Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • A Short Introduction to Propertarianism On The Questions of Drugs and Religion

    —“What’s your view of the contemporary drug war? How does the Propertarian framework handle the externality effects of drug use? Conservatives obviously seem to feel strongly about it that they license a monolithic state to fight it, and libertarians seem to adopt the opposite libertine position, at best hoping that it somehow reduces the negative externalities in the end (something something free association). Exposure to your framework has taught me that there may be an interesting, novel response, one that (as intended with your system) doesn’t lose information and fairly negotiates between interest groups.”— Josh [G]reat Question Josh. Alcohol, Drugs, and Religion – and, yes I’m including religion for a good reason. 0) What one does in the mind, toilet, and home, is irrelevant if it does not externalize costs into the commons, court, or sacred places and events. 1) Prosecution of drug users has nothing to do with the users, but to the externalities caused by their drug use. In other words, the that prosecution is an act of prior restraint by the insurer of last resort on behalf of the insured. 2) Contract of any kind requires sentience, and without sentience one cannot adhere to contract. 3) Restitution is not possible since not all things are open to substitution – particularly living things like people and pets, but also art, and sacred things. 4) Restitution of information is not possible and this is a serious issue for mothers who must regulate the information available to their children in order to reduce the cost of raising competitive civic offspring. 5) Moral hazard – The problem with degenerative drug use, is that if one doesn’t take care of one’s mind and body the rest of society is put in moral hazard (just as unwed mothers put society in moral and economic hazard), by forcing us to either provide (costly) care, imprison, or kill. 6) Organizations can be held accountable for the actions of their members on behalf of the organization’s and their interests. A religion can prevent knowledge, or it can distribute knowledge. It can prevent bad civic behavior, or distribute bad civic behavior. It can use numbers to create and limit normative behavior, and create and limit economic and political behavior – even military behavior. So religions can externalize objectively good or objectively bad information, and restitution (repair) is almost impossible due to the unique method of teaching used by religion – the natural ‘drug’ ( endorphins ) provided by the submission-to-the-safety-of-the-pack response caused by gatherings of groups in ceremony, listening or chanting myths (prayers). ( Note: as you suggested, the addition of informational analysis helps us better understand these problems. ) SO THE QUESTION How can one insure others against the externalities? Well, one can engage in recreational use of drugs in the home, the home of friends, or somewhere not in the commons – admitting that it’s precisely the entertainment of the commons, and relief from the pressure of normative obedience in the commons most of us seek release from. One can limit one’s use of these things to the non-detrimental. As far as I know alcohol pot and most non-opiates are safe in small numbers. But anything that alters brain chemistry is a serious problem for all of us. One can engage in ‘celebrations and rituals’ with others who provide insurance when you are not able to (‘ someone who doesn’t drink – much – for example ‘). THE REAL ISSUE As far as I know the most significant issues creating this problem are the tragic danger of automobiles, the moral hazard of universal health care, the externalization of un-civic behavior to the young and ‘impulsive’, the retaliation invoked by the desecration of the sacred – of which to westerners, the commons simply is a part. Evidence is that extremely severe prosecution of violators of the commons has greater influence than prosecution of the manufacturers and distributors. So my suggestion is that one serious strike or three minor strikes get you hung. This fear will be enough to control aberrant behavior in the commons while permitting what I see as necessary release for the ‘impulsively impaired’ in the home. Like prostitution, if manufacture and distribution are not taking place in the commons, and if use is not taking place in the commons, and if externalities are not produced in the commons, then there is no meaningful consequence. THE HIDDEN BENEFIT Pot has the amazing benefit of both pacifying the underclasses and rapidly increasing male sterility, thereby reducing the rates of reproduction. The opposite is true of alcohol. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • WE TRIED A CENTURY OF THINKING WE WERE SMARTER THAN OUR ANCESTORS – AND WE WERE

    WE TRIED A CENTURY OF THINKING WE WERE SMARTER THAN OUR ANCESTORS – AND WE WERE WRONG. THEY JUST DIDN”T WRITE THEIR ‘BIBLE’ DOWN.

    Western man created the commons as a sacred place. Other civilizations didn’t. That’s why we have beautiful commons. And the rest of the world treats the commons like either their living room or a dumpster.

    Do not assume you possess the knowledge of wisdom to counter traditions developed over thousands of years – and are the very cause of which you are able to live better than a dirt scratching peasant farmer picking fleas out of your hair.

    Western man evolved to worship nature as sacred, and he preserved this in the commons at very high cost, put through imitation of the effete classes who demanded it.

    We just tried a century of thinking we were smarter than our ancestors, and it turns out we weren’t.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-20 04:21:00 UTC

  • IS THE MOST ACCURATE FRAMING OF THE ECONOMIC MOVEMENTS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE TO US

    https://t.co/CYn1I4nXmXTHIS IS THE MOST ACCURATE FRAMING OF THE ECONOMIC MOVEMENTS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE TO US.

    1 – Austrian economics seeks to eliminate asymmetries of knowledge so that people can cooperate voluntarily under the optimum possible conditions. So as a movement, Austrian economics was a social science. In other words, they want to improve our information.

    2 – American (Chicago) economics seeks to identify rule of law, so that economics can be constructed as a formula under rule of law – eliminating discretionary toying with the economy, just as rule of law eliminates discretionary toying with the polity. In other words, they want to manipulate information as little as possible.

    3 – Saltwater (New York/California) economics seeks to identify the maximum disinformation that the government can insert into the economy with which to farm taxes, consume, and redistribute them, while preserving the incentive to keep working and risking capital (the hamster wheel), and to create sufficient knowledge of how to use disinformation that policy makers have full discretion.

    My @Quora answer to Is Keynsian economics better for America than Austrian economics?

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-19 17:00:00 UTC

  • POPPER, HAYEK, AND HOPPE: INFORMATION AND CALCULATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE Popper a

    POPPER, HAYEK, AND HOPPE: INFORMATION AND CALCULATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE

    Popper and Hayek treat information (knowledge) as the model for analysis of man but fail to complete it. (Just as physicists treat the universe as information.)

    Hoppe (by way of rothbard) creates the method of categorization, measurement, and operations of information: property and voluntary cooperation.

    Popper: sources of knowledge and ignorance.(individual/critical/truth)

    Hayek: use of knowledge in economics and society (group/law/cooperation/liberty)

    Hoppe: propertarian ethics (cooperation) as entities (property) and operations (voluntary transfers).

    Doolittle: the division of perception, cognition, knowledge and labor by reproductive demand, and the use of voluntary cooperation to consolidate it into a network that acts on the behalf of the network of individuals.

    Together this creates is a system of constant calculation, whose test is volition (demonstrated use of existing knowledge)

    In my early work I referred to the problem of ‘calculation’. I knew it was the problem I had to solve. I just didn’t realize how enormous a problem it was other than it was the only way of preventing thievery in government.

    I knew my writing was difficult to understand because of the influence of writing software. It took me a very long time to understand that I was intuiting the relationship between the existential dependence of software (computability) and testimonial (existential) truth. And that the only way to write this way was to write in the same style as programming.

    Like I tell people – my autistic intuition finds patterns. I just have to work out what it’s telling me and determine if its true or not. For this reason I never think I am particularly smart – it’s more that I am gifted, and I work hard at translating my gift into language.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-19 06:24:00 UTC

  • THINKING OF BERNARD WILLIAMS (PHILOSOPHER) : THE MIND OF ARTISTS, ENTREPRENEURS,

    THINKING OF BERNARD WILLIAMS (PHILOSOPHER) : THE MIND OF ARTISTS, ENTREPRENEURS, AND JURISTS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF PHILOSOPHY.

    You know, there is a natural conflict between judges, entrepreneurs, and artists. A judge makes no proactive statements, only prohibitionary. Artists and entrepreneurs envision possibilities, and rarely issue prohibitions.

    But it is somewhat of a difference between the sculptors of stone and of clay.

    A sculptor of clay creates from either skeleton or nothing, A sculptor of stone eliminates all that is not that which he desires. Working with clay is much more forgiving than working with stone. The sculptor of stone works with what exists, and the sculptor of clay works with what yet may be. The Judge works with what exists, and the artist and entrepreneur work what may be.

    Together they produce the same art.

    I agree with Williams that scientism is tedious for the artist, of limited use to the entrepreneur – but it is of necessity to the jurist.

    Reasonableness, Reason, Justification are tools of artist and entrepreneur for the purpose of creating hypotheses – that which may yet serve man.

    Science, Criticism, and Testimonialism are the tools of the jurist for the purpose of determining truth – that which exists independently of our opinions.

    The division of perception, cognition, knowledge, advocacy, negotiation, and labor, exists everywhere.

    For every OBVERSE (hypothesis) there must exist a REVERSE (criticism).

    Creator and Jurist are necessary for a two dimensional imaginary plane to be represented as a three dimensional object in reality.

    (You see, I am perfectly capable of argument by informative analogy. But that is only because I know the truth, and wish to inform. It is not because I want to inform without first knowing the truth.)

    Theory:obverse and limits:reverse.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-19 06:20:00 UTC

  • WHY ARE SOME PROGRAMMERS 10,000 TIMES BETTER THAN THE REST? DOES IT MATTER? THEY

    WHY ARE SOME PROGRAMMERS 10,000 TIMES BETTER THAN THE REST? DOES IT MATTER? THEY ARE.

    Kirill just fixed a problem that has been with us for two years, that he solved in just a few hours – flawlessly. Yet, instead of being arrogant, he will also say “Alexey will do that, he has more patience than I do”. And Alexey will make fun of us both at times because we miss the logically obvious (to him). The difference is “Talent”, experience, research, persistence, hard work, and humility.

    So:

    – There many reasons that make a happy family, any one or more of which will make an unhappy family.

    – There are many reasons that an animal is domesticatable, any one of which will make it impossible to domesticate.

    – There are many reasons that make a programmer great any one of which will make the others only adequate.

    We have only four substantial issues left that I know of before BETA clients can use it:

    a) deliverable (sprint) accounting – which should not be hard. It means tracking the history of additions and subtractions of children from estimated and in-progress work.

    b) The reports which are our last feature for v1.

    c) The addition of reservations and appointments (forecasting) to the gantt chart. (I should never have cut it. it’s my fault. I know). We have to have them.

    d) Then my job…. :

    d0) Edit all the error and other messages.

    d1) Documentation and tutorials.

    d2) Default (sample) workflows and projects.

    I GO THRU THE LIST EVERY DAY, AND THATS IT FOR BETA.

    We’re in the last stretch!

    NITS I”M CONFESSING

    Some nits I’ve noticed that make me a little crazy, but aren’t blockers for release to beta sites.

    d) the inconsistency of button labels when editing tables. This will be something Kirill and I do in a few hours over coffee.

    e) a lot of the admin screens need to separate SELECTED items from UNSELECTED items. Right now they are combined in one table and this is confusing for users.

    I SUSPECT I WILL NOW BE THE SOURCE OF ANY DELAY since the documentation is enormous, and while I write fast, and I am partly through it, I degrade quickly when switching between the screen capture and art, and the text.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-19 05:57:00 UTC

  • Is The United States A Rogue State?

    The problem with american policy is that it’s policy is utopian. 

    1. The postwar consensus was that states needed to focus internally on capitalism and human rights, and stay within their borders, so that we don’t have another civil war. Unfortunately americans promote democracy AND consumer capitalism instead of consumer capitalism regardless of political order.
    2. Democracy is a bad idea. Its not a cause of prosperity. It is a luxury good – a conspicuous consumption for wealthy societies, and creates chaos and suffering elsewhere.
    3. American postwar policy says ‘choose the government you want”.  what we don’t say is “but if you choose badly we will send you back to the stone age”.  Unfortunately, human instinct is parasitic: people choose badly.  Why? no enlightenment, no chivalry, no high trust, no prohibition on cousin marriage, and unfortunately, a full standard deviation in lower median IQ.
    4. People are not oppressed so much as parasites that need domestication.
    5. The west is better off than the rest not because of our virtues, but because for one thousand years we hung 1/2 to 1% of the underclass every year, controlled access to farm land, delayed childbirth, prohibited cousin marriage, and starved the rest.  SO most of the west is decendent from the middle class.  The rest of the world hasn’t done this (other than china and Japan) and so they are disproporionately impuslive, aggressive, and of lower intelligence than westerners.
    6. Europe failed in its colonial efforts to national detriments.  We have colonized Europe to its detriment.  Ottoman colonies are the source of world conflict.  The germans were probably right in the first world war, and we should have stayed out of it.  We tend to be wrong a lot. Other than the war on communism – we tend to be wrong a lot.

      Is that uncomfortable? It’s true.

    https://www.quora.com/Is-the-United-States-a-Rogue-State

  • Yes. I’m Controversial. But Why?

    [Y]eah. I’m controversial. Although, it’s somewhat odd to me that advocating truth-telling, not-stealing, limiting public publication to truthful statements, converting to market rather than authoritarian government, and paying poor people in exchange for having just one kid, is controversial. Slaying sacred ideological cows in every era is controversial. But then, I don’t know why advocating deceitful speech, authoritarianism, theft, and systemic parasitism isn’t more controversial than truth telling and not stealing. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • Yes. I’m Controversial. But Why?

    [Y]eah. I’m controversial. Although, it’s somewhat odd to me that advocating truth-telling, not-stealing, limiting public publication to truthful statements, converting to market rather than authoritarian government, and paying poor people in exchange for having just one kid, is controversial. Slaying sacred ideological cows in every era is controversial. But then, I don’t know why advocating deceitful speech, authoritarianism, theft, and systemic parasitism isn’t more controversial than truth telling and not stealing. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • THE JOY OF SEX ERA, THE PORN ERA, AND THE REALITY IN THE MIDDLE. (promoted to po

    THE JOY OF SEX ERA, THE PORN ERA, AND THE REALITY IN THE MIDDLE.

    (promoted to post) (adult content) (sex) (from elsewhere)

    In my demographic were were trained by “the Joy of Sex” movement – the current incarnation of that strategy is ‘tantric’ sex. Slow and romantic.

    The past generation has been trained by pornography. Rather aggressive, and … classless

    The truth is somewhere in the middle.

    Best advice I ever got came in parts from one of those guys who despite being near forty, keeps literally dozens of women going at any one point:

    – Spend the whole day or more in seduction starting with clear suggestions, and followed infrequently by subtle suggestions. I have a very, very, hard time turning my brain off. I can’t imagine what it’s like for women to shut it off. it’s freaking chaos in their heads at all times anyway. So help them.

    – The first time, you must blow her mind, and leave her exhausted. The memory has to stick. This I have found true.

    – The inner woman desires your inner gorilla. Same for women and men: ladies and gentlemen in public, gorillas in bed. But mix it up. One issue is that a lot of sexual excitement comes from novelty (which is why studies of frequent porn users is discouraging for lovers, but probably good for crime rates and prostate glands.) so without mixing it up you must lose interest over time – unless it is primarily an act of intimacy.

    If you listen to, and submit to, your inner gorilla, and use your WHOLE body, rather than either overthinking at one end of the spectrum, or just ‘using your dick as a spear’ on the other end of the spectrum; and then when you get ‘close’, then slow down, use the rest of your body, and prolong it – I think of running in sprints – you’re generally going to do well for your other half.

    For couples:

    – Have sex as often as possible so that it’s a desired habit – an outlet you depend upon, and not an effort in seduction to get started ’cause that will end. That way when either of you is stressed you want each other, and that’s good. I knew an older couple with a lot of kids that snuck off to a hotel for a night once a month to keep it lively. It seemed to work.

    – Never go to bed angry. And keep the sex dirty and the arguments clean.

    – The relationship has to outlive the kids. Many women fuck this up. Kids are often easier (cheap) sources of affection. But they grow up and leave. Meanwhile you didn’t maintain your husband and he’s now trained to not want or contribute affection. Keeping a family cannot be done without a woman watering all in it with affection. So it’s not that your husband is helping you with the kids. Its that your husband wants you for affection just like your kids, not because he intrinsically gets the same joy from them that you do. He might get some. But a mother’s joy is a chemical dependency created by evolution and men do not have it. We think about the tribe, our mates, and the kids, with relatively equal weight. Women specialize in kids and mates, and the tribe is usually not even in her mind.

    Anyway. Maybe that will help someone. I dunno. I wish someone had told me all that when I was sixteen. lol.

    Cheers

    (BTW: Just so I don’t sound like a know-it-all, or because I think I’m some kind of stud or something, cause i’m neither: I’ve been in almost nothing but long term relationships, I am probably a little less interest in sex than average – and more in intimacy – so its more of a romantic thing for me. And my life’s challenge is that asthma is not your friend at these most important of moments and must be managed. So that’s my preemptive counter to the peanut gallery’s potential criticisms that I think I’m full of myself or something.)

    Oh and women are full of shit. Ferraris work. Sorry. They do.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-18 07:02:00 UTC