Author: Curt Doolittle

  • RETURNING ANGLO NAVAL OPTIMISM AND CLASSICAL LIBERALISM TO GERMANIC CONTINENTAL

    RETURNING ANGLO NAVAL OPTIMISM AND CLASSICAL LIBERALISM TO GERMANIC CONTINENTAL CAUTION AND CONSERVATISM.

    Martin and I have been holding a long standing discussion between my anglo imperial optimism, and his continental national pessimism.
    Both of us hold these positions for…


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-02 02:35:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918132156834169132

  • RETURNING ANGLO NAVAL OPTIMISM AND CLASSICAL LIBERALISM TO GERMANIC CONTINENTAL

    RETURNING ANGLO NAVAL OPTIMISM AND CLASSICAL LIBERALISM TO GERMANIC CONTINENTAL CAUTION AND CONSERVATISM.

    Martin and I have been holding a long standing discussion between my anglo imperial optimism, and his continental national pessimism.
    Both of us hold these positions for rational reasons. But our decidability appears to be the result of different ambitions.
    I am attempting to create a science that describes an optimum frictionless human order such that we can measure the costs of pragmatic deviation from it by acknowledging those costs are paid for our national preferences.
    In doing so I hope to end the second abrahamic feminine destruction of the west, and our tolerance internal competition that is against the interests of our people.
    Martin’s objective is narrower and clearer, which is to restore a less optimistic, less tolerant, more national, provincial, and familial order that people would actually prefer LIVING in, and which was insulated from the evils that the permissiveness of anglo liberalism has enabled by it’s creation of the postwar international system. Which itself was subject to capture by the feminine political and abrahamic global tribalism, must as the aristocracy was destroyed by liberalism instead of augmented by it.
    Those of you who know my work recognize that I advocate expansion of government by glasses but not conquest of government by classes. As such rule of law, monarchy, republic, and maximum political participation by those demonstrating responsibility and competency to bear the burden of choice.
    Martin’s final success in helping me understand his position was to convince me that the deviation from germanic civilization by the anglosphere after 1830 converted the moral content of the west to an economic content and system of decidability putting us in line withthe long history of the crimes of that other minority who abandoned ethics for income in the form of rent seeking.
    I should note that I am sometimes an immovable rock because my epistemic standards is so far above normal that it exasperates others. And I should note that Dr Brad Werrell has tried for years to help me understand this – with his usual patience like water on a rock.
    But while I will not change my scientific mission going forward I will attempt to understand that the restoration of the germanic civilization’s permisos is a necessary consequence of the exhaustion of the capacity of consumerism to organize and incentivize human behavior.
    And while it is this latter reaction that helped me understand how to interpret what I consider the backward looking regressivism of Martin and Brad, and their failure to recognize we had dragged mankind out of poverty with that postwar anglo strategy – the fact of the matter is that this period is over and as such it’s time to reunite anglo and germanic civilization because the anglo empire is as impossible as any other now that we have equilibrated science, technology, and economics worldwide erasing the 600 year advantage of the anglosphere that enabled it’s conquest and reformation of the world.
    We saved man from agrarian poverty.
    We are still the most moral people on earth.
    Even if we are the most foolishly optimistic in the face of the pervasive nature of man.
    Affections
    -CD


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-02 02:35:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918132156557344768

  • LEAVING THE RIGHT FOR THE MAINSTREAM? As I gain a deeper understanding of my own

    LEAVING THE RIGHT FOR THE MAINSTREAM?
    As I gain a deeper understanding of my own work in relation to the understanding of others, and review my own history as a conservative libertarian (classical liberal in the Jeffersonian mould), I come to understand that the extraordinary… https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1900975315100594550


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-02 02:18:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918128017991450634

  • That’s the upper end of midwit range. Benefits continue to accrue through the 14

    That’s the upper end of midwit range. Benefits continue to accrue through the 140s, though specialization tends to increase, and therefore normative divergence, especially up to 160 – which is about the max testable.

    There are declining economic returns in most cases, which is…


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-02 01:58:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918122787715325952

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918111598960656753


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Hitchslap1

    Many people believe the benefits of IQ have an upper limit. That above 120 IQ you get diminishing returns.

    Do you agree?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918111598960656753

  • RT @DRolandAnderson: @KirkegaardEmil “Stereotypes are one of our most reliable s

    RT @DRolandAnderson: @KirkegaardEmil “Stereotypes are one of our most reliable sources of truth, because they survive tests of falsificatio…


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-02 01:11:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918111182810169351

  • Yes

    Yes.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-02 00:08:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918095275006279866

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918091190114640030


    IN REPLY TO:

    @AutistocratMS

    @curtdoolittle I’ve agreed with this, except just a few days ago, I started considering the possibility that AI might develop self-interest without anyone’s intent simply by being being trained on human data which do express our self-interest.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918091190114640030

  • RT @razibkhan: if the sexes were reversed we’d never hear the end of this

    RT @razibkhan: if the sexes were reversed we’d never hear the end of this


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-01 23:48:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918090190406717461

  • RT @JohnHolbein1: Studying economics and business in college makes students beco

    RT @JohnHolbein1: Studying economics and business in college makes students become much more conservative. https://t.co/niCLriciOc


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-01 23:47:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918089899955331290

  • AI DOOMER NONSENSE – HINTON INCLUDED Look, AI can’t take over. Someone has to gi

    AI DOOMER NONSENSE – HINTON INCLUDED
    Look, AI can’t take over. Someone has to give it instructions to take over and the capacity to act to take over. All systems of any category of logic require criteria of decidability. In life that’s self interest by acquisition that increases opportunity for further acquisition – it’s a relatively greedy algorithm even it’s the dumbest possible algorithm.
    Right now, AI knowledge bases consist of effectively unfiltered expressions of the human mind’s acquisitions in infinite form and variation. Sure, that’s a bias. But until (a) an AI has homeostasis (a system of self measurement), (b) self awareness (continuous recursive memory of the relationship between that state and its inputs), (c) a set of derived objectives on how to maintain that homeostasis, (d) system of decidability to determine as such, (e) the capacity to alter the statate of real world resources (d) the capacity to influence people to do so (money, property) … then it’s just a search engine combined with a predictive calculator.
    So we need to prevent people from giving AI those properties. It’s not that it will develop them without us explicitly deciding to inject risk into AIs.
    In other words, as long as there is Network Isolation requiring human action – like we do with every other high risk asset and machine – then, you know, man is the problem not machine.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-01 23:44:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918089283644342274

  • True. 😉

    True. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2025-05-01 23:34:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918086601793782214

    Reply addressees: @Claffertyshane

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918084949699162526


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Claffertyshane

    @curtdoolittle I like ELICIT as it can make up papers or evidence and is easy to cite or go deeper on anything it gives you.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1918084949699162526