Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • DEFINITIONS: Red Queen, The Red Queen, Defeating the Red Queen

    Human beings seek to minimize neural costs by seeking stability, stasis, constancy and harmony – but this is suicidal – stability means ne is falling behind others who are not static.  This ‘cognitive error’ is a remnant of our hunter-gatherer instincts and only europeans appear to have systematically overcome it – and even then, only a minority. And this is the source of our ‘european creativity’.

    From Wikipedia:

    The Red Queen hypothesis (also referred to as Red Queen’s, the Red Queen effect, Red Queen’s race, Red Queen dynamics) is an evolutionary hypothesis which proposes that organisms must constantly adapt, evolve, and proliferate in order to survive while pitted against ever-evolving opposing organisms in a constantly changing environment, as well as to gain reproductive advantage.

    The hypothesis intends to explain two different phenomena: the constant extinction rates as observed in the paleontological record caused by co-evolution between competing species,“ and the advantage of sexual reproduction (as opposed to asexual reproduction) at the level of individuals.The phenomenon’s name is derived from a statement that the Red Queen made to Alice in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking-Glass in her explanation of the nature of Looking-Glass Land:

    “Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.”

    Van Valen coined the hypothesis “Red Queen” because under this interpretation, populations have to “run” or evolve in order to stay in the same place – or else go extinct.

  • DEFINITIONS: Red Queen, The Red Queen, Defeating the Red Queen

    Human beings seek to minimize neural costs by seeking stability, stasis, constancy and harmony – but this is suicidal – stability means ne is falling behind others who are not static.  This ‘cognitive error’ is a remnant of our hunter-gatherer instincts and only europeans appear to have systematically overcome it – and even then, only a minority. And this is the source of our ‘european creativity’.

    From Wikipedia:

    The Red Queen hypothesis (also referred to as Red Queen’s, the Red Queen effect, Red Queen’s race, Red Queen dynamics) is an evolutionary hypothesis which proposes that organisms must constantly adapt, evolve, and proliferate in order to survive while pitted against ever-evolving opposing organisms in a constantly changing environment, as well as to gain reproductive advantage.

    The hypothesis intends to explain two different phenomena: the constant extinction rates as observed in the paleontological record caused by co-evolution between competing species,“ and the advantage of sexual reproduction (as opposed to asexual reproduction) at the level of individuals.The phenomenon’s name is derived from a statement that the Red Queen made to Alice in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking-Glass in her explanation of the nature of Looking-Glass Land:

    “Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.”

    Van Valen coined the hypothesis “Red Queen” because under this interpretation, populations have to “run” or evolve in order to stay in the same place – or else go extinct.

  • Notes on Corp Ownership Reform

    Jan 1, 2020, 8:47 PM Legal PerspectiveTrue: “The purpose of the corporation is to do anything lawful.” And “Corporations are real, shareholders are a fiction.” In other words, shareholders are not owners. Companies do not work to maximize shareholder value. That is a fiction to sell investors. A management team balances brand awareness, market share, customers, employees, bankers, investors, and vendors, each of which is competing to maximize their take of the profits if their are any. Thoughts:

    (a) Owners ‘invest’ to obtain income and appreciation but lack liquidity.

    (b) Shareholders function as lenders who purchase liquidity and opportunity for dividends and appreciation – they are not owners, that is the myth.

    (c) From the company’s perspective, dividends and appreciation are the cost of maintaining borrowing capacity in capital markets so that opportunities can be seized by rapid appeal to capital markets.

    (d) Boards of other than owners are a wast of time money and energy – a kabuki theater – and instead, companies should be, and are, insured to act in the interest of their contract with the shareholders. The very best you can say about boards is (i) you can pay people for relationships, assistance, and information. (ii) when you are unsure and want to bounce ideas off peers rather than employees but be sure it won’t leak, they’re useful. (iii) preparing for board meetings makes sure that you and your team are on the same page and understand your own business. (iv) I use my boards exclusively to test my ideas and rarely do anything if I can’t convince them unanimously. This tempers my too-high risk tolerance. It gives me political cover with the staff and others if I make a mistake.

    (e) It’s not even clear that financial reports other than to auditors and insurers are of any value other than in selling to lenders (shareholders). Randomly select financial reports from your favorite companies. You will learn far more from analyst calls.

    (f) Trying to maintain or improve shareholder value, is a terrible practice because investment cycles (capital requirements necessary for returns) have been increasing, and the division of production distribution and trade fragmenting, but lifespan of companies are decreasing – for this very reason. Innovators dilemmas everywhere. No one tries to maximize shareholder value. That’s nonsense. You try to preserve it. the objective of nearly every business is to preserve it’s existence as a going concern for all those involved: customers, employees, owners, vendors, investors. It is very hard to build a business that produces a durable income stream because the customer vendor employee network is the most difficult organization to produce.

    (g) There is no reason whatsoever that companies should direct resources to ‘charities’ or ‘movements’, instead of requiring such donations come from individuals. Social responsibly is a code word for rent-seeking because the government is incapable of providing results. The current condition is that companies are frequently blackmailed if they don’t contribute to certain causes. That’s an injustice. That one shall do no harm is the best an organization can do and is the best therefore we can ask them to do. Lastly unless you’ve run a company of at least say, 50M, and preferably over 100M you have no idea just how difficult it is to produce a profit. (i) My primary complaint is that companies do not themselves maintain accounting for operations (cash: profit and loss from operations), management (ops plus overhead), owners (ops, overhead, assets, and yes, market share ), lenders (EBITDA), and the state (taxes, amortization, and depreciation). Most executives I’ve consulted, companies I’ve acquired, or accounting departments I’ve fought with, have too poor a grasp of operations and obscure it by conflating accounting data so to obscure normal volatility and variation in risk from investors and lenders, and to minimize taxes. Drive employee quality, operations, marketshare, and leave everything else to finance and accounting. Money is just another resource provided by vendors.

  • Notes on Corp Ownership Reform

    Jan 1, 2020, 8:47 PM Legal PerspectiveTrue: “The purpose of the corporation is to do anything lawful.” And “Corporations are real, shareholders are a fiction.” In other words, shareholders are not owners. Companies do not work to maximize shareholder value. That is a fiction to sell investors. A management team balances brand awareness, market share, customers, employees, bankers, investors, and vendors, each of which is competing to maximize their take of the profits if their are any. Thoughts:

    (a) Owners ‘invest’ to obtain income and appreciation but lack liquidity.

    (b) Shareholders function as lenders who purchase liquidity and opportunity for dividends and appreciation – they are not owners, that is the myth.

    (c) From the company’s perspective, dividends and appreciation are the cost of maintaining borrowing capacity in capital markets so that opportunities can be seized by rapid appeal to capital markets.

    (d) Boards of other than owners are a wast of time money and energy – a kabuki theater – and instead, companies should be, and are, insured to act in the interest of their contract with the shareholders. The very best you can say about boards is (i) you can pay people for relationships, assistance, and information. (ii) when you are unsure and want to bounce ideas off peers rather than employees but be sure it won’t leak, they’re useful. (iii) preparing for board meetings makes sure that you and your team are on the same page and understand your own business. (iv) I use my boards exclusively to test my ideas and rarely do anything if I can’t convince them unanimously. This tempers my too-high risk tolerance. It gives me political cover with the staff and others if I make a mistake.

    (e) It’s not even clear that financial reports other than to auditors and insurers are of any value other than in selling to lenders (shareholders). Randomly select financial reports from your favorite companies. You will learn far more from analyst calls.

    (f) Trying to maintain or improve shareholder value, is a terrible practice because investment cycles (capital requirements necessary for returns) have been increasing, and the division of production distribution and trade fragmenting, but lifespan of companies are decreasing – for this very reason. Innovators dilemmas everywhere. No one tries to maximize shareholder value. That’s nonsense. You try to preserve it. the objective of nearly every business is to preserve it’s existence as a going concern for all those involved: customers, employees, owners, vendors, investors. It is very hard to build a business that produces a durable income stream because the customer vendor employee network is the most difficult organization to produce.

    (g) There is no reason whatsoever that companies should direct resources to ‘charities’ or ‘movements’, instead of requiring such donations come from individuals. Social responsibly is a code word for rent-seeking because the government is incapable of providing results. The current condition is that companies are frequently blackmailed if they don’t contribute to certain causes. That’s an injustice. That one shall do no harm is the best an organization can do and is the best therefore we can ask them to do. Lastly unless you’ve run a company of at least say, 50M, and preferably over 100M you have no idea just how difficult it is to produce a profit. (i) My primary complaint is that companies do not themselves maintain accounting for operations (cash: profit and loss from operations), management (ops plus overhead), owners (ops, overhead, assets, and yes, market share ), lenders (EBITDA), and the state (taxes, amortization, and depreciation). Most executives I’ve consulted, companies I’ve acquired, or accounting departments I’ve fought with, have too poor a grasp of operations and obscure it by conflating accounting data so to obscure normal volatility and variation in risk from investors and lenders, and to minimize taxes. Drive employee quality, operations, marketshare, and leave everything else to finance and accounting. Money is just another resource provided by vendors.

  • In Everything.

    Jan 2, 2020, 12:56 PM

    Some of us think of minimizing risk and living a long time. Some of us think about of a mark on history, and having a good death. Another example of Feminine Consumption vs Masculine Production in everything.

  • In Everything.

    Jan 2, 2020, 12:56 PM

    Some of us think of minimizing risk and living a long time. Some of us think about of a mark on history, and having a good death. Another example of Feminine Consumption vs Masculine Production in everything.

  • The “Will of The Gods” Was a Convenient Escape of The Responsibility of Liability.

    Jan 2, 2020, 1:18 PM by JWarren Prescott The concept of the supernatural, ie. beyond nature, outside our reality, magical, being independent of logic and inexplicable by science because it defies the laws of physics, is from the infancy of human civilization where we had no idea what the natural world was. It was our attempt to fill the gaps of understanding. The unintended consequences of the lack of understanding was the rise of the huckster class – the priests, those apex parasitical manipulators of mankind’s fears of the unknown. They leveraged their verbal skills to political power as rulers were the only ones capable of protecting them from scrutiny of their failed predictions and the liability of malpractice. The hucksters always knew that the warlords, kings and rulers were generally far more gullible to the supernatural as it was a legitimation of, and a securing of their right to rule and a comfort to their insecurities of bad decisions. The “will of the gods” was a convenient escape of the responsibility of liability.

  • The “Will of The Gods” Was a Convenient Escape of The Responsibility of Liability.

    Jan 2, 2020, 1:18 PM by JWarren Prescott The concept of the supernatural, ie. beyond nature, outside our reality, magical, being independent of logic and inexplicable by science because it defies the laws of physics, is from the infancy of human civilization where we had no idea what the natural world was. It was our attempt to fill the gaps of understanding. The unintended consequences of the lack of understanding was the rise of the huckster class – the priests, those apex parasitical manipulators of mankind’s fears of the unknown. They leveraged their verbal skills to political power as rulers were the only ones capable of protecting them from scrutiny of their failed predictions and the liability of malpractice. The hucksters always knew that the warlords, kings and rulers were generally far more gullible to the supernatural as it was a legitimation of, and a securing of their right to rule and a comfort to their insecurities of bad decisions. The “will of the gods” was a convenient escape of the responsibility of liability.

  • Explaining (defining) Propertarianism – for Newbs:

    Jan 2, 2020, 6:35 PM 1 – The completion of the scientific method and all that it entails – which is a lot and why P is such a big program: it touches everything and it converts almost all psychological, social, and political speech to economic expressions – which is counter-intuitive because it’s scientific where our current psychological social, moral, and political speech is only normative or in the case of psychology sociology and politics, both pseudoscientific and sophomoric. 2 – The explanation for western success in ancient and modern worlds (adaptive velocity because of our individual sovereignty and resulting traditional law of property/tort.) 3 – The explanation of the different systems of argument used in the different civilizations, and in particular the abrahamic means of deceit used in the ancient world (judaism, Christianity, islam) and in the modern world (marxism, feminism, postmodernism, denialism/political correctness). EXPLANATION Do you know what a formal logic is? It’s grammar of the logic of inference using sets and binary truth or falsehood. Do you know what programming is? It’s a grammar of operational logic using binary truth or falsehood. Do you know what law is? It’s a formal operational rational grammar of conflict resolution, using ternary falsehood, truth candidacy, and undecidability. Do you know what tort law is? it’s a formal rational operational grammar of conflict resolution over demonstrated interests that we enumerate as property, using ternary logic of falsehood, truth candidacy, undecidability. Propertarianism is a formal (strict), operational(sequential action), grammar (vocabulary, grammar, syntax, logic), of Tort (demonstrated interests), and as a consequence a value neutral universal language (vocabulary, grammar, syntax, logic) across all disciplines (physical science, language-metaphysics, psychology, sociology, politics, ethics, law, group strategy), that allows us to falsify (test) every possible dimension of human action, intuition, cognition, and speech, for both testimonial possibility (truth) and reciprocity(ethics, morality, trespass, tort), and as a consequence allows us to create uninterpretable constitutions, and their enumerated rights and responsibilities, the most influential of which is the conversion of free speech to free truthful and reciprocal speech, in public, to the public, on matters public (commerce, economics, commons, politics, group strategy) by extending the involuntary warranty of due diligence and involuntary liability for the truthfulness and reciprocity of commercial speech to that of political speech. As such it allows us to outlaw hostile religions, and pseudo-religions especially the pseudoscientific and sophomoric restatements of supernatural judaism , christianity, and islam, in pseudoscientific and sophomoric and ir-reciprocal marxism, socialism, feminism, and postmodernism. Propertarianism is equivalent in scope to the revolutions of Aristotelian reason (Realism, Naturalism, Reason), the Empirical Revolution(Realism, Naturalism, Empiricism), in that it completes the scientific method by extending it from the physical to the psychological and social sciences, including that of law, politics, and group strategy. In other words, “Propertarianism consists of the completion of the Scientific Method; its application to the totality of human knowledge; producing a universally commensurable language of all thought; its embodiment in the common law of tort; resulting in a logical and scientific constitution; permitting the criminalization of ir-reciprocal and un-testifiable speech, and as a consequence the eradication of superstition, pseudoscience, sophism, fraud, and deceit from the commercial, financial, economic, political, and informational commons.” When we explain the reason for western success we discover: “Heroism and Excellence; Truth and Duty; Oath and Warranty; Sovereignty and Reciprocity; Law and Jury; And Voluntary Markets in Every Aspect of Life: Association, Cooperation, Production, Reproduction, Commons, Polities and War; The direction of surpluses to the production of commons and the returns therefrom; at the cost of suppression of the reproduction of the unproductive underclasses; and the Direction of Dominance Expression to the Production of Commons by a Distributed Dictatorship of Individually Sovereign People and the Reciprocal Warranty of Denial of Power To Any and All.” Propertarianism is (a) the completion of the Aristotelian program (b) the completion of the scientific method (c ) the logic and science of the social sciences, and (d) the Natural Law of Reciprocity under which all display word and deed is expressible and commensurable. (e) and the means of institutionalizing in a “Market for the Suppression of Fraud” the suppression of the greatest crime against humanity: the big lies that are responsible for the last dark age and the new one that the enemy has sought to bring about.

  • Explaining (defining) Propertarianism – for Newbs:

    Jan 2, 2020, 6:35 PM 1 – The completion of the scientific method and all that it entails – which is a lot and why P is such a big program: it touches everything and it converts almost all psychological, social, and political speech to economic expressions – which is counter-intuitive because it’s scientific where our current psychological social, moral, and political speech is only normative or in the case of psychology sociology and politics, both pseudoscientific and sophomoric. 2 – The explanation for western success in ancient and modern worlds (adaptive velocity because of our individual sovereignty and resulting traditional law of property/tort.) 3 – The explanation of the different systems of argument used in the different civilizations, and in particular the abrahamic means of deceit used in the ancient world (judaism, Christianity, islam) and in the modern world (marxism, feminism, postmodernism, denialism/political correctness). EXPLANATION Do you know what a formal logic is? It’s grammar of the logic of inference using sets and binary truth or falsehood. Do you know what programming is? It’s a grammar of operational logic using binary truth or falsehood. Do you know what law is? It’s a formal operational rational grammar of conflict resolution, using ternary falsehood, truth candidacy, and undecidability. Do you know what tort law is? it’s a formal rational operational grammar of conflict resolution over demonstrated interests that we enumerate as property, using ternary logic of falsehood, truth candidacy, undecidability. Propertarianism is a formal (strict), operational(sequential action), grammar (vocabulary, grammar, syntax, logic), of Tort (demonstrated interests), and as a consequence a value neutral universal language (vocabulary, grammar, syntax, logic) across all disciplines (physical science, language-metaphysics, psychology, sociology, politics, ethics, law, group strategy), that allows us to falsify (test) every possible dimension of human action, intuition, cognition, and speech, for both testimonial possibility (truth) and reciprocity(ethics, morality, trespass, tort), and as a consequence allows us to create uninterpretable constitutions, and their enumerated rights and responsibilities, the most influential of which is the conversion of free speech to free truthful and reciprocal speech, in public, to the public, on matters public (commerce, economics, commons, politics, group strategy) by extending the involuntary warranty of due diligence and involuntary liability for the truthfulness and reciprocity of commercial speech to that of political speech. As such it allows us to outlaw hostile religions, and pseudo-religions especially the pseudoscientific and sophomoric restatements of supernatural judaism , christianity, and islam, in pseudoscientific and sophomoric and ir-reciprocal marxism, socialism, feminism, and postmodernism. Propertarianism is equivalent in scope to the revolutions of Aristotelian reason (Realism, Naturalism, Reason), the Empirical Revolution(Realism, Naturalism, Empiricism), in that it completes the scientific method by extending it from the physical to the psychological and social sciences, including that of law, politics, and group strategy. In other words, “Propertarianism consists of the completion of the Scientific Method; its application to the totality of human knowledge; producing a universally commensurable language of all thought; its embodiment in the common law of tort; resulting in a logical and scientific constitution; permitting the criminalization of ir-reciprocal and un-testifiable speech, and as a consequence the eradication of superstition, pseudoscience, sophism, fraud, and deceit from the commercial, financial, economic, political, and informational commons.” When we explain the reason for western success we discover: “Heroism and Excellence; Truth and Duty; Oath and Warranty; Sovereignty and Reciprocity; Law and Jury; And Voluntary Markets in Every Aspect of Life: Association, Cooperation, Production, Reproduction, Commons, Polities and War; The direction of surpluses to the production of commons and the returns therefrom; at the cost of suppression of the reproduction of the unproductive underclasses; and the Direction of Dominance Expression to the Production of Commons by a Distributed Dictatorship of Individually Sovereign People and the Reciprocal Warranty of Denial of Power To Any and All.” Propertarianism is (a) the completion of the Aristotelian program (b) the completion of the scientific method (c ) the logic and science of the social sciences, and (d) the Natural Law of Reciprocity under which all display word and deed is expressible and commensurable. (e) and the means of institutionalizing in a “Market for the Suppression of Fraud” the suppression of the greatest crime against humanity: the big lies that are responsible for the last dark age and the new one that the enemy has sought to bring about.