Curt Doolittle

Form: Short Note

  • THE SECOND SECRET OF LEARNING PROPERTARIANISM. For every reference you use, expr

    THE SECOND SECRET OF LEARNING PROPERTARIANISM.

    For every reference you use, express it as a position in a spectrum of at least three different states all of which share the same measurement (constant relation).

    The reason most things seem clearer or more insightful is that I use series’ of operational definitions to limit (as do all grammars) and emphasize, the constant relation I wish to illustrate.

    By describing a spectrum from coming into existence, to dropping from existence (failure) you create a definition wherein the priority of the properties of the category (causality) is not open to conflation or misinterpretation.

    And that is how Abrahamism causes deception: conflation and redirection (suggestion).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-28 10:49:00 UTC

  • The Second Secret Of Learning Propertarianism.

    For every reference you use, express it as a position in a spectrum of at least three different states all of which share the same measurement (constant relation). The reason most things seem clearer or more insightful is that I use series’ of operational definitions to limit (as do all grammars) and emphasize, the constant relation I wish to illustrate. By describing a spectrum from coming into existence, to dropping from existence (failure) you create a definition wherein the priority of the properties of the category (causality) is not open to conflation or misinterpretation. And that is how Abrahamism causes deception: conflation and redirection (suggestion).

  • The Second Secret Of Learning Propertarianism.

    For every reference you use, express it as a position in a spectrum of at least three different states all of which share the same measurement (constant relation). The reason most things seem clearer or more insightful is that I use series’ of operational definitions to limit (as do all grammars) and emphasize, the constant relation I wish to illustrate. By describing a spectrum from coming into existence, to dropping from existence (failure) you create a definition wherein the priority of the properties of the category (causality) is not open to conflation or misinterpretation. And that is how Abrahamism causes deception: conflation and redirection (suggestion).

  • The irony that the Long House is the Ultimate Family home design, and that the C

    The irony that the Long House is the Ultimate Family home design, and that the Courtyard House is the Ultimate Multi-Generational home design, and that the Courtyard Block of ‘interior facing condos’, or exterior facing Town Homes, is the ultimate Multi-Family Intergenerational home design, and we have all been trying to develop farm houses, which were not homes but small businesses; and manor houses, which were medium and large sized businesses, and our aesthetic is for farm houses, and for Manors despite the fact that we no longer have farms, or conduct business from our homes – and in particular, do not have six children per woman, and household servants to assist in training, clothing, and feeding them. I’ve been drawing home designs since I was nine (I satisfied my OCD by 3d construction drawings of our many Victorian Homes, and guessing at the internal wood construction. What is scary, even knowing myself now, is that because I was working for my father as a delivery runner, I knew every house in town from memory, and could do the drawings from memory. And I think I have only lost that facility because I simply don’t use it.) But it became obvious to me, after living in a courtyard home, that it is the perfect solution to home design. It is not as cheap as two story winter-weather standing homes, but it is infinitely more desirable to live in. Particularly as diversity increases and trust and norms decrease. 1 – Long house (territorial family) 2 – Courtyard TownHomes (non-territorial family) 2 – Courtyard House (intergenerational non-territorial family) 3 – Courtyard Homes (multiple intergenerational non territorial families.)

  • The irony that the Long House is the Ultimate Family home design, and that the C

    The irony that the Long House is the Ultimate Family home design, and that the Courtyard House is the Ultimate Multi-Generational home design, and that the Courtyard Block of ‘interior facing condos’, or exterior facing Town Homes, is the ultimate Multi-Family Intergenerational home design, and we have all been trying to develop farm houses, which were not homes but small businesses; and manor houses, which were medium and large sized businesses, and our aesthetic is for farm houses, and for Manors despite the fact that we no longer have farms, or conduct business from our homes – and in particular, do not have six children per woman, and household servants to assist in training, clothing, and feeding them. I’ve been drawing home designs since I was nine (I satisfied my OCD by 3d construction drawings of our many Victorian Homes, and guessing at the internal wood construction. What is scary, even knowing myself now, is that because I was working for my father as a delivery runner, I knew every house in town from memory, and could do the drawings from memory. And I think I have only lost that facility because I simply don’t use it.) But it became obvious to me, after living in a courtyard home, that it is the perfect solution to home design. It is not as cheap as two story winter-weather standing homes, but it is infinitely more desirable to live in. Particularly as diversity increases and trust and norms decrease. 1 – Long house (territorial family) 2 – Courtyard TownHomes (non-territorial family) 2 – Courtyard House (intergenerational non-territorial family) 3 – Courtyard Homes (multiple intergenerational non territorial families.)

  • The irony that the Long House is the Ultimate Family home design, and that the C

    The irony that the Long House is the Ultimate Family home design, and that the Courtyard House is the Ultimate Multi-Generational home design, and that the Courtyard Block of ‘interior facing condos’, or exterior facing Town Homes, is the ultimate Multi-Family Intergenerational home design, and we have all been trying to develop farm houses, which were not homes but small businesses; and manor houses, which were medium and large sized businesses, and our aesthetic is for farm houses, and for Manors despite the fact that we no longer have farms, or conduct business from our homes – and in particular, do not have six children per woman, and household servants to assist in training, clothing, and feeding them.

    I’ve been drawing home designs since I was nine (I satisfied my OCD by 3d construction drawings of our many Victorian Homes, and guessing at the internal wood construction. What is scary, even knowing myself now, is that because I was working for my father as a delivery runner, I knew every house in town from memory, and could do the drawings from memory. And I think I have only lost that facility because I simply don’t use it.)

    But it became obvious to me, after living in a courtyard home, that it is the perfect solution to home design. It is not as cheap as two story winter-weather standing homes, but it is infinitely more desirable to live in. Particularly as diversity increases and trust and norms decrease.

    1 – Long house (territorial family)

    2 – Courtyard TownHomes (non-territorial family)

    2 – Courtyard House (intergenerational non-territorial family)

    3 – Courtyard Homes (multiple intergenerational non territorial families.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-28 10:45:00 UTC

  • What Kind Of Advice Would You Give To A 24 Year-old Male?

    1) When you are young you can do something that people who are older cant: work incessantly on very little income. The truth is though, that older startup guys do better at it. We just are more interested in young guys. but they have to give away a lot of the company because they can’t work like you can. So use it.

    2) Ideas are not scarce. Customers are scarce. whenever I start a business I know who I will sell the product or service to, and who I will sell the company to. I am usually wrong about the specifics but the general idea works out.

    3) Create something that a bigger company wants to buy from you, by collecting customers that they cant reach.

    4) Get into a house with other guys who do the same work, and save some money.

    5) Work at a larger company for one year so you understand the value of process. Then move to a startup so that you understand how to actually get something done – most people in large companies don’t actually do anything of much value. Everyone in a small company does.

    6) Never expand early. It is an excuse to focus on internal organizational development rather than customers, service and product. Humans possess this cognitive bias. And it is a startup killer.

    7) There isn’t anyone enough smarter than you to create a marginal difference. Don’t expect there to be. And they won’t come work for you anyway. That means you have to solve a lot of problems on your own. That desperate need to understand is what makes one an entrepreneur.

    8) take the first two basic accounting classes if you haven’t. That’s all you’ll ever need to know. but you need to know it.

    9) Your job is to sell. Sell ideas. Sell products. Sell Services. If you are doing something someone else can because it gives you a sense of accomplishment then you’re wasting your time. Nothing that produces significant returns has a short production cycle, and sales are frustrating. So spend your time on the long term, hard stuff, and get the admin folks to do the rituals.

    10) Good salespeople won’t work for you. But you can buy good marketing. The number of companies that think 300K of ad budget is out of the question yet blow twice that on non-performing people never ceases to amaze me.

    I tried for 10. Hopefully there is a gem in there somewhere.

    https://www.quora.com/What-kind-of-advice-would-you-give-to-a-24-year-old-male

  • Conservatives Are More Attractive Than Liberals

    (we’ve known this forever, but yet another study) Effects of physical attractiveness on political beliefs Rolfe Daus Peterson (a1) and Carl L. Palmer (a2) Access Volume 36, Issue 2 Fall 2017 , pp. 3-16 https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2017.18Published online: 27 December 2017 Abstract Physical attractiveness is an important social factor in our daily interactions. Scholars in social psychology provide evidence that attractiveness stereotypes and the “halo effect” are prominent in affecting the traits we attribute to others. However, the interest in attractiveness has not directly filtered down to questions of political behavior beyond candidates and elites. Utilizing measures of attractiveness across multiple surveys, we examine the relationship between attractiveness and political beliefs. Controlling for socioeconomic status, we find that more attractive individuals are more likely to report higher levels of political efficacy, identify as conservative, and identify as Republican. These findings suggest an additional mechanism for political socialization that has further implications for understanding how the body intertwines with the social nature of politics.

  • CONSERVATIVES ARE MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN LIBERALS (we’ve known this forever, but y

    CONSERVATIVES ARE MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN LIBERALS

    (we’ve known this forever, but yet another study)

    Effects of physical attractiveness on political beliefs

    Rolfe Daus Peterson (a1) and Carl L. Palmer (a2)

    Access Volume 36, Issue 2 Fall 2017 , pp. 3-16

    https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2017.18Published online: 27 December 2017

    Abstract

    Physical attractiveness is an important social factor in our daily interactions. Scholars in social psychology provide evidence that attractiveness stereotypes and the “halo effect” are prominent in affecting the traits we attribute to others. However, the interest in attractiveness has not directly filtered down to questions of political behavior beyond candidates and elites. Utilizing measures of attractiveness across multiple surveys, we examine the relationship between attractiveness and political beliefs. Controlling for socioeconomic status, we find that more attractive individuals are more likely to report higher levels of political efficacy, identify as conservative, and identify as Republican. These findings suggest an additional mechanism for political socialization that has further implications for understanding how the body intertwines with the social nature of politics.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-27 16:20:00 UTC

  • My answer to Why do people discriminate others but dislike it when they are disc

    My answer to Why do people discriminate others but dislike it when they are discriminated? https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-discriminate-others-but-dislike-it-when-they-are-discriminated/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=fcb03d89

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-27 01:20:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/957060631479406592