For what it's worth, I got your point through the examples and I think that posing the right questions to get to more fruitful territory is an excellent observation. The question is how to identify which questions lead to good conversation and which questions risk shutting it down. Avoiding obvious yes/no questions is one way, or at least use those questions sparingly, but try to go elsewhere.

I currently read the pen-and-paper RPG Microscope, and one rule in the game is that before a scene you select a question to direct the action. The scene concludes when the question has been answered. There's no game master so all players collaborate to create characters and answer the scene question.

The game text says "The best questions are extremely specific. Vague questions are bad and lead to confusing or muddled scenes. Open-ended questions can work, but you will get much better scenes out of very loaded or incriminating questions."

The game goes on to list examples:

"If you have an idea you want to explore, don't hesitate to stack the deck and make your question more specific. A simple formula is to just add more conditions or 'even though' twists to establish clear issues.

'How does the Alliance beat the invaders?' is a good starting point, but that's a very open-ended scene.

'How does the Alliance beat the invaders even though they're outnumbered and outgunned?' is more specific. We have a better idea of the situation.

'Is the Alliance willing to sacrifice the colony on Sigma VII to beat the invaders even though the colonists will get slaughtered in the process?' is better still because it gives us a clear situation, an obvious dilemma."

Finally, on good questions:

"It may not immediately be clear why a question is interesting. Don't be alarmed. Once you ask the question, the other players get to jump in and run with it. They may have ideas you didn't even consider. So long as your question gets everyone on the same page about the scene, you're in good shape."

This relates to what hueving said. The game assumes that the other players want to turn your questions into something interesting, and that you collaborate to create something great. If the other players are hostile or indifferent, they can ignore your question and take the scene in a completely different direction so that it never ends, but the point is that some questions have a better chance of keeping things on track. The same with other people. If you're talking to someone indifferent to hostile, they can obviously shoot down all conversation, but if they're indifferent to positive, you may have a chance to interest them.

I looked up Kezia Noble on YouTube, having never heard of her. I think your summary of what she says was more interesting than her videos, at least the first one I watched on how to specifically talk to women in the fashion industry. But in another video she said something interesting on posing questions that take the other person off auto pilot. If you ask "So what do you do?" and they answer "I'm a teacher." and you say "Do you like it?" they'll probably say "Oh, it's OK." or something similar. They (and you) are on auto pilot, and have probably both had this exact exchange before with other people. If you instead ask "So what made you choose teaching?" you'll perhaps take them off script and force them to think, which is a good thing because it makes them more engaged in the conversation. I think it relates to the RPG suggestions above to be a bit more specific with the questions, and to try to add some kind of twist to the question to make the other person think.