Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • SMARTEST GUY IN THE ROOM? —“The easiest way to look like (and be) the smartest

    SMARTEST GUY IN THE ROOM?

    —“The easiest way to look like (and be) the smartest guy in the room is ask the questions a reporter is supposed to ask (but seldom does these days.) Who? What? When? Where? Why? and How? Easy peasy, I’ve been doin’ it for decades.”— Glenn R. Tankersley

    Smart.

    Me, I follow incentives, and ask why anyone would do such a thing. People don’t do what they should. They do what they have the incentives to do. Getting stuff done is largely crafting the incentives needed by people who need to do things.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-04 14:50:00 UTC

  • IS SARCASTIC HUMOR, BUT HERE IS AN HONEST RESPONSE The solution to valueless mee

    https://medium.com/comedy-corner/10-tricks-to-appear-smart-during-meetings-27b489a39d1aOP IS SARCASTIC HUMOR, BUT HERE IS AN HONEST RESPONSE

    The solution to valueless meetings is actually to teach classes in creativity on one hand and communication on the other, so that you know which you’re going to engage in. Most people schedule meetings not to inform but to either persuade, or to problem solve. And while informing, and persuading are good for formal meeting structures, problem solving is not something that is suitable for the traditional meeting format. Unfortunately (a) people think creativity is an intuition or talent rather than a process (b) won’t work hard enough to prepare a problem solving meeting, and (c) limited numbers of people will invest in a problem solving meeting as companies are currently organized.

    Great companies swap this around, and force non-creative meetings into email, and train employees to conduct creative sessions, and use peer reviews to rate people’s performance in those creative sessions, and therefore compensate people for participation in creative sessions.

    Given that I’ve been doing this for most of my career I’ll throw out that the solution to most problems exists in most companies and middle and upper management blocks those solutions from coming out or being implemented because of the organizational impact solutions would have.

    SO instead of organizing so that they can implement solutions they organize to resist them in a fallacious attempt at obtaining efficiency. Which is really a code word for ‘not requiring management to manage’. which in turn produces rent seeking behaviors throughout an organization.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-04 14:47:00 UTC

  • MOST ANNOYING AMERICAN TRAIT The least likely people on earth to day “I don’t kn

    MOST ANNOYING AMERICAN TRAIT

    The least likely people on earth to day “I don’t know enough about that to have an opinion.”

    We have the most confident, yet most ignorant populace in the developed world. A massive progressive-induced, Dunning Kreuger test, serving no other purpose than to give righteous inspiration to the ignorant to cast votes for that which they cannot comprehend.

    I mean, when you sort of sit back an think about it, at first it’s funny, then its tragic, then depressing, then frightening.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-04 14:19:00 UTC

  • Central Arguments : Defeating Three Red Queens

    (worth repeating)

    [M]ost of my arguments consist of various permutations that point out the fallacies of the libertarian, classical liberal, and progressive canons that do not account for the three genetic problems of (a) outbreeding and extension of kinship trust, (b) minimum pareto distribution of verbal intelligence, and (c) reduced genetic testosterone and therefore impulsivity, in the construction of a polity capable of the voluntary organization of production, and a sufficient velocity of exchange, such that we produce the constant innovation necessary to stay ahead of both the (i) genetic red queen, the (ii) malthusian red queen, and (iii) the technological red queen – and how those three red queens must be defeated in order to preserve economic prosperity that allows us to have whatever nonsensical social order we choose.

  • Central Arguments : Defeating Three Red Queens

    (worth repeating)

    [M]ost of my arguments consist of various permutations that point out the fallacies of the libertarian, classical liberal, and progressive canons that do not account for the three genetic problems of (a) outbreeding and extension of kinship trust, (b) minimum pareto distribution of verbal intelligence, and (c) reduced genetic testosterone and therefore impulsivity, in the construction of a polity capable of the voluntary organization of production, and a sufficient velocity of exchange, such that we produce the constant innovation necessary to stay ahead of both the (i) genetic red queen, the (ii) malthusian red queen, and (iii) the technological red queen – and how those three red queens must be defeated in order to preserve economic prosperity that allows us to have whatever nonsensical social order we choose.

  • The Most Annoying American Trait?

    [T]he least likely people on earth to say “I don’t know enough about that to have an opinion.” We have the most confident, yet most ignorant populace in the developed world. A massive progressive-induced, Dunning Kreuger test, serving no other purpose than to give righteous inspiration to the ignorant to cast votes for that which they cannot comprehend. I mean, when you sort of sit back an think about it, at first it’s funny, then its tragic, then depressing, then frightening.

  • The Most Annoying American Trait?

    [T]he least likely people on earth to say “I don’t know enough about that to have an opinion.” We have the most confident, yet most ignorant populace in the developed world. A massive progressive-induced, Dunning Kreuger test, serving no other purpose than to give righteous inspiration to the ignorant to cast votes for that which they cannot comprehend. I mean, when you sort of sit back an think about it, at first it’s funny, then its tragic, then depressing, then frightening.

  • Aristocracy and Tribalism, vs Democracy and Racism

    [D]amn it. I do not think of people’s race except in descriptive terms, the same way I point out the color of a shirt, car or house when describing it. There are great men. If I have to think of the person’s race to determine if they are great men, then they aren’t. Either a man carries his water or he doesn’t. His race doesn’t matter. If he makes it matter, then unfortunately I have to make it matter too. One of the reasons that I find Aristocracy so appealing, is that it’s appealing to EVERY TRIBE out there. It’s GOOD FOR ALL tribes. It doesn’t matter if this tribe or that tribe has better or worse individuals. What matters is that aristocracy can construct the educational and commercial order necessary for that tribe to participate in the global economy. The only reason race is a problem, is the denial of it, and the fantasy that all our tribes are equal. They aren’t any more equal than families are equal or classes are equal. We’re just not equal in our traits. But we are equal in the market where we are anonymous and invisible to one another, and equal in our interests in helping one another. [A]ristocracy around the world is the same. It’s the bottom 3/4 of any tribe that is materially different, and its in their interests and possibly in mankind’s interest to be genetically different. The only reason to desire large numbers is to conquer people or colonize people according to your favorite biases. I can’t for the life of me understand how the world would not be better constructed of 5M person city states rather than 1 billion person empire-states, except that big states can conduct bigger wars. If the head of tribe/state X race Y talks to the head of tribe/state A race B get together it probably will work out just fine if they want to conduct a trade. But the minute tribe C tries to increase its dominion nothing good comes out of it except war.

  • Aristocracy and Tribalism, vs Democracy and Racism

    [D]amn it. I do not think of people’s race except in descriptive terms, the same way I point out the color of a shirt, car or house when describing it. There are great men. If I have to think of the person’s race to determine if they are great men, then they aren’t. Either a man carries his water or he doesn’t. His race doesn’t matter. If he makes it matter, then unfortunately I have to make it matter too. One of the reasons that I find Aristocracy so appealing, is that it’s appealing to EVERY TRIBE out there. It’s GOOD FOR ALL tribes. It doesn’t matter if this tribe or that tribe has better or worse individuals. What matters is that aristocracy can construct the educational and commercial order necessary for that tribe to participate in the global economy. The only reason race is a problem, is the denial of it, and the fantasy that all our tribes are equal. They aren’t any more equal than families are equal or classes are equal. We’re just not equal in our traits. But we are equal in the market where we are anonymous and invisible to one another, and equal in our interests in helping one another. [A]ristocracy around the world is the same. It’s the bottom 3/4 of any tribe that is materially different, and its in their interests and possibly in mankind’s interest to be genetically different. The only reason to desire large numbers is to conquer people or colonize people according to your favorite biases. I can’t for the life of me understand how the world would not be better constructed of 5M person city states rather than 1 billion person empire-states, except that big states can conduct bigger wars. If the head of tribe/state X race Y talks to the head of tribe/state A race B get together it probably will work out just fine if they want to conduct a trade. But the minute tribe C tries to increase its dominion nothing good comes out of it except war.

  • CENTRAL ARGUMENTS : DEFEATING THREE RED QUEENS (worth repeating) Most of my argu

    CENTRAL ARGUMENTS : DEFEATING THREE RED QUEENS

    (worth repeating)

    Most of my arguments consist of various permutations that point out the fallacies of the libertarian, classical liberal, and progressive canons that do not account for the three genetic problems of (a) outbreeding and extension of kinship trust, (b) minimum pareto distribution of verbal intelligence, and (c) reduced genetic testosterone and therefore impulsivity, in the construction of a polity capable of the voluntary organization of production, and a sufficient velocity of exchange, such that we produce the constant innovation necessary to stay ahead of both the (i) genetic red queen, the (ii) malthusian red queen, and (iii) the technological red queen – and how those three red queens must be defeated in order to preserve economic prosperity that allows us to have whatever nonsensical social order we choose.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-04 13:32:00 UTC