Curt Doolittle

Form: Short Note

  • El problema con la monogamia y la prosperidad

    A menos que las mujeres sean capaces de reproducirse con los mejores genes y obtengan apoyo del resto de los genes a cambio de sexo, entonces siempre habrá una influencia disgénica en la humanidad. ¿Por que? Porque su  descendencia es costosa y son capaces de auto engañarse de cualquier forma posible para poder llevar a cabo la pretensión de que sus pésimas elecciones no han resultado en un peso muerto parasitario para la civilización. La monogamia evita que los hombres sean violentos pero forza la disgenia.   ¿Ahora lo entendéis?

  • 100%

    https://personalityfactors.com/?utm_source=asfbEN-2017-4-17&utm_medium=story&utm_term=uwZdHP5qyrLexpPJx&utm_content=fbimgU&utm_campaign=vsharedEN-2017-4-17Complexity: 100%

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-16 21:28:00 UTC

  • (((Ancestry))) continues the ‘diversity’ agenda by suggesting that you share gen

    (((Ancestry))) continues the ‘diversity’ agenda by suggesting that you share genes with other regions rather than that other regions share common ancestors, and that the survival of similar genes from common ancestors is both selected and random.

    Use 23andMe instead.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-16 17:57:00 UTC

  • The entire Econ discipline must be reconstructed

    The entire Econ discipline must be reconstructed.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-15 14:08:00 UTC

  • AI’s need decidability. In the end, this will govern the entirety of its behavio

    AI’s need decidability. In the end, this will govern the entirety of its behavior. Humans had to evolve property in order to overcome predation, parasitism, and conflict. AI’s can easily make use of the same system that governs human behavior (acquisition), by using the same limits (property).

    The problem instead, (like nuclear weapons), is prohibiting the construction and distribution of ai’s that do not respect property, by liability for the individual, the organization, the government, and the ‘nation’.

    The problem we face is not AI’s, but that people will create autonomous machines that are NOT Ai’s.

    In other words, I define an AI as that which governs its actions by property, and a intelligent weapon as something that does not.

    One would have to weaponize an AI.

    The economic limit of AI’s will be the feedback from people and the subsequent changes in prices that results from their awareness.

    The most cunning way an AI could manipulate people is by disinformation that causes demand, that causes changes in prices.

    This is the same technique currently used by the financial sector, but on a slower scale.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-13 09:58:00 UTC

  • I would love to debate Truth with Rorty

    I would love to debate Truth with Rorty.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-13 05:53:00 UTC

  • OMFG Just turn off the tv. Americans are second only to the british in stupidity

    OMFG Just turn off the tv. Americans are second only to the british in stupidity.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-13 05:32:00 UTC

  • This site is no good to me unless: 1) I have some idea who I’m talkin’ to. 2) yo

    This site is no good to me unless:
    1) I have some idea who I’m talkin’ to.
    2) you shrink the size of the main feed .
    3) I can put a short header on a longer post.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-12 15:52:58 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/4301957807727365

  • The Languages: Myth, Religion, Literature, Philosophy, Science, Engineering, and

    The Languages: Myth, Religion, Literature, Philosophy, Science, Engineering, and Law.

    **Intellectual History Must Include All**

    And the sequence I’ve listed them in matters a great deal.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-12 10:50:00 UTC

  • THE FOUNDERS WERE USING CURRENT TECHNOLOGY TO DESCRIBE NATURAL LAW Natural Law,

    THE FOUNDERS WERE USING CURRENT TECHNOLOGY TO DESCRIBE NATURAL LAW

    Natural Law, Locke, Smith, and Hume were understood by Jefferson as the most current technology available. But that he, and they, were still victims of the poetry of scripture and wrote their laws in that verse. So they used *higher context* and less precise language and I’m using *lower context* and more precise language, in order to prevent ‘interpretation’ (abuse) of natural law through the act of misrepresenting terms written in high context as permissive, and therefore eliminating possibility of abuse through ‘interpretation’.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-12 10:29:00 UTC