Source: Facebook

  • EQUATION / LAW, PROOF / ALGORITHM, JUSTIFICATION / THEORY It’s interesting. A PR

    EQUATION / LAW, PROOF / ALGORITHM, JUSTIFICATION / THEORY

    It’s interesting.

    A PROOF(deduction) and an ALGORITHM(construction) are approximately equal processes, with the algorithm greater in informational content.

    And that an EQUATION(description) and a THEORETICAL-LAW(description) are approximately equal processes.

    Everything that can be described in mathematical language can be described in ordinary language. Everything that can be described in ordinary language cannot be described in mathematical language.

    Everything that can be described in justificationary language can be described in theoretical language with greater exclusion. Everything that can be explained in theoretical language cannot be explained in justificationary language.

    Everything that can be described in operational language can be described in allegorical language. Everything that can be described in allegorical language cannot be described in operational language.

    All of this means something very profound that I am still trying to put into words.

    (I am also trying to narrow in on the cause of our natural justificationism, and I am getting very close now. Taleb inspired me to try to answer what he intuits but can’t explain.)


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-29 07:30:00 UTC

  • THEOLOGIANS GET IT RIGHT ONCE IN A WHILE (if we can just depose the false pope..

    http://www.christianpost.com/news/globalism-antichrist-demonic-theologians-wallace-henley-fay-voshell-jim-garlow-jeremy-rabkin-170131/THE THEOLOGIANS GET IT RIGHT ONCE IN A WHILE

    (if we can just depose the false pope…)


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-29 04:51:00 UTC

  • THE ORIGIN OF THE NATION STATE The City State is a natural consequence of market

    THE ORIGIN OF THE NATION STATE

    The City State is a natural consequence of markets, and the enforced dominion of some set of rules in order to gain access to the benefits that market.

    The Nation State is a declared, involuntary, genetic and cultural empire enforcing dominion over city states and surrounding territories. The empire is a cross genetic and cultural involuntary organization, enforcing dominion over all political orders in a territory ostensibly for the common good – and in many ways the claim is true.

    Prior to the nation state, multi-ethnic, military, legislative, and commercial, empires, usually ruled by a monarch from the dominant ethnic group, were the common form of cultural, economic, political, and military organization.

    As markets expanded, and wealth expanded, and ‘cognizance’ of the greater world expanded “as an inadvertent byproduct of 15th-century intellectual discoveries in political economy, capitalism, mercantilism, political geography, and geography combined together with cartography and advances in map-making technologies.” Or stated differently, accounting, record keeping, literacy, and map making made people aware of both their competitors and their economic opportunities for preserving competition against them – for preserving their sovereignty. The result was somewhat of a ‘big sort’ in europe that is currently occuring in the United States, as people in the USA re-nationalize after ‘filling up’ the new continent.

    This is the positive, romantic, or ‘opportunistic’ side of the story. But the other side of the story is negative, pragmatic, and defensive.

    The modern Nation State was invented by Napoleon for use in funding his invention of Total War. The Nation State evolved everywhere else in response to Napoleon’s invention of total war: either as a defense against it, or as a siezure of opportunity to replicate it.

    Before Napoleon, only tropical empires could marshall the resources necessary for sustained expansionary conquest and control. Napoleon was the first European to successfully bring Oriental Despotism to Europe with the same level of mobilization of the populace as the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Chinese had been able to do, due given their relative ease of controlling irrigation by flooding of rivers and concentrated production, compared to small farms distributed over large territories with distributed production in what we call Christendom (Europa major).

    The combination of Post-Templar Self-Defended Credit, in the form of Jewish-Credit Under State Protection, superior methods of record keeping (accounting), the increases in agrarian and mechanical production in Europe due to the second ‘agrarian revolution’, produced in no small part through rapid expansion of literacy and print, and the windfalls from the transfer of trade from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic, and the ability to manufacture muskets in vast numbers thereby eliminating the advantage of a professional warrior class made a Napoleon possible – but only because of the backwardness of the French Monarchy, which, like the church, had stagnated in comparison to her faster-evolving neighbors.

    This combination of extremely backward governance, and extreme opportunity to mobilize is usually seen only when there is an extraordinary excesses of young males lacking opportunities for income and sex. But when combined with extraordinary credit and community license to restructure all of society by violence, the momentum of the movement created an opportunity for despotism equal to that which had been available in the ancient river empires.

    As far as I know this is the origin of the second phase of the nation state: total war. The technological ability to organize distributed production under the same level of control as concentrated flood river production.

    To take this further we must also address cosmopolitan universalism on the one hand(Profits for Some), and the clash of civilizations on the other (Norms for All).


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-29 03:35:00 UTC

  • (It’s because I work the entire day pretty much without breaks except for the th

    (It’s because I work the entire day pretty much without breaks except for the three hours or so every night that I devote to b-movies and crash and prank videos.)


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-28 14:47:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-28 08:17:00 UTC

  • Many apriori statements are not false. And they may be meaningfully true, but ar

    Many apriori statements are not false. And they may be meaningfully true, but are they actionably true? Can you state their limits? And are they decideably true? Generally no.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-28 08:13:00 UTC

  • (read it and weep) ***Pareto Distributions are a Consequence of Nash Equilibrium

    (read it and weep)

    ***Pareto Distributions are a Consequence of Nash Equilibriums***

    You cannot create Nash equilibriums and Pareto distributions if you attempt to create Pareto distributions (involuntary redistributions) at the expense of Nash equilibriums.

    Nash equilibriums (pairing off = voluntary exchanges = sovereignty.)

    Pareto Distributions (80/20,80/20,80/20….) result from sovereignty, voluntary exchanges, desirability(oppy), ability(utility), and knowledge(advantage).

    Pareto distributions without sovereignty and pairing off, can only be constructed by authority (violence). And these are…. not constructed by voluntary exchange, desirability, ability, and knowledge, but by corruption, nepotism, and favoritism.

    We can produce Pareto distributions by creating nash equilibriums if we charge fees for market transactions (taxes).

    But the question then becomes why should that revenue from the production of Pareto distributions using nash equilibriums made necessary by sovereignty and its institutions: natural, judge discovered, common, law, be allocated by monopoly rather than market decisions?

    This is the question. Why must we, in a mixed economy, rely upon the monopoly provision of commons under majoritarian democracy, rather than the market provision of commons under a multi-house market for commons limited by juridical dissent?


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-28 06:56:00 UTC

  • COO : WAYS OF RUNNING OPERATIONS PROFESSOR You view every person and every goal

    COO : WAYS OF RUNNING OPERATIONS

    PROFESSOR

    You view every person and every goal as an opportunity to educate the staff so that the continually improve and as a consequence the organization, it’s goods, services, and reputation improve. You manage, advise, counsel, and direct where necessary. You stay actively involved with each person and their duties. You contribute ‘suggestions’ and keep honing the organization by pushing decisions downward, while maintaining a safety net in case there are points of failure.

    When? When you are building a growth company.

    (I run operations like an MBA program. And it works. And people love it. )

    MANAGER

    You have a competent and stable team, and your primary function is to handle exceptions, and those exceptions are generally limited to the choice of how to allocate scarce resources.

    When? When you have built a stable company, but not a growth company.

    DELEGATOR

    You have people competent at performing tasks, but not yet at achieving goals. You control the planning and decision making then delegate the activities to team members, and in general, control the flow of work through the organization.

    When? When you don’t have the scale (or money) to build a team of people who can manage production without your help.

    OBSERVER

    You have competent people and you really don’t have to do anything because there is very little change in the organization over time, and little prospect of change.

    When? When there is little adaptation or innovation or change occurring in the organization and the individuals in the company merely need someone to come to in those few cases of where conflict resolution is needed.

    HARASSER

    You do not have competent talent at planning and decision making, and you are not competent at planning and decision-making, and do not know what to do, so you harass people as a means of getting information out of them the only way that you know how – precisely because you cannot get it out of them through creating value.

    When? When your company is a poor performer with a poor executive team and they cannot attract better talent for budgetary, cultural, or market segment reasons.

    ABSENTEE

    Enough said.

    When? Um. Seriously? When everyone knows the end is near but no one has the courage to shut down operations and write down the debt because it is still possible to collect a paycheck for another year.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-28 03:10:00 UTC

  • THE VARIOUS EXECUTIVE ROLES First. Let’s get our terminology straight so that we

    THE VARIOUS EXECUTIVE ROLES

    First. Let’s get our terminology straight so that we’re not talking apples and oranges. Executive Roles are Fungible, but in general:

    – CEO: BALANCE SHEET AND MANAGEMENT TEAM

    – CSO / VP SALES: SALES AND SALES AND MARKETING TEAM

    – …..CMO: MARKETING (if a separate responsibility for demand generation)

    – COO: P&L AND PRODUCTION TEAM (IN HOUSE OPERATIONS)

    – CFO: CASH AND CREDIT, AND ACCOUNTING TEAM

    The term President is a legal fiction preserved for archaic reasons. And it refers to those organizations still small enough that the various executive roles are held by an individual. For the uninitiated, in American parlance, the Legal Entity (corporation) must have a president (registered responsible person), and sometimes one or more other responsible persons (All are for tax accountability, and for legal accountability in matters of conflict). The ORGANIZATION can be run by registered agents (president), or the CEO and Management team, or by the Board, and the CEO and the Management Team. It’s a matter of scale.

    Some companies are separating the balance sheet (CEO) from the sales measurement by assigning the ‘president’ role to the CSO, and some are still using the strange archaic fiction of “VP Sales” in large companies. Sometimes because the CEO retains the SALES function as his primary focus.

    This is also a possible strategy if the company is small enough. A CEO should generally focus 1/3 on sales and marketing (outside), 1/3 on talent management,(inside) and 1/3 on resources and allocation of resources to strategic ends.

    As a general rule, if a CEO is spending too much time outside, his sales and marketing are too weak, or he is pursuing phis own interests, not the company’s. The most productive CEO’s handle exceptions in all functions, and spend half of their time internally with staff. (Although I have been criticized for making companies too dependent upon me by doing that.) In most companies I have acquired that are unsuccessful the CEO does not spend enough time or budget in sales (‘Craftsman Effect’), or the CEO spends too much time in sales without (paying for) an adequate internal CEO (COO), (“underinvestment effect”). In both these cases I am fairly confident that the company has failed to transition from small to mid-sized, usually because not enough profit to pay for transition to the next scale, or too much extraction of profits to afford to pay for transition to the next scale; or (as I have encountered) the CEO is not able to transition to an executive role and/or is incapable of hiring talent sufficiently strong to allow him to do so. (This inability to hire good enough talent to work for you is a more common problem than we usually intuit.)

    The Chief Revenue Officer (CRO) title is floating around referring to the sales function, but this is incorrect, since sales (what you book as potential revenue from the operation of the business ) and revenue (what you recognize as ‘earned’ revenue from the business plus any other activities such as investments) are two different things. In organizations where sales are immediately booked as revenue because of simple transactions where the production cycle does not have to be ‘earned’ or where the sale is not recognized until the good is delivered, this error is the understandable result of confusion. (Does it matter. Maybe not. But it can make your company look a little ‘dim’ if you have sophisticated customers, and there is a lag between sale and recognition of revenue.)


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-28 02:52:00 UTC

  • CHOICE VS DECIDABILITY We often conflate these two terms when they refer to very

    CHOICE VS DECIDABILITY

    We often conflate these two terms when they refer to very different conditions.

    We CHOOSE PREFERENCES, but TRUTHS are DECIDABLE.

    Choosing a preference requires that you contribute information to a comparison in order to make a choice, because only your preference provided decidability between members of a comparison.

    Deciding whether a statement is true or not requires that you can decide between members of a comparison WITHOUT contributing information in order to make a decision, and where your preference is irrelevant.

    Choice = Preference (or undecidable).

    Decidability = Truth (or not), regardless of preference.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-28 02:19:00 UTC