Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • Um. No. EcoNOMICS is CAUSATION. EconoMETRICS is CORRELATION. Big… Really Big.

    Um. No.

    EcoNOMICS is CAUSATION.

    EconoMETRICS is CORRELATION.

    Big… Really Big. Difference. OK?

    You perform RESEARCH with Econometrics so that you can identify and test the INCENTIVES, using PRAXEOLOGY, of individuals who must perform the ACTIONS required to create causal relationships between states. Those tested incentives and their corresponding actions constitute the CAUSATION necessary to determine that you have indeed identified that thing we call ‘Economics’ – instead of some sort of chaotic periodicity without meaning.

    Please. We get really tired of correcting you. It’s … painful.

    Correlation is a form of obfuscation. If you cannot reduce an economic phenomenon to actions subject to praxeological testing, then you have not yet determined anything.

    (SIgh)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-25 15:41:00 UTC

  • OPEN LETTER TO PROGRESSIVES (satire) An open letter from Anarcho Capitalists to

    OPEN LETTER TO PROGRESSIVES

    (satire)

    An open letter from Anarcho Capitalists to Progressives

    Hi.

    You know, we like people who disagree with us. It’s really fun to debate. We are nerds after all. We love this stuff.

    But, you know how you feel when Orthodox conservatives tell you something unscientifically, absolutely ridiculous? With a straight face? I mean, you can’t really hold an debate when science, reason, logic and fact go out the window. Just isn’t possible.

    Well, we feel the same way when you Orthodox Totalitarian Humanists say something economically ridiculous. And, if you’re talking, it’s pretty much economically ridiculous. Really. We love you and all. But. I mean. BOTH of you are ridiculous. You orthodox progressives, AND the orthodox conservatives.

    Now, a lot of libertarians are just as idealistic as you are. We have libertarians that think the world will someday wake up and agree with them; just like you think the world will agree with you, if ‘they only understood’. If they only “could see the light”.

    But, you know, most of us libertarians actually understand that none of us are going to change our moral preferences. I mean, that’s what science and evidence tell us.

    And so, given that none of us will change, we have this crazy idea that you can have your totalitarian government, and we can have our libertarian government, and if we do that, then we can get along just fine.

    We just wonder one thing: why won’t you let us live like we want to, if we are willing to let you live like you want to?

    It’s an honest question. Although, we kinda’ suspect we won’t get an honest answer. (Sorry, but we’re honest about this stuff.)

    And we also suspect that we’re the ones holding the moral high ground. ‘Cause we don’t want to conquer you. But unless you let us live our lives the way we want to, then you just want to conquer us.

    And we don’t think that’s moral, right, good, or nice.

    Cheers.

    Nerdy Anarcho Capitalist Libertarians Everywhere.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-25 15:31:00 UTC

  • Is there something to the fact that less intelligent people are more likely to c

    Is there something to the fact that less intelligent people are more likely to consistently believe in magic (intentional causes)? That smart but ignorant people overestimate our capacity. And more intelligent people who are knowledgeable are afraid of HUBRIS?

    I mean, does the ‘smart fraction’ theory simply mean that liberals are ignorant, and willfully ignorant, and libertarians are not? Or are liberals less intelligent (probably).

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-25 15:15:00 UTC

  • ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS I’VE HAD A THOUSAND TIMES (funny) (software d

    ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS I’VE HAD A THOUSAND TIMES

    (funny) (software development)

    Employee: Can we have coffee?

    Curt: Sure. I love coffee. 🙂

    … … …

    Employee: So, how come you keep adding features? We’ll never get done!

    Curt: You’re confused. It’s not that I add features. The feature list has been on the wall for a six months. It’s constant except for very minor changes.

    Employee: (curious expression)

    Curt: It’s just that I parcel them out one or two at a time. Lots of states of ‘done’ that way. And I can kill something early or try something else. It also stops ‘grand plans’ that take forever to implement.

    Employee: (awareness)

    Curt: The only feature I know that I added is the one you told me to. (teams) The only feature I postponed is the one you told me to (team estimating). In fact, I’m pretty sure you’ve added more features than I have. (various amazingly brilliant UI ideas.)

    (discussion)

    Curt: I have my own bias: Get to feature complete, then harden the app by refactoring it. But until you’re feature complete it’s all R&D, and the return isn’t there if you’re doing much more than getting to feature complete. Once you’re feature complete, it isn’t a matter of whether you’ll succeed or not. It’s just the cost of error reduction and user experience improvement until you decide to release.

    COMMENT

    Everyone has their own little bias. Mine is money. I want to know money is well spent at all times.

    If I produced this software in the states it would probably take a little longer. But it would cost me something under ten times as much. And that’s money that I don’t have to borrow, get from investors. But it’s also my money. And I’m very careful with my money. 🙂

    Get to feature complete. Prove the theory. If it works at feature complete, then the theory is pretty close. If it goes to market and sells, then the theory is confirmed. It can still be falsified. But at present, the theory tested true.

    But there isn’t a lot of POINT in investing in a theory, and that’s what an application *IS*, until you’ve tested that theory.

    Its just scientific after all..

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-25 10:11:00 UTC

  • There is construction going on across the street on a wonderful old brick buildi

    There is construction going on across the street on a wonderful old brick building that’s being brought up to date. When they aren’t using power tools it’s actually fun to listen to the banter.

    Today, some guy randomly is shouting, in very clear and passionate Russian “Mother F___r!”, on a semi random basis.

    We all laugh every time.

    🙂

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-25 09:22:00 UTC

  • I just really like this meme. Our job as libertarians is not to be the majority

    I just really like this meme. Our job as libertarians is not to be the majority – we cant be. It’s to be intellectual arms dealers to anyone who opposes the totalitarian state. That is a really good meme. It’s a really good meme.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-25 06:40:00 UTC

  • DANIEL KEUHN : OBFUSCATORY LANGUAGE —“The greatest hesitation I have about the

    http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2013/10/donald-kuehn-none-of-them-along-the-line-know-what-any-of-its-worth-noted.htmlCONTRA DANIEL KEUHN : OBFUSCATORY LANGUAGE

    —“The greatest hesitation I have about the market economy is the wedge between demand and the willingness to pay that is the ability to pay.” —

    Curtd said…

    Hmm…

    (a) What is incorrectly allocated in the structure of production that allows people to desire to consume, but have nothing to exchange?

    (b) It is probably true that if we bypassed the financial system, and inflated the currency, by directly, say, crediting people’s debit cards – as long as it was done equally, that this would increase activity in the economy by redistributing savings and investment that are not moving, to consumers who desire to spend. We’ve been talking about this for a couple of decades now.

    (c) But why is there structural misallocation in the first place, and what misallocations are we creating this way?

    — We are creating poor single parent households. Would this activity increase the rate of creation of single parent households?

    — We are clearly failing at education of our work force compared to the Germans

    — We are clearly transforming old age savings into academic institution equity, and long term student debt, without performing any useful education other than sortition.

    — We are clearly immigrating vast numbers of low wage workers rather than employing our young and old at higher cost, and therefore creating two dependent classes.

    — We are clearly destroying the system of intergenerational cooperation of savings and borrowing, and the information system that goes with it.

    — We are clearly depending upon future anticipated growth, based upon a five hundred years of the spread of anglo absolute nuclear families, accounting, law, money and prices around the world by forcible conquest and unforced competition.

    (d) Instead: WHAT TROUBLES ME IS THE MISALLOCATION OF ACTION, CAPITAL, CREDIT, and POLICY THAT PREVENTS PEOPLE WHO DESIRE TO PAY FROM EARNING SOMETHING TO PAY FOR IT.

    One can use the artful word ‘wedge’ as a means of obfuscation: As OBSCURANT LANGUAGE, in order to obfuscate the underlying CAUSAL RELATIONS. This is what it means to speak as a leftist: using obscurant, and therefore, unscientific language. 🙂

    At least the right’s religious people speak in analogy not obfuscation. 🙂 The left’s religious people simply use obfuscatory language, and artificially select short time horizons so that they can ignore externalities. 🙂

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-24 19:17:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a photo

    Curt Doolittle shared a photo.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-24 13:34:00 UTC

  • NEW MACBOOK PRO : PORTABLE WHOO HOOOO!!! 15-inch: 2.3GHz with Retina display – 2

    NEW MACBOOK PRO : PORTABLE WHOO HOOOO!!!

    15-inch: 2.3GHz with Retina display

    – 2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7

    – Turbo Boost up to 3.5GHz

    – 16GB RAM

    – 512GB PCIe-based flash storage

    – Intel Iris Pro Graphics

    – NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M with 2GB GDDR5 memory

    – Built-in battery (8 hours)

    $2,599.00

    NEW MAC PRO: OFFICE WHOO HOOOOOO!!!

    Mac Pro w/ E5 3.5GHz 6-core Intel Xeon E5

    Dual AMD FirePro D500 graphics with 3GB each

    16GB 1866MHz DDR3 ECC RAM

    256GB PCIe-based flash storage

    Ports Six Thunderbolt 2, Four USB 3, HDMI 1.4, Two Gigabit Ethernet

    $3999

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-24 13:22:00 UTC

  • MAXIMUM TAXATION? Taxation is by definition immoral. Whereas fees are not. We is

    MAXIMUM TAXATION?

    Taxation is by definition immoral. Whereas fees are not. We issue taxes even in local villages, largely to prevent free riding. We issue taxes under statism for the purpose of empowering the state. And little else.

    The maximum taxation possible is that which maintains the ability of exit from the market and the total reliance on past earnings as a means of maintaining one’s standard of living. If this lottery is removed it will decrease participation in experimentation that is only evident over a decade or more.

    Subtract from this the willingness of people to subsidize that which they disagree with.

    Subtract from this the impact that taxation places on their status signaling ability.

    Subtract from this the trust that their sacrifice is well used by government.

    Subtract from this their current level of economic confidence in the long term.

    That’s pretty much it. Math is pretty easy really.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-24 10:40:00 UTC