Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Philosophy: “Testimonial Science” Well, we usually define philosophy as either t

    Philosophy: “Testimonial Science”

    Well, we usually define philosophy as either the love of wisdom – in the ancient sense – or in the modern sense, the search for truth.

    My work is an effort to define truth, so that we can prohibit falsehood and the use of falsehood as a means of theft, parasitism, predation and conquest.

    So as far as I know I have produced the most total definition of truth and means of identifying it as has been achieved as yet. (and it seems hard to do better really.)

    This definition of truth causes the convergence of biology, morality, philosophy, law, and science. Which is in itself an achievement, and we call this kind of utility “explanatory power”. This truth has a great deal of explanatory power.

    I call this ‘existentially possible’ and ‘complete’ truth “Testimonial Truth”.

    And since science and philosophy are merged by using this definition of truth, I argue that philosophy should be reframed (relabeled) as “Testimonial Science”.

    Meaning, the science of speaking the truth.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-17 08:23:00 UTC

  • RELYING ON YOUR DEV LEAD I love my business partner Kirill, and we work pretty w

    RELYING ON YOUR DEV LEAD

    I love my business partner Kirill, and we work pretty well together.

    I am more emotional, he is more steady.

    There are some things that are just matters of understanding the user.

    There are some things that are important to keep consistent so that the user will understand it. And I sort of carry weight with the former, and he the latter.

    But we are very similar otherwise.

    I rarely if ever say ‘well, we just gotta do it this way’.

    I find that as in most things if we agree we should do it.

    If we don’t agree we should wait until we do to do it.

    And at this point he understands the application better than I do.

    Alexey is sort of like the adult in the room. He humors us. Lets us babble, then says its logical or not, or that we’re not thinking clearly. It’s kind of interesting.

    So if you watch us work, I submit issues. I rarely assume I am right. I just expect that these issues must survive team criticism. Which is the scientific thing to do.

    Now, most of the time there is an analyst on a project (business rules), and a UI analyst (user experience), and these people try to minimize the impact on the development team.

    But we can’t find those people here in this part of the world (and I think in many cases we’re much better at UX anyway even if our detail design isn’t often there – an artist problem not a UX problem).

    So this is how we work. I say something insane, Kirill makes it compatible, and Alexey finds the limits and contradictions and corrects us and that seems to work pretty well.

    There are some very old UI gaffs in there that I just don’t like. But we’ll fix them sooner or later.

    Thanks for listening.

    Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-17 03:08:00 UTC

  • WHY DO PEOPLE WANT TO EXIT THE CONSULTING BUSINESS? (OVERSING UPDATE) Everyone w

    WHY DO PEOPLE WANT TO EXIT THE CONSULTING BUSINESS?

    (OVERSING UPDATE)

    Everyone who builds a consulting company always seems to want to exit. There are a lot of reasons for this. First, it is a low capital investment industry that is easy to get into and exit even if exit is at low multiples (1-2x). So it attracts people who work overly hard, and get tired of it. Second, it is an extremely volatile business full of constant risk, because there is no way to entrench yourself in a customer other than relationships and knowledge of their business. It is very hard to raise rates. Skills are rapidly perishable and subject to swings. Employees are not sticky. Receivables very high, and credit on receivables difficult and constraining to your growth. And it is the first business to feel recessionary pressures. It is a very mercenary business. And that is because it is largely impossible to collect rents. (which I find fascinating really. it is an example of how all of us seek rents, because the constant productivity of consulting is like the constant productivity of hourly labor, except you’re working in a higher paid white collar capacity. So by inversion that means most of us seek employment where we can seek rents.)

    You start get enter the safety zone as you approach 500 people, and generally get somewhat safe after 1000, because even if you halve the business, you can halve the staff, and have the cash flow to rebuild.

    SOLVING THE PROBLEM

    The only way to solve the problems of the stressfulness of running a services business is BRAND, SCALE, PORTFOLIO, and PROCESS.

    Build a reputation for excellence that feeds you leads.

    Get large enough that you can tolerate volatility without causing doubt in the staff. (maintain your ‘other’ customer base of employees).

    Look at portfiolios of either customers or offerings or both, and plan two years out at least, if not three.

    Create a process of continuous training (education) for your employees.

    WHY CAN SOME PEOPLE NOT DO THIS?

    Because actively managing your business is pretty hard. And investing in your employees skills is not expensive, but it is a constant effort.

    ****So the best way to create process of continuous improvement is to treat the company as a university that does paying work for clients rather than unpaid homework for the professor.****

    And instead of relying upon the professor’s or management’s opinion for your grades, you rely upon the reviews of your peers and your customers.

    If you grasp this. That this is probably the business model for all businesses in the 21st century. That we have passed the era of lifetime careers. That we have passed the era of decade long careers. That instead we are in an era of continuous education of our staffs, and that we need processes to achieve that continuous training at lowest possible cost, then you will understand why we built oversing.

    ***BECAUSE ALL COMPANIES ARE TURNING INTO CONSULTING COMPANIES AND ALL LABOR INTO PROFESSIONAL WORK.***

    Whether we have made oversing powerful enough yet to achieve this is certainly debatable. But that we have made it powerful enough to do much of it is not.

    Oversing is a platform of the management of human capital in the 21st century.

    It’s a Social ERP for The constant Improvement of human beings.

    And the data we will give you about your organization after using Oversing will blow your mind.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-17 02:45:00 UTC

  • ARE THE RUSSIANS RIGHT? ARE THE CHINESE RIGHT? ARE WE WRONG? (YES) …. ISLAM IS

    ARE THE RUSSIANS RIGHT? ARE THE CHINESE RIGHT? ARE WE WRONG? (YES) …. ISLAM IS THE CAUSE OF THE DESCENT OF MAN.

    I love Russian people. I love them perhaps most of all. In some ways they are the only non-ideological europeans remaining. The only people who do not let idealism interfere with their perception of reality.

    I consistently criticize the government. And I criticize the government almost entirely for using propaganda and deception. The rest I attribute to paranoia of a low trust society accumulating and concentrating in political office.

    My argument is quite simple: If you’re right, just tell the truth about it. The truth is enough.

    China Subjugates the muslims to the west – and are wise to.

    Russia Subjugates the muslims to the south – and are wise to.

    Africa resists the muslims to the north – and are wise to.

    Europa attempts to ‘civilize’ them through commercial exchange and incorporation.

    There is only one fool here: The West.

    And one set of advocates: the cosmopolitans, feminists, and postmodernists.

    The Muslim groups have an IQ below the threshold of employability.

    They cannot be integrated.

    They cannot be converted.

    Their reproduction causes genetic damage.

    And Muslims are easily antagonized because islam requires the grant of respect (reinforcement) of the ignorant and dim. Ours requires that you earn it, or know your place as an inferior who is tolerated. THis provides an incentive to imiate one’s betters if one cannot comprehend them. And to learn if it is possible. Our civilizations attempt to coral the underclasses so that they cannot damage us. And we sought to eliminate them by hard and soft eugenics for almost all of our history – until women got the vote.

    The muslims do not do this. They spread through reproduction and demand for respect for the dim and ignorant, and the reinforcement of the dim and ignorant if they can follow the scripture of the dim and ignorant.

    We spent a thousand years of darkness trying to overcome the first great lie – supernatural monotheism.

    We have spent the last 150 trying to overcome the second great lie (the jewish pseudosciences).

    We are importing a third great lie – islam.

    We cannot cure islam with science.

    We could cure pseudoscience and christianity with science because both were predicated on reason and intelligent carriers in the upper classes.

    But islam does not advance because of intelligence and reason, but by aggression, ignorance, genetic inferiority, and rapid reproduction.

    There is no forward direction to evolution. Our brains are not getting bigger.

    We distributed calculation through voluntary cooperation as a means of computation. A vast division of perception, cognition, knowledge, advocacy and negotiation.

    But there is no reason that a human that is more aggressive, less intelligent, with faster reproduction will not defeat intelligence.

    As Stephen J Gould argued – intelligence is a costly and not necessarily useful advantage. For the simple reason that it is far more expensive that just reproducing faster and consuming fewer resources.

    We may have already reached peak human, and islam is the end of the ascent man.

    Perhaps the Russians are right: you fight mysticism with reason, reason with rationalism, rationalism and pseudoscience with science.

    But if you must defeat the dim, the ignorant, who employ nothing but reproduction and aggression, then you must fight them on their terms: with deception and violence. In other words: war.

    Islam is an invasive species.

    Violence is the only cure.

    Time to cure the world of this disease.

    Why are we fighing for status between the west, the russians, and the chinese, when our common interest is to resist the people of the steppe and desert?

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-16 05:03:00 UTC

  • Intentional Abuse of Ethical Systems as a Means of Parasitism

    [T]he false use of ethics as a means of deception. In childhood we require others to imitate: virtue ethics. In adulthood we require general rules to apply : rule ethics. In wisdom we require outcomes to measure : outcome ethics. Not all can achieve outcome ethics. Some are stuck in virtue. Others in rule. 1) We forgive children who obey virtue ethics because they cannot understand rules. 2) We forgive adults who obey rule ethics because they cannot understand the outcomes. 3) We rarely forgive outcome ethics, which we see as error (when a general fails) and should have relied upon conventual wisdom or morality. THE DARK SIDE There are those who practice virtue and rule ethics in order to circumvent responsibility for outcomes. Keynesianism and Rothbardianism are dark side ethics. They ignore the consequences in order to further current self interest. Lies, more lies, and many more lies. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • Intentional Abuse of Ethical Systems as a Means of Parasitism

    [T]he false use of ethics as a means of deception. In childhood we require others to imitate: virtue ethics. In adulthood we require general rules to apply : rule ethics. In wisdom we require outcomes to measure : outcome ethics. Not all can achieve outcome ethics. Some are stuck in virtue. Others in rule. 1) We forgive children who obey virtue ethics because they cannot understand rules. 2) We forgive adults who obey rule ethics because they cannot understand the outcomes. 3) We rarely forgive outcome ethics, which we see as error (when a general fails) and should have relied upon conventual wisdom or morality. THE DARK SIDE There are those who practice virtue and rule ethics in order to circumvent responsibility for outcomes. Keynesianism and Rothbardianism are dark side ethics. They ignore the consequences in order to further current self interest. Lies, more lies, and many more lies. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • NAP: Asserting that Out-group non-retaliation was a rule for in-group cooperation

    [N]AP was employed by separatists to attempt to assert that out-group non-retaliation was a rule for in-group cooperation. Jewish law, culture, and religion attempt to preserve separatism so that they gain the benefits of the host’s commons production, without paying for the normative commons. Just as Gypsies do, but gypsies keep the cost low enough, and appeal to our altruism enough, that the cost of extermination is more than we are willing to pay. Jews do not limit their parasitism, and perform it largely through externality or deception, and this is why they are, over the centuries, repeatedly retaliated against: because the cost has become high enough that hosts must. This is not unknown since jewish authors discuss this problem openly.

  • The Problem of Moral Intent Without the Skills of Moral Action

    [T]he moral man is skeptical. If you come at me with questions it would be the actions of a moral man. But as a teacher of others and a philosopher myself I grasp that it is quite difficult to ask questions when you do not know what to ask. So the only option available to one is to criticize until one knows what questions to ask. So it is not necessarily that one intends immorality. It is that we stumble the best we can with the skills at our disposal. As such you have moral intent but not the ability to act morally. I often spend a generous amount of time with those of moral intent but lacking in moral skills, in order to help them discover what questions they might want to ask. This is my contribution to the commons. Tolerance. Patience. Cost. A cost for which many people have suggested I waste my time. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Problem of Moral Intent Without the Skills of Moral Action

    [T]he moral man is skeptical. If you come at me with questions it would be the actions of a moral man. But as a teacher of others and a philosopher myself I grasp that it is quite difficult to ask questions when you do not know what to ask. So the only option available to one is to criticize until one knows what questions to ask. So it is not necessarily that one intends immorality. It is that we stumble the best we can with the skills at our disposal. As such you have moral intent but not the ability to act morally. I often spend a generous amount of time with those of moral intent but lacking in moral skills, in order to help them discover what questions they might want to ask. This is my contribution to the commons. Tolerance. Patience. Cost. A cost for which many people have suggested I waste my time. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Challenge of Our Time is Deceit

    [W]e spend a lot of time on logical fallacies, which assume mere error on the part of one’s opponent. We have begun to spend a lot of time on Cognitive Biases which affect one’s opponent. But both of these disciplines assume that the other party errs. When the problem of modern era, is not error but deception: lying. Social Pseudoscience, Keynesian Pseudoscience, postmodernism, rationalist obscurantism, propaganda and overloading, rallying and shaming, feminism, political correctness, religion and mysticism, democratic secular humanism (a pseudoscientific religion). All of these are possible not by error, not by bias, but by the organized use of language and media as a means of conducting theft by deception. The problem of our time is DECEPTION. How do we cleanse the commons of deceit? That’s why I work on Testimonialism (truth telling) and propertarianism (limits of human action) and propertarian liberalism (the market construction of commons.) End the century of lies.