solve a problem. In this case we speak of testing movements through which the organism tries to rid itself of a troublesome problem. Higher organisms are able to learn through trial and error how a certain problem should be solved. We may say that they too make testing movements - mental testings - and that to learn is essentially to tryout one testing movement after another until one is found that solves the problem. We might compare the animal's successful solution to an expectation and hence to a hypothesis or a theory. For the animal's behaviour shows us that it expects (perhaps unconsciously or dispositionally) that in a similar case the same testing movements will again solve the problem in question.
The behaviour of animals, and of plants too, shows that organisms are geared to laws or regularities. They expect laws or regularities in their surroundings, and I conjecture that most of these expectations are genetically determined - which is to say that they are innate.
All Life is Problem Solving, p.3
Socials
Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani
Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
Solve all our problems and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here
Toss us some coin over hur (patreon subscription approach or the ko-fi, the "just give us cash you animals" approach), and click dem like buttons on youtube over hur.
Do studies show that Ben or Vaden is correct? Tell us at incrementspodcast@gmail.comSupport Increments
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.