Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/34875704_10156410197572264_35722142

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/34875704_10156410197572264_3572214279648051200_o_10156410197567264.jpg TIME PUBLISHES COVER WITH GOD EMPEROR TRUMP!!!! ;)Tab WolframIf only he were the fascist they decry him as …Jun 07, 2018 1:22pmCharles H BrennanMeme magic is realJun 07, 2018 1:27pmCurtus MaximusIs this real?Jun 07, 2018 1:33pmBrian McQuiston🤞Jun 07, 2018 1:35pmGilberto CarlosThis but unironically;Jun 07, 2018 1:37pmTab Wolframhttps://youtu.be/_9Ww3yVcCi8 If you’ve never seen this you’re in for a real treatJun 07, 2018 1:42pmJim LeisMore constitutional than we’ve seen for some time.Jun 07, 2018 1:42pmOliver Westcottis it just me or is this a pretty bad illustration? the crown doesn’t seem to sit right on his head, or really even look right as a crown on it’s own. Trump seems to have his head pointing down, but in the reflexion it’s pointing up. his face in the reflexion looks almost photograhic, but otherwise the whole thing looks less so.Jun 07, 2018 1:43pmJason MurphyCrap, might have to actually buy an issue to frame thatJun 07, 2018 1:53pmGilberto CarlosIt’s real in my dreams.Jun 07, 2018 1:54pmCurtus MaximusWe’re livin the dream.

    https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/5303844/donald-trump-king-coverJun 07, 2018 2:05pmBjorn MoritzYeah it’s a crappy photoshop. I could do betterJun 07, 2018 2:05pmJames BoweryMeatspace clickbait.Jun 07, 2018 2:36pmKevin CoxFor all sad words of tongue and pen, The saddest are these, ‘It might have been’.

    John Greenleaf WhittierJun 07, 2018 2:39pmThomas RambeauImagine having the mindset this is somehow negative and a “jab” at trump that will get people to look at him less. The left really cant memeJun 07, 2018 2:43pmAdam HamdanImagine a Trump monarchy 😍😍😍Jun 07, 2018 3:07pmJames HalladayI wishJun 07, 2018 3:11pmJeff UrizenIf onlyJun 07, 2018 5:21pmIra WaglerWho reads Time??Jun 07, 2018 6:03pmEthan Ethanfunny, WaPo put something out like this a couple years back https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-role-fit-for-donald-trump-king-of-america/2016/04/11/e2b7b028-001d-11e6-b823-707c79ce3504_story.html?noredirect=onJun 07, 2018 7:50pmTom WattJun 07, 2018 8:17pmMichael PattinsonExactlyJun 08, 2018 5:00amCurt DoolittlePAGE COUNT. That’s all you need to know. Time is approaching comic book size.Jun 08, 2018 7:42amTom WattSorry Curt. I couldn’t not share this 4chan homage to the Kang.😉Jun 08, 2018 8:03amTIME PUBLISHES COVER WITH GOD EMPEROR TRUMP!!!! 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 13:20:00 UTC

  • “the earliest populations of the Near East derived around half their ancestry fr

    —“the earliest populations of the Near East derived around half their ancestry from a ‘Basal Eurasian’ lineage that had little if any Neanderthal admixture and that separated from other non-African lineages before their separation from each other.”—

    This is interesting. Because we have been taught the opposite.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:55:00 UTC

  • RACIALIZATION OF THE FIRST FARMERS —“The first farmers of the southern Levant

    RACIALIZATION OF THE FIRST FARMERS

    —“The first farmers of the southern Levant (Israel and Jordan) and Zagros Mountains (Iran) were strongly genetically differentiated, and each descended from local hunter–gatherers. By the time of the Bronze Age, these two populations and Anatolian-related farmers had mixed with each other and with the hunter–gatherers of Europe to greatly reduce genetic differentiation.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:49:00 UTC

  • ORIGINS: THE RE-RACIALIZATION UNDER FARMING —“The impact of the Near Eastern f

    ORIGINS: THE RE-RACIALIZATION UNDER FARMING

    —“The impact of the Near Eastern farmers extended beyond the Near East: farmers related to those of Anatolia spread westward into Europe; farmers related to those of the Levant spread southward into East Africa; farmers related to those of Iran spread northward into the Eurasian steppe; and people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to the pastoralists of the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South Asia.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:46:00 UTC

  • ETHICAL AI? YES ITS SOLVABLE AND TRIVIALLY SO 1) Ethical AI is a trivially solva

    ETHICAL AI? YES ITS SOLVABLE AND TRIVIALLY SO

    1) Ethical AI is a trivially solvable problem in (a) hardware (b) software design (c) requirement of insurance, and (d) extremely harsh punishment of violations of that law, applied to every person in the chain of decidability. (d) international treaty.

    2) We have solved this problem for thousands of years among humans with one single rule. All civilizations and all law is based upon that one rule. That politicians, philosophers and theologians ‘skirt’ that rule does not mean we cannot apply it to software.

    3) There is nothing ethical or moral about war. That war exists defines the limit of ethics and morality. There will be killing machines just as there are machine guns and nuclear weapons, and the first people to invent them will dominate war, politics, economics, for a century.

    4) The military incentive always DEFINES the political order. Not the other way around. You cannot stop this technology. This tech means greatest manufacturing capacity and engineering capacity will dominate all future wars – and therefore politics and therefore economics.

    5) However, it is entirely possible to protect citizens from criminal uses the same way we do from nuclear weapons. However, the cost of AI will be in the billions today and dependent on vast infrastructure. But this price will decrease while the cost of refining n-weapons won’t.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:43:00 UTC

  • “Every time we put truth into practice we ruin someone else’s business model.”–

    —“Every time we put truth into practice we ruin someone else’s business model.”— John Mark

    (genius)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:23:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a photo

    Curt Doolittle shared a photo.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:21:00 UTC

  • SOVEREIGNTY VS LIBERTY VS FREEDOM Sovereignty in fact – because a group has enou

    SOVEREIGNTY VS LIBERTY VS FREEDOM

    Sovereignty in fact – because a group has enough capacity for violence to produce sovereignty over the will or ability of any and all competitors.

    Liberty by request – because a group does not have enough capacity for violence to produce sovereignty, but can purchase liberty with fees (taxes).

    Freedom by permission – because an individual has too little violence to produce sovereignty, and too little violence to request liberty, but can purchase freedom through non-interference and payment of fees (taxes).

    Sovereignty is produced as a commons(Polity/Executive).

    Liberty is produced as a commons(Business/Managerial).

    Freedom is given to produce commons (Trades/Labor).

    Serfdom is imposed to produce commons at cost(Labor).

    Slavery is imposed to produce commons at high cost(labor).

    Whether one demonstrates a condition of Sovereignty(Aristocracy: Polity/Territory), Liberty(Citizen : capital), or freedom (Freeman: body), the production of such must be constructed top down: from commons to degree of property ownership (responsibility) since while it is most productive to have the greatest distribution of property, it is also most productive to limit the distribution of property to those who produce commons.

    Since productivity determines the ability for a polity to compete for sovereignty and territory the distribution of property therefore productivity and responsibility is determined by competitive necessity versus the abilities of the population.

    Hence the need for growth to defeat the red queen of technology and productivity, against men, and to defeat the red queen of evolution (or devolution, or extinction).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:10:00 UTC

  • WHEN THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN… When the constitution was written, spelling

    WHEN THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN…

    When the constitution was written, spelling was often phonetic rather than canonized as it has been post-Webster. Capitalization and font size were used as emphasis – bold not available to the pen, as it is today in print. Grammar was more formal and still retained some academic latin influences – including longer sentence structure. And it was written in the context of traditional Common Law, which itself was written in the context of Anglo Saxon Law, which codified Ancient Germanic law, which preserved european (west indo-european) traditional law. This presents a conflict because natural law of reciprocity needs strict construction to eliminate interpretation and the constitution relied on familiarity with that tradition rather than strict construction – Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, and Markets in Everything are not stated, but assumed to the same degree as the existence of god and the perpetual existence of the church. Hence why the constitution must be rewritten with those definitions and with strict construction to ensure that that knowledge of that long tradition is no longer required, and also so that such a constitution is no longer open to interpretation.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:10:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a memory

    Curt Doolittle shared a memory.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 08:16:00 UTC