Skip to content
Lex Fridman PodcastLex Fridman Podcast

Liv Boeree: Poker, Game Theory, AI, Simulation, Aliens & Existential Risk | Lex Fridman Podcast #314

Liv Boeree is a poker champion and science educator on topics of game theory, physics, complexity, and life. Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors: - Audible: https://audible.com/lex to get 30-day free trial - GiveWell: https://www.givewell.org and use code Lex Fridman Podcast - Linode: https://linode.com/lex to get $100 free credit - Indeed: https://indeed.com/lex to get $75 credit - ExpressVPN: https://expressvpn.com/lexpod to get 3 months free EPISODE LINKS: Liv's Twitter: https://twitter.com/liv_boeree Liv's Instagram: https://instagram.com/liv_boeree Liv's Facebook: https://facebook.com/livboeree Liv's YouTube: https://youtube.com/user/LivBoeree Books and resources mentioned: Novacene: https://amzn.to/3wcVqEo POSITIVITY: https://amzn.to/3K2pfxj Meditations on Moloch: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch PODCAST INFO: Podcast website: https://lexfridman.com/podcast Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/2lwqZIr Spotify: https://spoti.fi/2nEwCF8 RSS: https://lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/ Full episodes playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4 Clips playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOeciFP3CBCIEElOJeitOr41 OUTLINE: 0:00 - Introduction 0:58 - Poker and game theory 8:01 - Dating optimally 12:53 - Learning 21:05 - Daniel Negreanu 26:13 - Phil Hellmuth 28:46 - Greatest poker player ever 33:04 - Bluffing 43:25 - Losing 52:41 - Mutually assured destruction 57:35 - Simulation hypothesis 1:14:13 - Moloch 1:43:25 - Beauty 1:55:33 - Quantifying life 2:15:43 - Existential risks 2:34:06 - AI 2:43:57 - Energy healing 2:51:07 - Astrophysics 2:54:01 - Aliens 3:19:43 - Advice for young people 3:21:48 - Music 3:29:37 - Meaning of life SOCIAL: - Twitter: https://twitter.com/lexfridman - LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lexfridman - Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lexfridman - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lexfridman - Medium: https://medium.com/@lexfridman - Reddit: https://reddit.com/r/lexfridman - Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/lexfridman

Liv BoereeguestLex Fridmanhost
Aug 24, 20223h 35mWatch on YouTube ↗

EVERY SPOKEN WORD

  1. 0:000:58

    Introduction

    1. LB

      Evolutionarily, we, you know, if we see a lion running at us, we didn't have time to sort of calculate the lion's kinetic energy and, you know, is it optimal to go this way or that way, you just reacted. And physically our bodies are well attuned to actually make right decisions. But when you're playing a game like poker, this is not something that you ev- you know, evolved to do, and yet you're in that same flight or fight response. Um, and so that's a really important skill to be able to develop, to basically learn how to, like, meditate in the moment and calm yourself so that you can think clearly.

    2. LF

      The following is a conversation with Liv Boeree, formerly one of the best poker players in the world, trained as an astrophysicist, and is now a philanthropist and an educator on topics of game theory, physics, complexity, and life. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here's Liv Boeree.

  2. 0:588:01

    Poker and game theory

    1. LF

      What role do you think luck plays in poker and in life? You can pick whichever one you want, poker or life and/or life.

    2. LB

      The longer you play, the less influence luck has. You know, like with all things, the bigger your sample size, um, the more the quality of your decisions or your strategies matter. Um, so to answer that question, yeah, in poker it really depends. If you and I sat and played 10 hands right now, I might only win 52% of the time, 53% maybe. Um, but if we played 10,000 hands, then I'll probably win, like, over 98, 99% of the time. So it's a question of sample sizes.

    3. LF

      And what are you figuring out over time? The betting strategy that this individual does, or literally it doesn't matter against any individual over time?

    4. LB

      Against any individual over time, the better player, because they're making better decisions. So what does that mean to make a better decision? Well, uh, to get into the real nitty-gritty already, um, basically poker is a game of math. Um, there are these strategies familiar with like Nash equilibria, that term, right?

    5. LF

      Yes.

    6. LB

      So there are these game theory optimal strategies that, that you can adopt. Um, and the closer you play to them, the less exploitable you are. So because I've studied the game a bunch, um, although admittedly not for a few years, but back in, you know, when I was playing all the time, um, I would study these game theory optimal solutions and try and then adopt those strategies when I go and play. So I'd play against you and I would do that. And because the objective when you're playing game theory optimal it's actually, it's a loss minimization thing that you're trying to do, um, your best bet is to try and play, uh, the sim- a sort of similar style. You also need to try and adopt this loss minimization. Um, but because I've been playing much longer than you, I'll be better at that. So first of all, you're not taking advantage of my mistakes. But then on top of that, I'll be better at recognizing when you are playing suboptimally and then deviating from this game theory optimal strategy to exploit your bad plays.

    7. LF

      Can you define game theory and Nash equilibria? Can we try to sneak up to it in a bunch of ways? Like, uh, w- what's the game theory framework of analyzing poker or analyzing any kind of situation?

    8. LB

      So game theory is just basically the study of decisions within a competitive situation. Um, I mean, it's technically a branch of economics, um, but it also applies to like dec- like wider decision theory. Um, and, you know, usually when you see it, it's these like little payoff matrices and so on. That's how it's depicted. But it's essentially just like study of strategies under different competitive situations. Um, and as it happens, certain games, in fact many, many games, um, have these things called Nash equilibria. And what that means is when you're in a Nash equilibrium, basically, uh, it is not... there is no strategy that you can take that would be more beneficial than the one you're currently taking, assuming your opponent is also doing the same thing. Um, so it'd be a bad idea, you know, if we're both playing at a, in, you know, a game theory optimal strategy, if either of us deviate from that now the o- you know, the, we're, we're putting ourselves at a disadvantage. Um, rock paper scissors this is actually a really great example of this. Like, if we were to start playing rock paper s- you know, you know nothing about me and we're gonna play for all our money, let's play ten rounds of it. What would your sort of optimal strategy be do you think? What would you do?

    9. LF

      Um, let's see. I would probably try to be as random as possible.

    10. LB

      Exactly. You want to, because you don't know anything about me, you don't want to give anything about, away about yourself, so ideally you'd have like a little dice or somewhat, you know, perfect randomizer that makes you randomize 33% of the time each of the three different things. And in response to that, um, well, actually I can kind of do anything, but I would probably just randomize back too. But actually it wouldn't matter because you're, I know that you're playing randomly. Um, so that would be us in a Nash equilibrium, um, where we're both playing this like unexploitable strategy. However, if after a while you then notice that I'm playing rock a little bit more often than I should ...

    11. LF

      Yeah, you're the kind of person that would do that, wouldn't you?

    12. LB

      Sure. Yes, yes, yes. I'm not, I'm more of a scissors girl. But anyway.

    13. LF

      You are?

    14. LB

      Uh, no, I'm a, as I said, randomizer. Uh ...

    15. LF

      (laughs)

    16. LB

      So you notice I'm throwing rock too much or something like that.

    17. LF

      Right.

    18. LB

      Now, you'd be making a mistake by continuing playing this game theory optimal strategy, becau- well, the previous one, because you are now, there's an, I'm making a mistake and you're not deviating and exploiting my mistake. Um, so you'd want to start throwing paper a bit more often, um, in whatever you figure is the right sort of percentage of the time that I'm throwing rock too often. So that's basically an example of where, you know, what, what game theory optimal strategy is in terms of loss minimization, but it's not always, uh, the maximally profitable thing if your opponent is doing stupid sh- stupid stuff, which, you know, in that example.So that's kind of then how it works in poker, but it's a lot more complex.

    19. LF

      Right.

    20. LB

      Um, and the way poker players typically, you know, nowadays they study. The game's changed so much and I think we should talk about how it's sort of evolved. Um, but nowadays like the- the top pros basically spend all their time in between sessions running these simulators, uh, using like software where they do basically Monte Carlo simulations, sort of doing billions of fictitious self-play, um, hands. You input a fictitious hand scenario, like, "Oh, what do I do with jack, nine suited on a king, ten, four, two- two spades board?"

    21. LF

      Mm-hmm.

    22. LB

      Um, uh, and- and you know, against this bet size. So you'd input that, press Play, it'll run it's- it's, uh, you know, it's billions of fake hands and then it'll converge upon what the game theory optimal strategies are.

    23. LF

      Mm-hmm.

    24. LB

      Um, and then you wanna try and memorize what these are. Basically they're like ratios of how often you, you know, what types of hands, uh, you want to bluff and what percentage of the time. So then there's this additional layer of in-built randomization built in.

    25. LF

      Yeah, those- those kind of simulations incorporate all the betting strategies and everything else like that.

    26. LB

      Yes.

    27. LF

      So they ... So as opposed to some kind of very crude mathematical model of what's the probability you win just based on the quality of the card, uh, it's including everything else too. The- the game theory of it.

    28. LB

      Yes. Yeah, essentially. And what's interesting is that nowadays if you want to be a top pro and you go and play in these really, like, the super high stakes tournaments or tough cash games, if you don't know this stuff, you're gonna get eaten alive in the long run.

    29. LF

      Yeah.

    30. LB

      But of course, you could get lucky over the short run and that's where this, like, luck factor comes in, because luck is both a blessing and a curse. I- if luck didn't ex- you know, if there wasn't this random element and th- there wasn't the ability for worse players to win sometimes, then poker would fall apart.

  3. 8:0112:53

    Dating optimally

    1. LB

      poker.

    2. LF

      Have you seen, um, A Beautiful Mind, that movie?

    3. LB

      Years ago.

    4. LF

      Well, what do you think about the game theoretic formulation of, uh, what is it? The hot blonde at the bar? Do you remember? Like ...

    5. LB

      Oh, yeah.

    6. LF

      The way they illustrated it is they're trying to pick up a girl at a bar and there's multiple girls. They're like friend ... It's like a friend group and you're trying to approach ... I don't remember the details, but I remember-

    7. LB

      Don't you like then speak to her friends first-

    8. LF

      Yeah, yeah, yeah.

    9. LB

      ... or something like that?

    10. LF

      Yeah.

    11. LB

      Feign disinterest. I mean, it's classic pickup artist stuff, right?

    12. LF

      Yeah.

    13. LB

      You- you wanna ...

    14. LF

      And they were trying to, uh, correlate that somehow that being an optimal strategy, uh, game theoretically. Why? What ... what ... Like, I don't think ... I remember-

    15. LB

      I can't imagine that there ... I mean, there's probably an optimal strategy. Is it ... Does that mean that there- there's an actual Nash equilibrium of like picking up girls? I don't-

    16. LF

      Do you know the, uh, The- The Marriage Problem? It's o- optimal stopping.

    17. LB

      Yes.

    18. LF

      So where it's a optimal dating strategy where you, uh ... Do you- do you remember what it is?

    19. LB

      Yeah, I think it's like something like you- you- you know you've got like a set of 100 people you're gonna look through and after how many do you now after that ... After going on this many dates out of 100, at what point do you then go, "Okay, the next best person I see, is that the right one?" And I think it's like something like 37% I think it was.

    20. LF

      Uh, it's one over E, whatever that is.

    21. LB

      Right, which I think is 37%.

    22. LF

      Yeah. (laughs) We're gonna fact check that.

    23. LB

      (laughs)

    24. LF

      Um, (laughs) yeah. So but it's funny, under those strict constraints then yes, after that many people, as long as you have a fixed size pool, then you just pick the- the per- the next person that is better than anyone you've seen before.

    25. LB

      Anyone else you've seen. Yeah.

    26. LF

      Um, if-

    27. LB

      Have you- have you tried this? Have you incorporated it?

    28. LF

      (laughs) I'm not one of those people. I'm, uh ... Uh, we- and we're gonna discuss this. I ...

    29. LB

      (laughs)

    30. LF

      (laughs) And what do you mean those people?

  4. 12:5321:05

    Learning

    1. LF

      about books, you don't really need to read it, you can just look at the CliffsNotes.

    2. LB

      Game, yeah, game the dating app by feigning intellectualism.

    3. LF

      Yeah. Can I admit something very horrible about myself?

    4. LB

      Go on.

    5. LF

      The things that... You know, I don't have many things in my closet, but this is one of them. I've never actually read Sha- uh, read Shakespeare. I've only read CliffsNotes, and I got a five on the AP English, uh, exam-

    6. LB

      Wow.

    7. LF

      ... and I, I-

    8. LB

      Which book?

    9. LF

      Uh, the, which books have I read or-

    10. LB

      Well, yeah, which was the, the exam on which books?

    11. LF

      Oh, no, they, they include a lot of them.

    12. LB

      Oh.

    13. LF

      Um, but Hamlet, uh, I don't even know if you read Romeo and Juliet. Uh, Macbeth. I don't, I don't remember, but I don't understand it. It's, like, really cryptic.

    14. LB

      It's hard, yeah.

    15. LF

      It's really... I don't... And it's not that pleasant to read. It's like ancient speak. I don't understand it. Anyway, maybe I was too dumb. I'm still too dumb. But, uh, I did ge-

    16. LB

      But you got a five, which is-

    17. LF

      Yeah, yeah, yeah.

    18. LB

      I don't know how the US grading system works.

    19. LF

      Oh, no. So AP English is a, there's kind of this advanced versions of courses in high school, and you take a test that is, like, a broad test for that subject and includes a lot. It wasn't obviously just Shakespeare. I think a lot of it was also writing, uh, written. You have like AP Physics, AP Computer Science, AP Biology, AP Chemistry, and then AP English or AP Literature. I forget what it was. But, um, I think Shakespeare was a part of that, but I, I...

    20. LB

      And you and you gameif- the point is you gameified it.

    21. LF

      Gameifi-... Well, entirely-

    22. LB

      I mean-

    23. LF

      ... I was into getting As. I saw it as a game. I don't think any... I don't think all the learning I've done has been outside of the s- ou- outside of school. The deepest learning I've done has been outside of school, with a few exceptions, especially in grad school, like deep computer science courses. But that was still outside of school, because that, it was outside of getting... Sorry. It was outside of getting the A for the course. The best stuff I've ever done is when you read the chapter and you do many of the problems at the end of the chapter-

    24. LB

      Mm.

    25. LF

      ... which is usually not what's required for the course, like the hardest stuff. In fact, textbooks are freaking incredible. If you go back now and you look at, like, biology textbook or, or any of the computer science textbooks on algorithms and data structures, those things are incredible.

    26. LB

      Yeah.

    27. LF

      They, they have the best summary of a subject, plus they have practice problems of increasing difficulty that allows you to truly master the basic, like the fundamental ideas behind that.

    28. LB

      That was... I, I got through my entire physics degree with one textbook that was just this really comprehensive one that they told us at the beginning of the first year, "Buy this, but you're gonna have to buy 15 other books for all your supplementary courses." And I was like, every time I would just check to see whether this book covered it, and it did, and I think I only bought, like, two or three extra, and thank God, because they're so, super expensive, textbooks. It's a whole racket they've got going on. Um, yet they are. They, they could just... You get the right one, it's just like a manual for... But what's interesting though is (sighs) this is the tyranny of, of having exams and metrics.

    29. LF

      Yeah. It's the tyranny of exams and metrics, yes.

    30. LB

      I loved them because I loved... I'm, I'm very competitive, and I liked-

  5. 21:0526:13

    Daniel Negreanu

    1. LB

    2. LF

      So, we- we mentioned offline Daniel Negreanu. Um, I'm gonna get a chance to talk to him o- on this podcast, and he's somebody that I- I was, I found fascinating in terms of the way he thinks about poker, verbalizes the way he thinks about poker, the way he plays poker, so... And he's still pretty damn good. He's been good for a long time. So you mentioned that people are running these kind of simulations and th- the game of poker has changed. Do you think he is adapting in this way? Do you th- like, the top pros, uh, do they have to adapt this way or is there, is there still, like, over the years, y- you basically develop this gut feeling about, like, you- you get to be, like, good the way, like, AlphaZero's good? You look at the board and s- f- somehow from the fog comes out the right answer. Like, this is likely what they have, this is likely the best way to move, and you don't really, you can't really put a finger on exactly why, uh, but it just comes from your gut feeling. Or no?

    3. LB

      Yes and no. So gut feelings are definitely very important. Um, you know, that we've got our two mo- well, you can distill it down to two modes of decision-making, right? You've got your sort of logical, linear voice in your head, system two as it's often called, and your system one, your- your- your gut, your gut intuition. Um, and historically in poker, the very best players were playing almost entirely by their gut. Um, you know, often they'd do some kind of inspired play and you'd ask them why they do it, and they wouldn't really be able to explain it. Um, and that's not so much because their process was unintelligible but it was more just because no one uns- no one had the language with which to describe what optimal strategies were because no one really understood how poker worked. This was before, you know, we had analysis software, you know, no one was writing, you know, if... I guess some people would write down their hands in a little notebook, but there was no way to assimilate all this data and- and analyze it. But then, you know, with, when computers became cheaper and software started emerging and then obviously online poker where it would, like, automatically save your hand histories, um, now all of a sudden you kind of had this- this body of data that you could run analysis on. And so that's when people started to- to see, you know, these mathematical solutions. And, um, and so what that meant is the- the role of intuition essentially became smaller. Um, and it- it- it went more into, as- as we talked before about, you know, this game theory optimal style. But as, als- also as I said, like, game theory optimal is about, um, loss minimization and being unexploitable, but if you're playing against people who aren't... 'Cause no person, no human being can play perfectly game theory optimal in poker, not even the best AIs. They're still like, they're m- you know, they're 99.99% of the way there or whatever but this, it's kind of like the speed of light, you can't reach it perfectly.

    4. LF

      So the- there's still a role for intuition?

    5. LB

      Yes. So when, yeah, when you're playing this unexploitable s- style but when your opponents start doing, uh, something, you know, suboptimal that you want to exploit, well now that's where not only your, like, logical brain will need to be thinking, "Well, okay, I know I have this, my, I'm at the sort of top end of my range here with this- with this hand, uh, so that means I need to be calling X percent of the time, um, and I put them on this range," et cetera. Uh, but then-... sometimes you'll have this gut feeling that will tell you, you know, ah, "You know what? This time I know, I know mathematically I'm meant to call now. You know, I've got, I'm in the sort of top end of my range and, um, these, this is the odds I'm getting, so the maths says I should call." But there's something in your gut saying, "They've got it this time. They've got it." Like, uh, you, they're, they're beating you, might, maybe your hand is worse. Um, so then the, the, the real art, this is where the, the last remaining art in poker, the, the fuzziness, uh, is like, do you listen to your gut? How do you quantify the strength of it or can you even quantify the strength of it? Um, and I think that's what Daniel has. I mean, I, I can't speak for how much he's studying with, with, with the simulators and that kind of thing. I think he has.

    6. LF

      Yeah.

    7. LB

      Like, he must be, to, to still be keeping up. Um, but he has an incredible intuition for just... He's seen so many hands of poker in the flesh. He's seen so many people, the way they behave when the chips are, you know, when the money's on the line, and you've got him staring you down in the eye. You know, he's intimidating.

    8. LF

      Mm-hmm.

    9. LB

      He's got this, like, kind of X factor vibe that he p- you know, gives out.

    10. LF

      And he talks a lot, which is an interactive element, which is he's getting stuff from other people.

    11. LB

      Yes. Yeah.

    12. LF

      And just, like, the subtlety, so he's, like, he's probing constantly.

    13. LB

      Yeah. He's probing and he's getting this extra layer of information-

    14. LF

      Yeah.

    15. LB

      ... that others can't. Now, that said though, he's good online as well. You know, I don't know how... Again, would he be beating the top cash game players online? Probably not. No. Um, but when he's in, in person and he's got that additional layer of information, he c- he can not only extract it, but he knows what to do with it, um, still

  6. 26:1328:46

    Phil Hellmuth

    1. LB

      so well. Uh, there's one player who I would say is the exception to all of this, um, and he's one of my favorite people to talk about in terms of... I think he might have cracked the simulation.

    2. LF

      Mm-hmm.

    3. LB

      Uh, is Phil Hellmuth.

    4. LF

      Mm-hmm.

    5. LB

      Uh, he... (laughs)

    6. LF

      In more ways than one, he's cracked the simulation, I think.

    7. LB

      Yeah. He, (laughs) somehow to this day is still... And I love you, Phil, don't... I'm not, in any way, knocking you. Um, he's still winning so much at the World Series of Poker, specifically. Um, he's now won 16 bracelets. The next nearest person I think has won 10. Um, and he's consistently, year in, year out, going deep or winning these huge field tournaments. You know, with like 2,000 people, um, which statistically he should not be doing.

    8. LF

      (laughs)

    9. LB

      And-

    10. LF

      Yeah.

    11. LB

      ... and yet, you watch some of the plays he makes, and they make no sense. Like, mathematically, they are so far from game theory optimal.

    12. LF

      Yeah.

    13. LB

      And the thing is, if you went and stuck him in one of these high, like high-stakes cash games with a bunch of, like, GTO people, he's gonna get ripped apart. But there's something that he has, that when he's in the halls of the World Series of Poker, specifically, um, amongst sort of amateurish players, he gets them to do crazy shit.

    14. LF

      Yeah.

    15. LB

      Like, tha- and, and, but my little pet theory is that also, he just... The ca- he- he's, he's like a wizard and he gets the cards to do what he needs them to. (laughs)

    16. LF

      (laughs)

    17. LB

      Um, because he ex- he, he just expects to win and he expects to recei- you know, to get flopper set with a, a frequency far beyond what the s- you know, the, the, the, the real percentages are. And I don't even know if he knows what the real percentages are.

    18. LF

      I- he-

    19. LB

      He doesn't need to-

    20. LF

      I think-

    21. LB

      ... because he gets there.

    22. LF

      ... I think he has found the cheat code, 'cause when I've seen him play, he seems to be, like, annoyed that the long shot thing didn't happen.

    23. LB

      Yes.

    24. LF

      (laughs) He's, like, annoyed and, and it's almost like everybody else is stupid because he was obviously going to win with his pair.

    25. LB

      Meant to win. If that-

    26. LF

      Laux putr-

    27. LB

      ... silly thing hadn't happened, and it's like, you don't understand. The silly thing happens 99% of the time.

    28. LF

      Yeah.

    29. LB

      And it's the 1%, not the other way around. But genuinely, for his lived experience, at the World S- only at the World Series of Poker-

    30. LF

      Yeah.

  7. 28:4633:04

    Greatest poker player ever

    1. LB

      right still.

    2. LF

      Wh- who do you think is the greatest of all time? Would you put Hellmuth?

    3. LB

      (sighs) It depends.

    4. LF

      Not, not because definitely, he seems like the kind of person, when mentioned, he would actually watch this, so you might wanna be careful. Not-

    5. LB

      Well, as I said, I love Phil.

    6. LF

      Yes.

    7. LB

      And I, and I'm, I'm, I have... I would say this to his face. I'm not-

    8. LF

      Yeah.

    9. LB

      ... saying anything I don't... He's got, he truly, e- I mean, he is one of the greatest.

    10. LF

      Yeah.

    11. LB

      I don't know if he's the greatest. He's certainly the greatest at the World Series of Poker and he is the greatest at, despite the games switching into a pure game of, almost an entire game of math, he has managed to keep the magic alive. And this, like, the, just through sheer force of will, making the game work for him, and that is incredible. And I think it's something that should be studied because it's an example.

    12. LF

      Yeah. There might be some actual game theoretic wisdom. There m- there might be something to be said about optimality from studying him. Right?

    13. LB

      What do you mean, what do you mean by optimality?

    14. LF

      Meaning, uh, or rather game design perhaps. Meaning if what he's doing is working, maybe poker is more complicated than we're currently modeling it as. So like his-

    15. LB

      Or-

    16. LF

      Yeah.

    17. LB

      ... there's an extra layer. And I don't mean to get too-

    18. LF

      Yes.

    19. LB

      ... weird and wooey, but s- but, or there's an extra layer of ability to manipulate the things the way you want them to go-

    20. LF

      Mm-hmm.

    21. LB

      ... that we don't understand yet.

    22. LF

      Do you think Phil Hellmuth understands them? Is he just generally- (laughs)

    23. LB

      Hashtag positivity. Well, as, uh, he did, he wrote a book on positivity and it's-

    24. LF

      He has?

    25. LB

      Yeah.

    26. LF

      He did? Not like-

    27. LB

      It's called Positivity.

    28. LF

      ... like a trolling book?

    29. LB

      No.

    30. LF

      A serious-

  8. 33:0443:25

    Bluffing

    1. LB

    2. LF

      So how much is bluffing part of the game?

    3. LB

      Huge amount.

    4. LF

      So, yeah, I mean, maybe actually let me ask, like, wha- what did it feel like with Phil Ivey or anyone else when it's a high stake, when it's a big, it's a big bluff? Um, so a lot of money on the table and maybe... I mean, what defines a big bluff? Maybe a lot of money on the table, but also some uncertainty in your mind and heart about, like, self-doubt about maybe I miscalculated what's going on here with the bets said, all that kind of stuff. Like, what does that feel like?

    5. LB

      I mean, it's, I imagine, comparable to, you know, running a... I mean, any kind of big bluff where you have a lot of something that you care about on the line, you know? So if you're bluffing in a courtroom, not that anyone should ever do that, or-

    6. LF

      Yeah.

    7. LB

      ... you know, something equatable to that. It's, it's incre-... You know, in that scenario, you know, it was, I think it was the first time I'd ever played a 20... I'd won my way into this 25K tournament. It was at... So that was the buy-in, €25,000. And I had satellited my way in because it was much bigger than I would never, ever normally play. And, you know, I hadn't... I wasn't that experienced at the time and now I was sitting there against all the big boys, you know, the Negreanu's, the Phil Ivey's and so on. Um, and then, uh, to, like, each, each time you put the bets out, you know, you put another bet out, y- your card... Yeah, I, I was on a st- what's called a semi-bluff. So there were some cards that could come that would make my hand very, very strong and therefore win, but most of the time those cards don't come.

    8. LF

      So that, it's a semi-bluff 'cause you're representing... What, are you representing that you're, already have something?

    9. LB

      Yeah. So I think in this scenario, I had, uh, a flush draw. Two, two... So I had two clubs, two, two clubs came out on the flop, and then I'm hoping that on the turn on the river one will come. So I have some future equity. I could hit a club and then I'll have the best hand, in which case, great, um, and so I can keep betting and I'll want them to call, but I'm also got the other way of winning the hand where if my f- card doesn't come, I can keep betting and get them to fold their hand.

    10. LF

      Mm-hmm.

    11. LB

      Um, and I'm pretty sure that's what the scenario was. Um, so I had some future equity, but it still... You know, most of the time, I don't hit that club and... So I would rather him just fold because I'm, you know, the pot is now getting bigger and bigger, and in the end, like, I jam all, draw- jam all in on the river, that's my entire tournament on the line. As, as far as I'm aware, this might be the one time I ever get to play a big 25K. You know, this was the first time I'd played one, so it was... It felt like the most momentous thing, and this was also when I was trying to build myself up, you know, build my name, a name for myself in, in poker. I wanted to get respect.

    12. LF

      So this could destroy everything for you?

    13. LB

      It felt like it in the moment.

    14. LF

      Yeah.

    15. LB

      Like, I mean, it literally does feel like a form of life and death. Like, your body physiologically is-

    16. LF

      Yeah.

    17. LB

      ... having that flight or fight response.

    18. LF

      What, what are you doing with your body? What are you doing with your face?

    19. LB

      Just trying to-

    20. LF

      Are you just like... What are you thinking about? (laughs) Are, are you-

    21. LB

      Uh, well, a mixture of, like, "Okay, what are the cards..." So, in theory, I'm thinking about, like, "Okay, what are, what are cards that look, make my hand look stronger? Which, you know, which cards hit my perceived range from his perspective? Which cards don't? Um, what's the right amount of bet size to, you know, maximize my fold equity in this situation?" You know, that's the logical stuff that I should be thinking about, but I think in reality because I was so scared, 'cause there's this, at least for me, there's a certain threshold of, like, nervousness or stress beyond which the, like, logical brain shuts off.... and now it just gets into this, like... I-i-it just, like, it feels like a game of wits basically.

    22. LF

      Yeah.

    23. LB

      It's like, of, of nerve. Can you hold your, hold your resolve? Um, and it certainly got by that, like by the river. This, I think, by that point I was like, "I don't even know if this is a good bluff anymore, but-"

    24. LF

      Yeah.

    25. LB

      "... fuck it, let's do it. I'm all in."

    26. LF

      Yeah. Your mind is almost numb from the intensity of that feeling.

    27. LB

      I call, I call it the white noise.

    28. LF

      (laughs)

    29. LB

      And, and that's a s- and it, and it happens in all kinds of decision-making, I think anything where it's really, really stressful. Like, I can imagine someone in, like, an important job interview, if it's, like, a job they've always wanted and they're getting grilled, you know, like Bridgewater-style where they ask these really, like, really hard, like, mathematical questions. You know, that's, it's a really learned skill to be able to, like, subdue your flight or fight response, you know, what I think get from the sympathetic into the parasympathetic, so you can actually l- you know, engage the, that voice in your head and do those slow logical calculations. 'Cause evolutionarily, we, you know, if we see a lion running at us, we didn't have time to sort of calculate the lion's kinetic energy and, you know, is it optimal to go this way or that way, you just reacted. And physically, our bodies are well-attuned to actually make right decisions. But when you're playing a game like poker, this is not something that you ever, you know, evolved to do, and yet you're in that same flight or fight response. Um, and so that's a really important skill to be able to develop, to basically learn how to, like, m- meditate in the moment and calm yourself so that you can think clearly.

    30. LF

      But as you were searching for a com- a comparable thing, it's interesting 'cause you, I, you just made me realize that bluffing is like an incredibly high-stakes form of lying. You're, you're, you're lying and I don't think you can-

  9. 43:2552:41

    Losing

    1. LB

      have.

    2. LF

      What's it feel like to lose? Like, uh, we talked about bluffing when it worked out. What about when you... when you go broke?

    3. LB

      So, like, in a game? I- I'm... Yeah.

    4. LF

      (laughs)

    5. LB

      Unfortunately I've never gone broke, uh, in poker.

    6. LF

      You mean, like, full life?

    7. LB

      Full life? No.

    8. LF

      N- no?

    9. LB

      Um, I know plenty of people who have. Um, uh, and I don't think Igor would mind me saying he went, you know... He went broke once in poker. Well, you know, early on when we were together. Um-

    10. LF

      Well, I- I feel like you haven't lived unless you've gone broke.

    11. LB

      I- I... Yeah. I've, I-

    12. LF

      In some sense.

    13. LB

      Right. Well, I, I, I-

    14. LF

      Some fundamental sense.

    15. LB

      I mean, I'm happy... I, I've sort of lived through it vicariously through him when he did it at the time. But, yeah, what is it like to lose? Well, it depends. So it depends on the amount, it depends what percentage of your net worth you've just lost, um, it depends on your brain chemistry, really, you know, varies from person to person, but-

    16. LF

      Well, you have a very cold, calculating way of thinking about this, uh, so it depends what percentage you... (laughs)

    17. LB

      Well, it d- it really does, right?

    18. LF

      And it... Yeah, it's true, it's true.

    19. LB

      You know? And I... But that's... I mean, that's another thing poker trains you to do, you see, you, you see everything in percentages, um, or you see everything in, like, ROI or expected hourlies or cost benefit, et cetera. You know? So, um, that's... I, I... One of the things I've tried to do is calibrate the strength of my emotional response to the, to the win or loss that I've received. Because it's, it's no good if, like, you know, you have a huge emotional dramatic response to a tiny loss, um, or, on the flip side, you have a huge win and you're sort- so dead inside that you don't even feel it. Well, that's, you know, that's a shame. I want my emotions to calibrate with reality as much as possible. Um, so yeah, what's it like to lose? I mean, I've had times where I've lost, you know... busted out of a tournament that I thought I was gonna win in, es- you know, especially if I got really unlucky or, um, or I make a dumb play, uh, where I've gone away and, like, you know, kicked, kicked the wall, punched a wall. I, like, nearly broke my hand one time. Like, um, I'm a lot less competitive than I used to b- be. Like, I was, like, pathologically competitive in my, like, late teens/early 20s. I just had to win at everything. Um, and I think that's, sort of, slowly waned as I've gotten older, but-

    20. LF

      According to you, yeah.

    21. LB

      According to me.

    22. LF

      I- I don't know if others would say the same, right?

    23. LB

      Um-

    24. LF

      I feel like ultra competitive people... Like, I've heard Joe Rogan say this to me, is, like, uh, that he's a lot less competitive than he used to be. Uh, I don't know about that.

    25. LB

      Oh, I believe it. No, I totally believe it. Like, I... Because as you get o- you can still be... Like, I care about winning. Like, when, you know, I play a game with my buddies online or, you know, whatever it is. Poly- Polytopia is my current obsession, like, when I-

    26. LF

      (laughs) Th- thank you for passing on your obsession to me.

    27. LB

      Oh, you're playing now?

    28. LF

      Yeah, I'm playing now.

    29. LB

      We gotta have a game. Yeah.

    30. LF

      But I'm terrible and I enjoy playing terribly. I don't wanna have a game because that's gonna pull me into your monster of, of, like, uh, competitive, uh, play.

  10. 52:4157:35

    Mutually assured destruction

    1. LB

    2. LF

      What do you think about that, uh, mutually assured destruction, that very simple almost to the point of caricaturing game theory idea that does seem to be at the core why we haven't blown each other up yet with nuclear weapons? Do you think there's some truth to that, this kind of stabilizing force of mutually assured destruction, and do you think that's gonna hold up-

    3. LB

      (laughs)

    4. LF

      ... through the 21st century?

    5. LB

      I mean, it's, it has, it has held, yes. There has, there's definitely truth to it that it was a, a, you know, it's a Nash equilibrium.

    6. LF

      Yeah, are you surprised it held this long?

    7. LB

      Um...

    8. LF

      Isn't it crazy?

    9. LB

      It is crazy when you factor in all the, like, near miss accidental firings. Yes. That's makes me wonder, like, well, you know, you know, a- are you familiar with the, like, quantum suicide thought experiment?

    10. LF

      No.

    11. LB

      Where it's basically like, uh, you have a, you know, like a Russian roulette type scenario, uh, set h- hooked up to some kind of quantum event, you know, uh, particle splitting, um, or para-particle splitting. And if it, you know, if it goes A then th- the gun doesn't go off, and it goes B then it does go off and it kills you. Because you can only ever be in the univer- you know, assuming, like, the Everett branch, you know, multiverse theory, you will always only end up in the, in the branch where you continually m- you know, option A comes in.

    12. LF

      Yeah.

    13. LB

      But you run that experiment enough times it g- starts getting pretty damn, you know, out of the, the, the tree gets huge. There's a million different scenarios and, but you'll always find yourself in this, in the one where it didn't go off. And, uh, and so from that perspective you, i- you are essentially immortal 'cause someone... And, and you will only find yourself in the set of observers that make it down that path.

    14. LF

      Yeah.

    15. LB

      So it's, it's, it's kind of a-

    16. LF

      But that, that doesn't mean... That does (laughs) that-

    17. LB

      Well-

    18. LF

      ... that does, doesn't mean you're s- (laughs) you're still not gonna be fucked at some point in your life. You-

    19. LB

      No, of course not. No.

    20. LF

      You might be-

    21. LB

      I'm not, I'm not advocating, like, that we're all immo- immortal because of this. It's just, like, a fun thought experiment. And the point is it, it, like, raises this thing of, like, these things called, uh, observer selection effects, which Bostrom, uh, Nick Bostrom talks about a lot, and I think people should go read. Um-

    22. LF

      It's really powerful but I think it could be overextended, that logic. I'm not sure...... exactly how it can be. It, I just feel like you can get... You can, um, over-generalize that logic somehow and that-

    23. LB

      Well, no, I mean, it leads you into, like, solipsism, which is a very dangerous mindset. Again, if everyone, like, falls into solipsism of like, "Well, I'll be fine," that's a great way of creating a very, you know, self-terminating environment. Um, but, uh, my point is, is that with the nuclear weapons thing, um, there have been at least, I think it's 12 or 11, um, near-misses w- of, like, just stupid things. Like, uh, there was moonrise over Norway and it made weird reflections off some glaciers in the mountains which set off, I think, the alarms of NORAD's, uh, NORAD radar, and that put them on high alert, nearly ready to shoot. And it was only because, um, the head of Russian military happened to be at the UN in New York at the time, that they go like, "Well, wait a second. Why would... Why would they fire now when their guy is there?" And it was only ju- that lucky happenstance-

    24. LF

      Yeah.

    25. LB

      ... which doesn't happen very often, where they didn't then escalate it into firing. And there's a bunch of these different ones. Stanislav Petrov, like saved... The o- the person who should be the most famous person on Earth, 'cause he's probably, on expectation, saved the most human lives of anyone, like billions of people, by ignoring Russian orders to fire because he felt in his gut that actually this was a false alarm. And it turned out to be. You know, very hard thing to do. Um, and there's so many of those scenarios that I can't help but wonder at this point that we aren't having this kind of, like, selection effect thing going on. 'Cause you look back and you're like, "Geez, that's a lot of near-misses." But, well, of course we don't know the actual probabilities that they would've end- each one would have ended up in nuclear war. Maybe they were not that likely. But still, the point is, it's a very dark, stupid game that we're playing. Um, and it is an absolute moral imperative, if you ask me, to get as many people thinking about ways to make this, like, very precarious. 'Cause we're in a Nash equilibrium, but it's not like we're in the bottom of a pit, you know? If you were to, like, map it topographically, um, it's not like a stable ball at the bottom of a thing. We're not in equilibrium because of that. We're on the top of a hill with a ball balanced on top and just, and any little nudge could send it flying down, and, you know, nuclear war pops off and hellfire and bad times.

    26. LF

      On the positive side, life on Earth will probably still continue. And a- another intelligent civilization might still pop up-

    27. LB

      Maybe.

    28. LF

      ... uh, several millennia after-

    29. LB

      Yeah. It de- it depend... Pick your X-risk. Depends on the X-risk. Nuclear war, sure, that's one of the perhaps less bad ones. Uh, green goo through synthetic biology, very bad. Will turn d- d- you know, destroy all, uh, y- organic matter-

    30. LF

      Yeah.

  11. 57:351:14:13

    Simulation hypothesis

    1. LF

      There's a robot right behind you. Okay, wait, uh, so, oh, let me ask you about this from a game theory perspective. Do you think we're living in a simulation? Do you think we're lis- living inside a video game-

    2. LB

      (laughs)

    3. LF

      ... created by somebody else?

    4. LB

      (laughs) Do I think... Well, so what was the second part of the question? Do I think we're living in a simulation and...

    5. LF

      W- a, a simulation that is observed by somebody for purpose of entertainment? So, like a video game. Are we listening? Are we... B- because th- th- there's a cre- it's like Phil Hellmuth type of situation.

    6. LB

      Yeah.

    7. LF

      Right? Like, um, there's a creepy level of like, this is kind of fun and interesting. Like, there's a lot of interesting stuff going on. I mean, that could be somehow integrated into the evolutionary process where, uh, i- m- the way we perceive and are-

    8. LB

      Are you asking me if I believe in God?

    9. LF

      Um...

    10. LB

      Sounds like it.

    11. LF

      Kind of, but God seems to be not optimizing, uh, in the different formulations of God that we conceive of, he doesn't seem to be, or she, optimizing for, uh, like, personal entertainment. (laughs) Or maybe-

    12. LB

      Well-

    13. LF

      ... the older gods did, but the, the, the, you know, just like, basically like a teenager in, in their mom's basement watching, create a fun-

    14. LB

      Right.

    15. LF

      ... universe to observe-

    16. LB

      So-

    17. LF

      ... what kind of crazy shit might happen.

    18. LB

      Okay, so to try and answer this, um, do I think there is some kind of ex- extraneous intelligence to, like, our s- you know, classic measurable universe that we, you know, can measure with conve- you know, through f- our current physics and, uh, uh, instruments? I think so, yes. Um, partly because I've had just small little bits of evidence in my own ex- in my own life which have made me question. Like, so I was a diehard atheist, um, even five years ago. Uh, you know, I got into, it was like the rationality community, big fan of LessWrong, uh, continue to be, incredible, uh, resource. Um, but I've just started to have too many little (sighs) snippets of experience which don't make sense with the current sort of purely materialistic, um, explanation of how reality works. Um-

    19. LF

      I- i- isn't that just like a humbling practical realization that we don't know how reality works? Isn't that just a reminder to yourself?

    20. LB

      Totally. Yeah, no, it's, it's a reminder of epistemic humility.

    21. LF

      Yeah.

    22. LB

      Because I fell too hard, you know, same, same as people, like, I think, you know, many people who are just like, "My religion is the way, this is the correct way, this is the work, this is the law. Um, you are immoral if you don't follow this, blah, blah, blah," I think they are lacking epistemic humility, they're a little too, too much hubris there. But similarly, I think the, sort of the Richard Dawkins brand of atheism is too, i- is too rigid as well, and doesn't... I, y- you know, I th- there's a way to try and navigate these questions which still honors the scientific method, which I still think is our best sort of-... the realm of, like, reasonable inquiry, you know, a method of inquiry. Um, so an example, um, I've two kind of notable examples that, like, really rattled my, my, uh, my cage. Uh, the first one was actually in 2010 early on in, um, uh, quite early on in my poker career. And I, the, the, i, the Is- uh, remember the Icelandic volcano that erupted that, like, shut down kind of all Atlantic airspace? Um, and I, it meant I got stuck down in the South of France. I was there for something else, um, and I, I couldn't get home and someone said, "Well, there's a big poker tournament happening in Italy maybe, do you wanna go?" I was like, "Oh right, sure." Like, let's, you know, got a train across, found a way to get there. Um, and it, the buy-in was €5,000 which was much bigger than my bank roll would normally allow and so I, uh, played a feeder tournament, won my way in, kind of like I did with the Monte Carlo big one. Um, uh, so then I won my way, you know, from €500 into €5,000 to play this thing. And on day one of then the big tournament which turned out to have, it was the biggest tournament ever held in Europe at the time. It got over, like, 1,200 people. Absolutely huge. And I remember they dimmed the lights, uh, for, before, you know, the normal shuffle up and deal, uh, to tell everyone to start playing and they played, uh, Chemical Brothers' Hey Boy Hey Girl, um, which I don't know why it's notable but it was just, like, a really, it was a song I always liked. It was like one of these, like, pump me up songs. And I was sitting there thinking, "Oh yeah, this is exciting. I'm playing this really big tournament." And out of nowhere, just suddenly this voice in my head just, and it sounded like my own sort of, you know when you s- you think in your mind you hear a voice kind of, right? At least I do. Um, and so it sounded like my own voice and it said, "You are gonna win this tournament." And it was so powerful that I got this, like, wave of, like, you know, sort of goosebumps down my body and I even loo- I remember looking around being like, "Did anyone else hear that?" And obviously people are on their phones like, "No, no one else heard it." And I was like, "Okay." Six days later I win the fucking tournament out of 1,200 people. And (sighs) I, I, to, I, I don't know how to explain it.

    23. LF

      Yeah.

    24. LB

      Um, okay, yes, maybe I have that feeling before every time I play and it's just that I happened to r- you know, because I won the tournament I retroactively remembered it.

    25. LF

      Mm-hmm.

    26. LB

      But that's just-

    27. LF

      Or the, or the feeling gave you a kind of now from the film Hellmuthian-

    28. LB

      Well, exactly.

    29. LF

      ... like it gave you a confident, a deep confidence.

    30. LB

      And it did, it definitely did. Like, I remember then feeling this, like, sort of, well although I remember then on day one I then went and lost half my stack quite early on and I remember thinking like, "Well that was bullshit."

Episode duration: 3:35:39

Install uListen for AI-powered chat & search across the full episode — Get Full Transcript

Transcript of episode eF-E40pxxbI

Get more out of YouTube videos.

High quality summaries for YouTube videos. Accurate transcripts to search & find moments. Powered by ChatGPT & Claude AI.

Add to Chrome