Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • THE PARADIGM FOR SOLVING AI IS NOT CALCULATION BUT COMPETITION We try to solve t

    THE PARADIGM FOR SOLVING AI IS NOT CALCULATION BUT COMPETITION

    We try to solve the problem of artificial intelligence using the wrong paradigm – a problem in economics we refer to as ‘mathiness’ – when the solution from bayesian accounting to the evolution of consciousness, is not calculation but competition.

    The other ‘great accident’ is the bilateral revolution, and the competition via necessity of coordination within the nervous system, followed by the division of labor and competition between the functions of our minds as predator and prey.

    We don’t think of neural economy, or bayesian networks as competitions at the neural-path level, nor do we think of consciousness as the result of memory and competition in a division of labor between layers and functions. The problem of an ethical and moral machine is one that must decide a competition from the forecasting of a decision, and the negative reinforcement of decision networks that lead to involuntary transfers (harms).

    I understood this from my work in the early 80’s on AI for military games. But the technology wasn’t available at the time to do anything about it. I don’t find any particular mystery to artificial intelligence other than the volume of memory and the necessity of an internal grammar or language to assist in a hierarchy continuous recursive competition between forecasts(predictions).

    My open questions are the amount of memory required if we want both the benefits of mechanical memory, and the power of reason, without the economy of imprecision. I mean, look at the experiments with chimpanzee image processing vs human.

    Or put differently, in order to FURTHER divide intelligence more efficiently we might very well have sacrificed memory precision for another ‘n-lateral’ revolution using language and the competition between minds using language.

    The problem of continuous recursive disambiguation into serial speech requires not the preservation of state (chimp memory) for internal consideration, but the recursive passing of state (human memory) so that we can serialize state into a continuously recursively disambiguous stream of expressions between individuals. We then evolved the ability to plan from this process.

    It is very hard to try to remember what it’s like to think without language. It’s like trying to measure without numbers. you can do it but only to some rather simple degree. Language is just another form of calculation. Or rather more easily understood, calculation with measurements is just a reductive form of language.

    The consistency throughout the hierarchy is competition (market) between memory and perception, the competition of the neural economy, competition between neural forecasts, competition between reactions or choice of actions, competition between perceptions and minds, and ability to calculate using language (grammars).

    It’s this ‘market competition’ that is the model not only for cognition, but for all of social science that results from that cognition.

    We were fooled by mathiness and justificationism that results from the mathematics – the most simple of logics: the single constant relation provided by the single property of a positional name. Mathematics requires very little difference between construction and deduction. Logics break down rapidly after first or second order. Games do as well. Reason does as well. Markets(competition) doesn’t break down. -Cheers )

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-18 08:06:00 UTC

  • RESTORING VIOLENCE TO THE STUDY OF POLITICS We removed violence from the discour

    RESTORING VIOLENCE TO THE STUDY OF POLITICS

    We removed violence from the discourse in order to accommodate women into the political system – despite the fact that the market for politics, like all other markets, is simply a proxy for violence. I set out to restore violence to libertarianism and it resulted in “Sovereigntarianism” (Propertarianism).

    Noah brings up the current context:

    –“Another big hurdle is adjusting mens relationship to violence. I have no problem with women saying “I disavow all violence” but I don’t want to hear men saying such weak things. We men need to embrace violence and the consequences of violence. The more comfortable we are with hard edged solutions the better. We don’ t seek them, but we don’t avoid what’s necessary. A failure to account for the power of violence has been a weakness of the right for too long.”—– Noah J Revoy

    You can’t peace your way into power unless you have power, and if you peace your way into power you will not retain it. Empires fall for this reason as much ore more so than any other. Pacifism is just rent seeking by avoidance of the cost of preservation of the natural order of reciprocity.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-17 10:46:00 UTC

  • UM. THE GENDERS CANNOT TAKE EACH OTHER’S VENTING SERIOUSLY –“I can’t understand

    UM. THE GENDERS CANNOT TAKE EACH OTHER’S VENTING SERIOUSLY

    –“I can’t understand men who talk about … putting women back in the kitchen, out of the workforce, or referring to of r_pe during a war. …”— A Female Friend

    That’s because you aren’t a man. Just like I am not a woman and can’t imagine that they’re serious rather than hyperbolic (LARPing).

    I have overheard far too many conversations of women talking about their husbands as mere monetary and physical resources to be exploited, and the stupidity of men and how women would do such and such better, and how they need female ‘unity’. I am also aware that women are over-privileged compared to men in everything from moral intuitions, to daily life, to health care, to political processes. These things are simply empirical. But they do not change the opinions of women on their relative status.

    Naxalt(defense of child) is to some degree a defense against male hyperbole(defense of tribe).

    This is why it is so hard for males and females to communicate at any scale. This is why men and women cannot work in or debate politics together except under the most optimum of circumstances.

    Hyperbole (exaggeration) of offense, and NAXALT (exaggeration) of defense.

    Defending children vs Exciting men.

    These cognitive differences are real, universal, and inescapable.

    If men wanted to oppress women they would do so. They do not do so because those women are their wives, daughters, sisters and mothers.

    But if men agree to do something, there is nothing that can stop them. Because in the end, the use of violence determines all political conflict. And political competition is simply a means of circumventing political violence within the limits of provoking political violence.

    Western men treat their women better than all other people’s combined. And under majority democracy it has come at the cost of inequality of outcomes for those men. Hence why I recommend houses for the genders, if there is to be a democratic government of any kind: so that we limit each other.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-17 10:07:00 UTC

  • CAN WE ELIMINATE RELIGION? NOT REALLY, BUT THAT REQUIRES WE DEFINE RELIGION AS M

    CAN WE ELIMINATE RELIGION? NOT REALLY, BUT THAT REQUIRES WE DEFINE RELIGION AS MARKET DEMANDS RATHER THAN THE CURRENT MEANS OF PRODUCTION.

    (repost)

    —“However unrealistic of a goal it might be, wouldn’t the ideal situation be a world without organised religion? Or is there some benefit to religion that I’m not seeing?”—Dann Hopkins

    Religion is just education. that’s all. Period. The ‘trick’ of both church and state is to claim church does no education, or that state education is sufficient.

    We need training in physical fitness, mindfulness, manners-ethics-morals-rituals (payments to the commons), the laws, the means of calculating that we think of as the 3R’s, the skills to run a household, and the skills for employment.

    It does not, as it once did, provide for physical fitness.

    It provides mindfulness in the personal, interpersonal, and public spheres of life.

    It provides the some of the manners, ethics, morals rituals that are the positive laws of the social order (not negative laws as is law proper).

    It provides a venue for public contract making (this is my child, this is my promise to the community, this is my mate, this is our property, this person has died and his or her property may be distributed).

    It is, to some degree, a computational necessity – meaning that it is very bad not to have that mindfulness.

    It provides child-level parables and myths which are no less a form of calculation about action in the world than are laws, logic, and mathematics.

    But there is no reason we cannot have lessons, parables and mythos and histories for each class of people at each stage of their lives, all of which contain the same messages.

    There is no reason the church rather than the school, post office, or library is not still the center of civic life, and that government is not relegated to the production and maintenance of material commons, just as we keep commerce out of religion.

    So I think I have most of this figured out – not that I am interested in the content in and of itself, but that I understand how to frame the problem, and restore the incentives, such that the second abrahamic dark age does not capture our people.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-17 08:01:00 UTC

  • WE ARE MORE LIKE THE CHINESE THAN THE SEMITES It is nearly impossible to talk to

    WE ARE MORE LIKE THE CHINESE THAN THE SEMITES

    It is nearly impossible to talk to abrahamic monotheists what have not traveled the world and learned about other ‘religions’ because they lack the frame of reference to consider ‘religion’ as it is practiced.

    The more I undrestand about world religions the more obvious it is that shinto is best, hindu a bit less so, and abrahamism the worst. While buddhism has turned into a religion, and stoicism on the borderline, and chinese folk religion, Taoism, Buddhism, Confucianism.

    We practice our folk religion still in many ways. And like the chinese we have our germanic tales (hearth religion), our our many versions of our religion, philosophy, and our law.

    That these are and always have been, ‘cults of the classes’ should be rather obvious.

    The chinese are ostensibly buddhism but they are so as much as we are christian – not so much. China is confucian.

    We are the same as china, not the same as the jews and muslims.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-16 06:44:00 UTC

  • Page is Actually OK. Surprisingly. Technically there is no meaning of life, othe

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning_of_lifeWiki Page is Actually OK. Surprisingly.

    Technically there is no meaning of life, other than increasing the probability of genetic persistence for those within six or fewer generations of you. We say we want to find ‘meaning’ but this is nothing more than a word-association between the (Positive) experience we feel when we understand, and the fact that there is nothing to undrestand about life other than to make the best use of it that we can before we die.

    So the question isn’t whether there is meaning to life. THere isn’t. At best we can estimate a sort of accounting. The question is whether we can CREATE MEANING with our lives.

    Experiences, Friends, Family, Generations, Achievements. Leave the world better for having lived in it.

    We have but one shot at life, and we have only one choice, and that is how we make use of the time within it.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-15 22:48:00 UTC

  • No religion should require you believe a falsehood – only pay the cost of initia

    No religion should require you believe a falsehood – only pay the cost of initiation and ongoing rituals in exchange for personal, interpersonal, social, political, and universal mindfulness.

    There is nothing false in the natural law of sovereignty reciprocity, truth, duty, charity, and markets in everything.

    There is nothing false in the elimination of hatred from the human heart, the extension of kinship love of family to the polity, personal acts of charity, and the exhaustion of forgiveness before abandonment or punishment.

    There is nothing false in ritual thanks to one another, to our ancestors, to those who made our existence possible, to the natural world, to the universe, and to the universe’s god – in whatever form that might be.

    There is nothing false in their parables, their myths, their histories other than their ignorance and vulnerability of time and place.

    There is nothing false in the ritual training of the body, intuition(soul), memory(knowledge), reason (calculation), ethics, morality, the law, and the skills with which to prosper.

    There is nothing false in that combination of of which will cause us, and any who likewise do the same, to transcend into the gods we have not yet made.

    That is not a sentimental argument. It is the optimum order for human beings. There is none better possible. It’s just science.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-15 19:36:00 UTC

  • THE GRAMMARS OF THE RED PILL We all get our red pills from different sources. Mi

    THE GRAMMARS OF THE RED PILL

    We all get our red pills from different sources. Mine was running businesses, watching the press lie about what my father said in town council, encountering the immorality of the legal system, and the one sidedness and immorality of divorce.

    I don’t care whether you get it from the manosphere(personal), the alt-light(social), alt-right (political), propertarianism(institutional or intellectual?), nasdap(military) sphere. We all understand the world in the power-language that we are most familiar with, and can best empathize with, and are most motivated by.

    What matters is that we have an OPERATIONALLY POSSIBLE solution for the survival of our genetic lines, our people, our culture, our civilization, and our ability to drag mankind out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, into the gods we imaged – the universe is ours for the taking.

    The only thing I focus on is the solution. I’m happy if everyone else focuses on REACH.

    -hugs

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-14 12:16:00 UTC

  • IF IT WAS COMMON SENSE WE WOULDN’T NEED THE WHITE LAW —“I follow Curt, but mos

    IF IT WAS COMMON SENSE WE WOULDN’T NEED THE WHITE LAW

    —“I follow Curt, but most of what he’s says seems like common sense.”— A Friend (from Chat)

    So yes. It is f–cking common sense. The difference is that I defend that common sense both logically and scientifically, because what is ‘common sense’ to you ‘is not common’.

    I made a Law of what you consider ‘common sense’. It is that law, the constitution that embodies it, and the logic and science in defense of it, that make it open to utility in persuasion, resistance to falsification, and institutional implementation, rather than simply a difference of moral bias and condition.

    I wrote our law. No one ever did that before. We just ‘do it’. For thousands of years.

    Individual Sovereignty, Truth, Duty (and charity), The Natural law of Reciprocity (Tort), the Sovereignty Judge and the Jury, and markets in everything that result. The Militia of a distributed dictatorship of sovereign men.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-14 12:09:00 UTC

  • THE NATURAL LAW FUNCTION OF RELIGION —“…error…”— I don’t make errors. It

    THE NATURAL LAW FUNCTION OF RELIGION

    —“…error…”—

    I don’t make errors. It’s my job.

    I run tests. I try to remove all falsehood from all statements. To leave only the truth standing. Because that other than sovereignty, it is western man’s uniqueness: Truth Regardless of the Impact to the self-image(personal), status(social), competence(economic), and dominance(political) hierarchy.

    Now, back to your criticism.

    —“Religion is nothing but education.”–CD

    There is nothing [in your comment] that you have stated that counters this proposition.

    Religion is education. It provides (educates with) narratives of intergenerational transference of mindfulness, codes of conduct(ethics and morals), signaling(social order ), tradition (strategy), and law (property rights and obligations).

    Some religions do this by the abrahamic method of deceit, some do it by the buddhist method, some by the hindu method(s), and some by the ancestor-worship methods. Some by simple folk rituals.

    Some emphasize a way of life (hinduism), some emphasize a way of thought (buddhism and stoicism), and some a ritual (shintoism), and some a cognitive fantasy (abrahamism).

    —“…curt…”—

    Psychologism is always and everywhere false. So the straw man is pointless.

    I am advocating for stoicism (mindfulness by self authoring), ancestor worship (thanks – we have ancestors worthy of it), and nature ‘worship'(celebration), with the ambition of transcendence of man into the gods we have designed (omnipotent, omniscient, omnirational). Not as individuals but as a collective. This provides the spectrum of personal, interpersonal, social, political, and group strategies that all of us appear to need.

    There is nothing in that list that is not both scientifically achievable, fulfilling of behavioral demand, and free of deceits and frauds.

    We know so because all of these have and do exist.

    So if you are invested in a lie – the answer is why? Are you human and capable of choice between truth and lie, or are you still animal and incapable of choice between truth and lie?

    Religion is simply education. Education in the personal, interpersonal, social, political, and strategic by ritual(repetition) practice – like every OTHER thing we learn through repetition. Like how to move our bodies, how to speak, how to socialize, how to read, do math, operate a machine, or compose works of innovative thought.

    I am not anti-religion. Just anti-lies. My religion is Transcendence of man into gods, by the use of Sovereignty, Truth, Duty, Charity, the Natural Law of Reciprocity and the Jury, Markets in everything, producing the most rapid calculation of, and achievement of godhood that is possible for man to perform.

    This religion requires training in mindfulness in the personal, interpersonal, social, political, international realms. In the physical (fitness), mental (mindfulness), social (manners, ethics, morals), calculative (3R’s), economic (job skills), political (laws), strategic (strategy).

    And under my method we return dominance of daily life from the State to the Church, ending the academy, and ending the Cathedral Complex. Creating a single ‘intolerante’ religion (education system). And with it, ending Abrahamism in jewish, christian, and muslim form, as well as Marxist, Postmodern, Feminist form. And with that, end this scam we call democracy which is an excuse to intermediate us from the courts as the means of resolving conflicts both private and common. And restoring rule of law, including houses for the classes to negotiate, and monarchy as judge of last resort, and a universal militia to guarantee all of the above.

    Period.

    There are a few arguments you might raise against me, but you are not able. your life consists of malinvestment in lies that produce ignorance, poverty, and dark ages, and have cost a billion lives.

    There is no better service we can do the world than eliminate abrahamism, for aside from the great plagues there is nothing more horrible in the experience of man.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-14 11:02:00 UTC