They are terribly expensive, but produce extraordinary returns. Now, think about this for a second. Russia invested overly in military and in particular nuclear weapons. Of all the investments in sovereignty Russia made, the only durable one has been those nuclear weapons. Any polity with a few nuclear weapons and an armed populace, with stores of RPG’s, Man portable Missile Launchers, and enough artillery to protect lines of invasion, is relatively safe from conquest. So a relatively small number of professional warriors, a sufficiently trained militia, and the cost of military can be below the 3-4% Switzerland, which arguably benefits from the ‘mountainous terrain discount’, only spends 0.8% per year. The additional benefit of being a small nuclear state operating on international markets is that it is very hard for you to create sufficiently international dependencies that you need war to protect them.
Form: Mini Essay
-
NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE A BIT LIKE MONUMENTS. They are terribly expensive, but produ
NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE A BIT LIKE MONUMENTS.
They are terribly expensive, but produce extraordinary returns.
Now, think about this for a second. Russia invested overly in military and in particular nuclear weapons. Of all the investments in sovereignty Russia made, the only durable one has been those nuclear weapons.
Any polity with a few nuclear weapons and an armed populace, with stores of RPG’s, Man portable Missile Launchers, and enough artillery to protect lines of invasion, is relatively safe from conquest. So a relatively small number of professional warriors, a sufficiently trained militia, and the cost of military can be below the 3-4% Switzerland, which arguably benefits from the ‘mountainous terrain discount’, only spends 0.8% per year. The additional benefit of being a small nuclear state operating on international markets is that it is very hard for you to create sufficiently international dependencies that you need war to protect them.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-08 08:49:00 UTC
-
I DON’T HATE. JUST ACCEPT SOME OF US MUST SEPARATE I don’t hate on any group. Th
I DON’T HATE. JUST ACCEPT SOME OF US MUST SEPARATE
I don’t hate on any group. The fact that it is in some our our interests to separate and some of our interests to mix, is simply an expression of the affordability of that option. Wealth allows expression of preferences.
Some of us prefer separatism (because we have superior group traits that provide us premiums) and some of us prefer integration (because we can gain from superior groups or inferior group discounts).
So it is in the interest of people from inferior groups and often with inferior traits to seek the benefits of superior groups.
The question is only whether it is of benefit (profit) to the host, or harm (loss) to the host. And in general transfer of professionals that reduces the price of professional services is of benefit, while transfer of labor which reduces the price of labor is of harm.
The simple reason being that lowering professional costs and raising labor costs is in the group’s interest.
My argument is that groups must pay the cost of domesticating their own, and if they cannot domesticate their own, and worse, if they export their own – causing externalities by doing so – they lose the reciprocal obligation to permit sovereignty (self rule).
This is a terribly simple problem: Pay for your own costs – one way or another.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-08 08:26:00 UTC
-
The Trick to Understanding Statistics Isn’t Math – Its ‘markets’ (competition in Equilibration)
THE TRICK TO UNDERSTANDING STATISTICS ISN’T MATH – ITS ‘MARKETS’ (COMPETITION IN EQUILIBRATION) There is nothing in genetic charts that requires mathematics to understand, just like there are no mathematical statements that cannot be expressed in ordinary (natural) language, and therefore understandable. The vast majority of genetics is nothing other than statistical analysis. The vast majority of statistical analysis is a list of single-regression analysis (set of variables), and then organizing those ‘lines’ into supply demand curves. It’s the second part – supply demand curves – rather than trying to produce a single line (distribution) using complex mathematics that (a) leads to errors and (b) is so prominent in the data. Some of us intuitively understand this, or have been educated in markets or economics or the competition of life, or the competition of evolution such that we are not so easily fooled. But the average person still operates by intuition considering himself as the standard unit of measure when interpreting data – which is precisely the same as creating a complex series of regression analysis in an attempt to produce a single statement. Think about that a bit.
-
The Trick to Understanding Statistics Isn’t Math – Its ‘markets’ (competition in Equilibration)
THE TRICK TO UNDERSTANDING STATISTICS ISN’T MATH – ITS ‘MARKETS’ (COMPETITION IN EQUILIBRATION) There is nothing in genetic charts that requires mathematics to understand, just like there are no mathematical statements that cannot be expressed in ordinary (natural) language, and therefore understandable. The vast majority of genetics is nothing other than statistical analysis. The vast majority of statistical analysis is a list of single-regression analysis (set of variables), and then organizing those ‘lines’ into supply demand curves. It’s the second part – supply demand curves – rather than trying to produce a single line (distribution) using complex mathematics that (a) leads to errors and (b) is so prominent in the data. Some of us intuitively understand this, or have been educated in markets or economics or the competition of life, or the competition of evolution such that we are not so easily fooled. But the average person still operates by intuition considering himself as the standard unit of measure when interpreting data – which is precisely the same as creating a complex series of regression analysis in an attempt to produce a single statement. Think about that a bit.
-
WHEN THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN… When the constitution was written, spelling
WHEN THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN…
When the constitution was written, spelling was often phonetic rather than canonized as it has been post-Webster. Capitalization and font size were used as emphasis – bold not available to the pen, as it is today in print. Grammar was more formal and still retained some academic latin influences – including longer sentence structure. And it was written in the context of traditional Common Law, which itself was written in the context of Anglo Saxon Law, which codified Ancient Germanic law, which preserved european (west indo-european) traditional law. This presents a conflict because natural law of reciprocity needs strict construction to eliminate interpretation and the constitution relied on familiarity with that tradition rather than strict construction – Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, and Markets in Everything are not stated, but assumed to the same degree as the existence of god and the perpetual existence of the church. Hence why the constitution must be rewritten with those definitions and with strict construction to ensure that that knowledge of that long tradition is no longer required, and also so that such a constitution is no longer open to interpretation.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:10:00 UTC
-
THE TRICK TO UNDERSTANDING STATISTICS ISN’T MATH – ITS ‘MARKETS’ (COMPETITION IN
THE TRICK TO UNDERSTANDING STATISTICS ISN’T MATH – ITS ‘MARKETS’ (COMPETITION IN EQUILIBRATION)
There is nothing in genetic charts that requires mathematics to understand, just like there are no mathematical statements that cannot be expressed in ordinary (natural) language, and therefore understandable.
The vast majority of genetics is nothing other than statistical analysis.
The vast majority of statistical analysis is a list of single-regression analysis (set of variables), and then organizing those ‘lines’ into supply demand curves.
It’s the second part – supply demand curves – rather than trying to produce a single line (distribution) using complex mathematics that (a) leads to errors and (b) is so prominent in the data.
Some of us intuitively understand this, or have been educated in markets or economics or the competition of life, or the competition of evolution such that we are not so easily fooled.
But the average person still operates by intuition considering himself as the standard unit of measure when interpreting data – which is precisely the same as creating a complex series of regression analysis in an attempt to produce a single statement.
Think about that a bit.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 07:30:00 UTC
-
Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom, and Markets for Survival of A Polity
Sovereignty in fact – because a group has enough capacity for violence to produce sovereignty over the will or ability of any and all competitors. Liberty by request – because a group does not have enough capacity for violence to produce sovereignty, but can purchase liberty with fees (taxes). Freedom by permission – because an individual has too little violence to produce sovereignty, and too little violence to request liberty, but can purchase freedom through non-interference and payment of fees (taxes). Sovereignty is produced as a commons(Polity/Executive). Liberty is produced as a commons(Business/Managerial). Freedom is given to produce commons (Trades/Labor). Serfdom is imposed to produce commons at cost(Labor). Slavery is imposed to produce commons at high cost(labor). Whether one demonstrates a condition of Sovereignty(Aristocracy: Polity/Territory), Liberty(Citizen : capital), or freedom (Freeman: body), the production of such must be constructed top down: from commons to degree of property ownership (responsibility) since while it is most productive to have the greatest distribution of property, it is also most productive to limit the distribution of property to those who produce commons. Since productivity determines the ability for a polity to compete for sovereignty and territory the distribution of property therefore productivity and responsibility is determined by competitive necessity versus the abilities of the population. Hence the need for growth to defeat the red queen of technology and productivity, against men, and to defeat the red queen of evolution (or devolution, or extinction).
-
Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom, and Markets for Survival of A Polity
Sovereignty in fact – because a group has enough capacity for violence to produce sovereignty over the will or ability of any and all competitors. Liberty by request – because a group does not have enough capacity for violence to produce sovereignty, but can purchase liberty with fees (taxes). Freedom by permission – because an individual has too little violence to produce sovereignty, and too little violence to request liberty, but can purchase freedom through non-interference and payment of fees (taxes). Sovereignty is produced as a commons(Polity/Executive). Liberty is produced as a commons(Business/Managerial). Freedom is given to produce commons (Trades/Labor). Serfdom is imposed to produce commons at cost(Labor). Slavery is imposed to produce commons at high cost(labor). Whether one demonstrates a condition of Sovereignty(Aristocracy: Polity/Territory), Liberty(Citizen : capital), or freedom (Freeman: body), the production of such must be constructed top down: from commons to degree of property ownership (responsibility) since while it is most productive to have the greatest distribution of property, it is also most productive to limit the distribution of property to those who produce commons. Since productivity determines the ability for a polity to compete for sovereignty and territory the distribution of property therefore productivity and responsibility is determined by competitive necessity versus the abilities of the population. Hence the need for growth to defeat the red queen of technology and productivity, against men, and to defeat the red queen of evolution (or devolution, or extinction).
-
HOW TO STUDY ANY SUBJECT Some idiot on Quora counter-signaling one of my posts o
HOW TO STUDY ANY SUBJECT
Some idiot on Quora counter-signaling one of my posts on ethnicity, by demanding sources. You know, I don’t put sources for a lot of things because it requires a second copy-paste, and google image search or text search will always find it. (and maybe subconsciously i like to bait these assholes.) As usual, it’s a diagram and quotes from Nature. Which is pretty much the top of the scientific stack. and… Fuck. Do people think I make this shit up? Fucking read something other than stupid shit….
You know how easy getting a grasp of anything is? You find a subject. You search wiki and read the articles and copy the references.
Now you search for those references. you read reviews of published papers that were published later, and you read reviews of books on amazon. You read the reviews of all related books suggested by amazon. You make a list of names, and terms, and key-phrases. You repeat this process until ‘I cant find anything that isn’t a duplicate of something someone else said’.
Once you’ve done that pick the best book, and read it’s table of contents. Try figure out which chapter makes the argument rather than prepares for it or explains it. Scan that chapter. then read it. Then if you think there is more to learn read more until there isn’t. Check the back of the book’s glossary and bibliography. Just scan them for things you either don’t know or sound interesting.
Pick another book. Do the same. Most of the time BOOKS CAN BE REDUCED TO A SET OF KEY PAPERS REFERENCED IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY. If not, they can be reduced to a central thesis, and the rest of the book is just DEFENSE of it.
My opinion on research is not to put a lot of stock in any defense, but to put stock tin the competition of books and papers that compete with one another on the topic. So I recommend using the cheapness of the internet to survey a subject and then get into the books.
Most of the time I work by finding an author that has created a novel insight and then reading the papers in his bibliography. It may seem like a lot is published but the truth is very few books in any year are of substance at the level of group evolutionary strategy and politics.
Once you are ‘current’ with the state of knowledge you just literally follow the top blogs, and read the relatively few papers that have any meaning.
What you find is that all the discipilnes duplicate effort on what you would consider awfully obvious matters.
By contrast, what most people do is the other way around: try to find one book and they get ‘hooked by the authors frame.’ and then they’re anchored. Start with an overview of the ‘market for ideas’. This isn’t the middle ages. Nearly every book more than a year old is available for free somewhere somehow. In fact, we have just about everything worth reading already in our library in digital form.
(Rant off.)
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-06 20:04:00 UTC