Curt Doolittle

Form: Reply

  • It’s just posturing. Everyone is playing to home audiences. The problem is Iran.

    It’s just posturing. Everyone is playing to home audiences. The problem is Iran. ISIS is just a lever.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-20 19:51:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/877252512767770624

    Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric @nntaleb @yaneerbaryam

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/876905795224350720

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/876905795224350720

  • YOU CAN’T FIX STUPID —No but you have a real penchant for wordplay and putting

    YOU CAN’T FIX STUPID

    —No but you have a real penchant for wordplay and putting words in peoples mouths to evade criticism— Jordan Kert

    Well, there is True criticism and False criticism, expression of ignorance, and mere expression of dissatisfaction masquerading as criticism.

    So here is the deal. (dipshit) There is nothing I propose that is not in the law and has not been practiced by the law for thousands of years. what I have done is increase the precision of that form of law we call tort, and specifically that subset of tort we call ‘fraud’, just as many other generations before me have increased that precision.

    The law operates by protocols: processes. Hence the term “Due Process Of Law”.

    Try not to be ignorant and stupid. Although, if there were no ignorant and stupid people I would have fewer excuses to explain solutions to intelligent but merely ignorant people.

    I have pity for the stupid. I do not have pity for the stupid’s evasion of dunning kruger.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-18 12:33:00 UTC

  • Damn. I love that header. Great idea. Clear Message. (Nice work)

    Damn. I love that header. Great idea. Clear Message. (Nice work)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-17 19:07:00 UTC

  • Re: missing socialization major cause of our ills

    Re: missing socialization major cause of our ills

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-17 01:48:00 UTC

  • Emailed. Automated response. He’s too busy

    Emailed. Automated response. He’s too busy.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-16 20:30:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/875812852996636672

    Reply addressees: @AlHernandez21 @jordanbpeterson

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/874732376840130563

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/874732376840130563

  • you might wanna read me for a while before thinking you understand. I work on a

    you might wanna read me for a while before thinking you understand. I work on a subject for quite a while. And each post is just another chisel on the stone exposing more of the thing that the stone harbors.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-16 18:44:00 UTC

  • Well, you just don’t grasp yet, that the discipline we call computer science is

    Well, you just don’t grasp yet, that the discipline we call computer science is more generally the logic of operations, and is superior to mathematics in that it is causal and mathematics is merely descriptive.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 12:45:00 UTC

  • “Is analytic philosophy superior to the continental philosophies – such as exist

    —“Is analytic philosophy superior to the continental philosophies – such as existentialism, phenomenology, Thomism?”– A Friend

    Um. I think deflationary analysis (science) is superior to conflationary analysis (continental philosophy).

    Continental philosophy bridges religion and science.

    Analytic philosophy isolates religion from the sciences and joins the sciences.

    (or more historically, analytic philosophy arose out of the enlightenment and law, and continental philosophy rose out of the enlightenment and religion. )

    Continental philosophy conflates just as monotheistic religions conflated. Analytic philosophy deflates.

    Analytic philosophy relies on literature for the experience

    and then we analyze the literature using different fields.

    So put in those terms, the ‘scientific tradition’ asks that we know more different tools of measurement, while the continental school tries to use our experiences as the standard of measurement.

    As far as I know, the continental method has been a waste of time. As far as I know the analytic method has been overly distracted by the use of logic (sets and language) for answers (That were not found by the way).

    WHereas science is in the process of discovering OPERATIONS rather than sets.

    The basis of all ‘truth’ is the possibility of what operations allow change in state given any set of conditions.

    Hence all true names are operational descriptions.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 12:07:00 UTC

  • ME? NO. NOT LIKE RAND OR ROTHBARD. NO. I don’t view it anything like Rand. I vie

    ME? NO. NOT LIKE RAND OR ROTHBARD. NO.

    I don’t view it anything like Rand. I view it like aristotle, Lock, Smith, Hume, Darwin and Nietzsche. The fact that she also relies upon them but advocates low trust individualistic jewish separatism via reason, while I advocate high trust SOVEREIGN production of commons via reason, is perhaps similar to someone who’s read rand. But my influences are really Artificial Intelligence > Popper > Hayek > Hoppe and the philosophy of mathematics more than anything else. My influences are science, economics, law, and mathematics.

    Simple people think in terms of value, reason, and choice. I think in terms of measurement, calculability and decidability. That’s a very big difference.

    The competitive advantage of the west is the use of truth to produce commons better, faster, and cheaper than any other people even imagine possible.

    The competitive advantage of judaism, is to extract the maximum possible from other people’s commons and concentrate it in the tribe, returning as little or nothing to the commons.

    So no. I’m the OPPOSITE of rand and rothbard and marx.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-14 22:38:00 UTC

  • WON’T ABRAHAMISTS JUST CHANGE STRATEGY AGAIN? —“Just curious..I’m sure you’ve

    WON’T ABRAHAMISTS JUST CHANGE STRATEGY AGAIN?

    —“Just curious..I’m sure you’ve worked this out already. But….So, how can we be so sure that Abrahamism won’t change its strategy again, adapt, and learn how to fight back through parasitism once again after we’ve implemented a new way through your philosophy for all time?”— Adam Walker

    Very good question.

    There is a basic logic of all communication that is reducible to a set of ‘measurements’ that allows us to construct a language (terms) and grammar that make it very difficult to state falsehoods. (this is primarily what Acquisitionism, Propertarianism, and Testimonialism provide)

    And given that we understand this grammar, we can also show how suggestion can be created by a series of related statements through unstated but intermediary consequences (suggestive deductions).

    It is very hard to construct lies via that intermediary means of suggestion. I suspect people will try to invent some method, but I think it’s going to be as easy to defeat as religious arguments are today.

    There is a limit to human cognitive ability which is why game theory is of such limited value beyond the second or third order. Just as there is a limit to the number of chess moves a human seems to be able to rationally consider in advance of play.

    So to translate that, it means it is extremely difficult to construct a lie that ordinary people can be fooled by if we make it difficult to do so beyond the third order.

    I hope that is enough to make sense (knowing you I suspect it is.)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-13 19:18:00 UTC