Curt Doolittle

Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy

  • Choice Words on Cooperation

    —“[C]ooperation in a division of knowledge and labor is a disproportionately rewarding action – so much so, that without it, it’s nearly impossible to survive, and with it, and increasing amounts of it, we prosper. And instead of income being the result of action, it is the result of action to acquire, and the most valuable things one can acquire are opportunity for cooperation, acts of cooperation, and debts of cooperation that can be inventoried for future use. Which is precisely what mankind demonstrates daily by his actions in every walk of life.”—

    Source: (1) Curt Doolittle – COOPERATION: CHOICE WORDS FROM MY CURRENT PAPER…

  • I just follow incentives. Moral arguments generally are used to obscure motives.

    I just follow incentives. Moral arguments generally are used to obscure motives. Slavery alone wasn’t enough for war.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-08 20:05:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/618873453408591872

    Reply addressees: @randiego2 @voxdotcom

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/618660498268012544

    IN REPLY TO:

    @randiego2

    @curtdoolittle @voxdotcom Wow, that’s some laughably twisted historical revisionism.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/618660498268012544

  • COOPERATION: CHOICE WORDS FROM MY CURRENT PAPER (good stuff!) —“Cooperation in

    COOPERATION: CHOICE WORDS FROM MY CURRENT PAPER

    (good stuff!)

    —“Cooperation in a division of knowledge and labor is a disproportionately rewarding action – so much so, that without it, it’s nearly impossible to survive, and with it, and increasing numbers of it, we prosper. And instead of income being the result of action, it is the result of action to acquire, and the most valuable things one can acquire are opportunity for cooperation, acts of cooperation, and debts of cooperation that can be inventoried for future use. Which is precisely what mankind demonstrates daily by his actions in every walk of life.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-08 07:56:00 UTC

  • “Mainstream Economics is not a practiced as a science of man but as a science of

    —“Mainstream Economics is not a practiced as a science of man but as a science of the deception of man. Not how to improve cooperation by reducing transaction costs and uncertainties but how to force consumption for the purpose of increasing employment.”—

    Of course the simplest method here is to stop distorting the labor economy and directly redistribute liquidity to consumers such that employment makes less of an impact on the unemployed. That would have a side effect of impoverishing the financial sector. Which is a good thing.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-08 00:50:00 UTC

  • The Free Market is a Fiat Construct, Produced by Organized Violence

    [T]he free market itself is a fiat construct. Just as property rights are a fiat construct. Morality, Property, and Free Markets require forcible imposition. The condition of primitive man is one of overlapping rents. Paternalism, Non-kin-Morality, Property and Trade were institutional innovations all of which required the organized application of violence to construct. Neither violence nor fiat are ‘bads’. They are means, not ends. One either constructs a distribution of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, distribution, and trade by the imposition of property rights, morality, and free markets or one fails to do so by constructing a network of rents.

    Fiat criticism is non-substantive. The natural order of man is an equilibrium between static rents and innovative freedoms. To construct liberty requires a constant application of organized violence to resist the equilibrating forces of rent seekers. Pacifist Libertinism is an attempt by means of obscurantist loading, framing, and overloading to achieve cheaply, by sophisticated gossip, that which can only be achieved by organized violence. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source: Curt Doolittle

  • The Free Market is a Fiat Construct, Produced by Organized Violence

    [T]he free market itself is a fiat construct. Just as property rights are a fiat construct. Morality, Property, and Free Markets require forcible imposition. The condition of primitive man is one of overlapping rents. Paternalism, Non-kin-Morality, Property and Trade were institutional innovations all of which required the organized application of violence to construct. Neither violence nor fiat are ‘bads’. They are means, not ends. One either constructs a distribution of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, distribution, and trade by the imposition of property rights, morality, and free markets or one fails to do so by constructing a network of rents.

    Fiat criticism is non-substantive. The natural order of man is an equilibrium between static rents and innovative freedoms. To construct liberty requires a constant application of organized violence to resist the equilibrating forces of rent seekers. Pacifist Libertinism is an attempt by means of obscurantist loading, framing, and overloading to achieve cheaply, by sophisticated gossip, that which can only be achieved by organized violence. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source: Curt Doolittle

  • THE FREE MARKET IS A FIAT CONSTRUCT PRODUCED BY ORGANIZED VIOLENCE The free mark

    THE FREE MARKET IS A FIAT CONSTRUCT PRODUCED BY ORGANIZED VIOLENCE

    The free market itself is a fiat construct. Just as property rights are a fiat construct. Morality, Property, and Free Markets require forcible imposition. The condition of primitive man is one of overlapping rents. Paternalism, Non-kin-Morality, Property and Trade were institutional innovations all of which required the organized application of violence to construct.

    Neither violence nor fiat are ‘bads’. They are means, not ends. One either constructs a disrtibution of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, distribution, and trade by the imposition of property rights, morality, and free markets or one fails to do so by constructing a network of rents.

    Fiat criticism is non-substantive. The natural order of man is an equilibrium between static rents and innovative freedoms.

    To construct liberty requires a constant application of organized violence to resist the equilibrating forces of rent seekers.

    Pacifist Libertinism is an attempt by means of obscurantist loading, framing, and overloading to achieve cheaply, by sophisticated gossip, that which can only be achieved by organized violence.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-06 03:52:00 UTC

  • ECONOMICS OF CONCURRENCY

    [C]oncurrency – e.g. multitasking – is hard, we all know that.

    In the following post I analyze the economics of concurrency, using the example of a layered conversation with two members, and many concurrent threads occurring in overlapping time intervals.

    (If you would think it a fun exercise, write up a comment about another topic of choice in multitasking – besides conversations, that is — and I’ll merge it into a generalized theory.  I already have that theory in the back of my head one way or another, and  social proof by induction is nice (beware the pun.) )

     

    Handling n+1 threads of conversation with another person concurrently requires:

    1. excellent working memory, to generate shared implicit context,
    2. excellent verbal intelligence, to generate shared explicit context for ambiguity mitigation,
    3. precision in phrasing,
    4. parsimony in phrasing,
    5. shared, similar, experiences,
    6. unshared, differing, experiences,
    7. similar time preference

    Fulfilling these seven requirements, it is possible to handle any amount of conversations at the same time, where the amount must not conflict with:

    a) your working memory limitations – most people can maintain five to nine different chunks of data at the same time quite well – to generate implicit shared context, or,
    b) the verbosity of speech you can mentally afford to invest in, to generate explicit shared context, or;
    c) the precision of speech you can mentally afford to invest in – from fluffy-emotive to precise-systemizing – or;
    d) the use of the absolute minimum amount of words necessary to convey your point precisely;

    and converges on having:

    e) experienced, and grown up with, overlapping and similar, as well as differing past life histories, and;
    f) overlapping future planning horizons, and;
    g) similarity in future time orientation.

    So you see, handling any amount of ongoing conversations with the same person is a matter of fulfilling those requirements, and not putting oneself under too many restrictions due to acting, and having acted, unconstructively.

     

    Now, the above part was about one quite specific use case. Can you think up more?

    Head tips to Bernard Spil for the idea and Curt Doolittle for review.

  • ECONOMICS OF CONCURRENCY

    [C]oncurrency – e.g. multitasking – is hard, we all know that.

    In the following post I analyze the economics of concurrency, using the example of a layered conversation with two members, and many concurrent threads occurring in overlapping time intervals.

    (If you would think it a fun exercise, write up a comment about another topic of choice in multitasking – besides conversations, that is — and I’ll merge it into a generalized theory.  I already have that theory in the back of my head one way or another, and  social proof by induction is nice (beware the pun.) )

     

    Handling n+1 threads of conversation with another person concurrently requires:

    1. excellent working memory, to generate shared implicit context,
    2. excellent verbal intelligence, to generate shared explicit context for ambiguity mitigation,
    3. precision in phrasing,
    4. parsimony in phrasing,
    5. shared, similar, experiences,
    6. unshared, differing, experiences,
    7. similar time preference

    Fulfilling these seven requirements, it is possible to handle any amount of conversations at the same time, where the amount must not conflict with:

    a) your working memory limitations – most people can maintain five to nine different chunks of data at the same time quite well – to generate implicit shared context, or,
    b) the verbosity of speech you can mentally afford to invest in, to generate explicit shared context, or;
    c) the precision of speech you can mentally afford to invest in – from fluffy-emotive to precise-systemizing – or;
    d) the use of the absolute minimum amount of words necessary to convey your point precisely;

    and converges on having:

    e) experienced, and grown up with, overlapping and similar, as well as differing past life histories, and;
    f) overlapping future planning horizons, and;
    g) similarity in future time orientation.

    So you see, handling any amount of ongoing conversations with the same person is a matter of fulfilling those requirements, and not putting oneself under too many restrictions due to acting, and having acted, unconstructively.

     

    Now, the above part was about one quite specific use case. Can you think up more?

    Head tips to Bernard Spil for the idea and Curt Doolittle for review.

  • GAWKER PROFITS 6M? So, it’s an interesting internet era statistic, that online m

    GAWKER PROFITS 6M?

    So, it’s an interesting internet era statistic, that online media can have so much presence and influence with so little money. I mean, it’s little more than a small business.

    Same for Drudge. Somewhere in the 10-15M range.

    Compare this to newspapers and television whose infrastructure and distribution costs are tremendous by comparison.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-04 03:36:00 UTC