Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • Tools of Deceit

    Apr 27, 2020, 12:19 PM |Falsehood -> Deceit|: … Ignorance -> Error > … … Bias->wishful_thiking > … … … Loading->framing > … … … … Suggestion->Obscurantism > … … … … … Sophistry->Idealism (verbal) > … … … … … … Magic ->Pseudoscience (physical) > … … … … … … … Occult-> Supernaturalism (imaginary) > … … … … … … … … Fiction (fabrication) > … … … … … … … … … Denial

  • “Curt: What Is Excellence?”

    Apr 27, 2020, 1:03 PM What is excellence? Excellence is Art. DISAMBIGUATION (Properties)

    1. craftsmanship (physical action)
    2. … … materials (physical materials)
    3. aesthetics (senses, design)

    4. … … form follows function (without excess)

    5. meaning (mind, content, associations)

    6. … … captures a period in time (index)

    7. uniqueness (novelty)

    8. … … fulfills its promise (is ‘honest’)

    9. competitiveness (by triangulation)

    Culminates in Excellence All human action can be tested by this method. All of it. Everything humans do. CAUSALITY “Fertility” “Beauty is the presence of resources” “Excellence is the presence of Human Investment” “Human investment is the evidence of time invested” “The evidence of human mind and hand” HIERARCHY Children > Amature > Student > Practitioner > Craftsman > Master Craftsman > Artist > Representative of Movement > Peak of Movement > Peak Across Movements

  • “Curt: What Is Excellence?”

    Apr 27, 2020, 1:03 PM What is excellence? Excellence is Art. DISAMBIGUATION (Properties)

    1. craftsmanship (physical action)
    2. … … materials (physical materials)
    3. aesthetics (senses, design)

    4. … … form follows function (without excess)

    5. meaning (mind, content, associations)

    6. … … captures a period in time (index)

    7. uniqueness (novelty)

    8. … … fulfills its promise (is ‘honest’)

    9. competitiveness (by triangulation)

    Culminates in Excellence All human action can be tested by this method. All of it. Everything humans do. CAUSALITY “Fertility” “Beauty is the presence of resources” “Excellence is the presence of Human Investment” “Human investment is the evidence of time invested” “The evidence of human mind and hand” HIERARCHY Children > Amature > Student > Practitioner > Craftsman > Master Craftsman > Artist > Representative of Movement > Peak of Movement > Peak Across Movements

  • Apr 27, 2020, 10:07 PM —“Can you describe the difference between P and Bakunin

    Apr 27, 2020, 10:07 PM

    —“Can you describe the difference between P and Bakunin anarchy. Just reading something and the description seemed very similar to P but seems to simply lack the formalism around reciprocity.—-

    P is a method. I use the P-method to explain all group strategies, religions, political systems, and moral intuitions. I use P to recommend the optimum political system that has ever been formed – rule of law by natural law. I dunno why you would pick Bakunin. This is Bakunin’s fantasy:

    –“The liberty of man consists solely in this, that he obeys the laws of nature because he has himself recognized them as such, and not because they have been imposed upon him externally by any foreign will whatsoever, human or divine, collective or individual.”–Bakunin

    What is true instead?

    1. Man desires consumption, consumption is increased by opportunity, and opportunity is increased by liberty, but so is irresponsibility. And so is free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, immigration, conversion, conquest, and genocide.
    2. The state evolved to incrementally suppress local parasitism decreasing local transaction costs, in exchange for paying taxes to pay the cost of decreasing local transaction costs. This made markets possible where only primitive trade previously existed.
    3. Man is amoral by nature, and pragmatic. By the institution of parenting, acculturation, indoctrination, training, laws, restitution, punishment, and prevention we invest in his domestication.
    4. Man develops theology, philosophy, ideologies, rationalizations, myths, fantasies, and various other forms of frauds, to attempt to obscure and justify his free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime.
    5. In order to produce the suppression of free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime, requires a power law of institutions of prevention, investigation, dispute resolution, prosecution, restitution, punishment and prevention.
    6. In order to produce a market requires a pareto distribution of assets, so that the organization of networks in an market can produce a complex division of labor and its returns without which the terms freedom and liberty have no meaning.
    7. In order to produce a society that tolerates market competition and the suppression of free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime, requires the resulting distribution of rewards satisfy a marginal nash equilibrium.
    8. Given three possible means of coercion: force-defense (Military-police, government), trade-boycott(commerce-law), and advocacy+insurance-undermining+ostracization(social,education,religion), elites will combine to use and misuse these skills in a competition.
    9. Given that Man varies greatly from barely human to superhuman in physical, social, and intellectual ability, and sexual, social, economic, political, and military value, and given the power, pareto, and nash necessities of distributions, man will sort by value to others by his value in those markets – producing networks of competing and overlapping hierarchies that we call sexual, social, economic, and political class.
    10. As such, rule of law and the independent judiciary provide a market for the suppression of not only individuals and groups of individuals, but elites in all three dimensions of elites, such that sovereignty, liberty and freedom are maintained DESPITE the presence of necessary hierarchies.

    So I consider bakunin like all other idiots as immature, adolescent, vain and ignorant consequences of the industrial revolution and the disregard for the hierarchies in elites of all resulted, and the that these vain, ignorant, immature, adolescent minds gave fertile soil for the false promise of pseudosciences and sophisms of the anti european sense making, and anti-european marxism, neo-marxism, neo-conservatism, libertarianism, postmodernism, feminism, and hbd-denial of the foundations of western civlization: that we used markets in everything to defeat regression to the mean by suppressing the reproduction of those that lacked ability to compete in the markets in the service of others. In other words, I view these well meaning fools as useful idiots in the destruction of western civlization. Which is how I pretty much view everyone.

  • Apr 27, 2020, 10:07 PM —“Can you describe the difference between P and Bakunin

    Apr 27, 2020, 10:07 PM

    —“Can you describe the difference between P and Bakunin anarchy. Just reading something and the description seemed very similar to P but seems to simply lack the formalism around reciprocity.—-

    P is a method. I use the P-method to explain all group strategies, religions, political systems, and moral intuitions. I use P to recommend the optimum political system that has ever been formed – rule of law by natural law. I dunno why you would pick Bakunin. This is Bakunin’s fantasy:

    –“The liberty of man consists solely in this, that he obeys the laws of nature because he has himself recognized them as such, and not because they have been imposed upon him externally by any foreign will whatsoever, human or divine, collective or individual.”–Bakunin

    What is true instead?

    1. Man desires consumption, consumption is increased by opportunity, and opportunity is increased by liberty, but so is irresponsibility. And so is free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, immigration, conversion, conquest, and genocide.
    2. The state evolved to incrementally suppress local parasitism decreasing local transaction costs, in exchange for paying taxes to pay the cost of decreasing local transaction costs. This made markets possible where only primitive trade previously existed.
    3. Man is amoral by nature, and pragmatic. By the institution of parenting, acculturation, indoctrination, training, laws, restitution, punishment, and prevention we invest in his domestication.
    4. Man develops theology, philosophy, ideologies, rationalizations, myths, fantasies, and various other forms of frauds, to attempt to obscure and justify his free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime.
    5. In order to produce the suppression of free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime, requires a power law of institutions of prevention, investigation, dispute resolution, prosecution, restitution, punishment and prevention.
    6. In order to produce a market requires a pareto distribution of assets, so that the organization of networks in an market can produce a complex division of labor and its returns without which the terms freedom and liberty have no meaning.
    7. In order to produce a society that tolerates market competition and the suppression of free riding, parasitism, fraud, crime, and organized crime, requires the resulting distribution of rewards satisfy a marginal nash equilibrium.
    8. Given three possible means of coercion: force-defense (Military-police, government), trade-boycott(commerce-law), and advocacy+insurance-undermining+ostracization(social,education,religion), elites will combine to use and misuse these skills in a competition.
    9. Given that Man varies greatly from barely human to superhuman in physical, social, and intellectual ability, and sexual, social, economic, political, and military value, and given the power, pareto, and nash necessities of distributions, man will sort by value to others by his value in those markets – producing networks of competing and overlapping hierarchies that we call sexual, social, economic, and political class.
    10. As such, rule of law and the independent judiciary provide a market for the suppression of not only individuals and groups of individuals, but elites in all three dimensions of elites, such that sovereignty, liberty and freedom are maintained DESPITE the presence of necessary hierarchies.

    So I consider bakunin like all other idiots as immature, adolescent, vain and ignorant consequences of the industrial revolution and the disregard for the hierarchies in elites of all resulted, and the that these vain, ignorant, immature, adolescent minds gave fertile soil for the false promise of pseudosciences and sophisms of the anti european sense making, and anti-european marxism, neo-marxism, neo-conservatism, libertarianism, postmodernism, feminism, and hbd-denial of the foundations of western civlization: that we used markets in everything to defeat regression to the mean by suppressing the reproduction of those that lacked ability to compete in the markets in the service of others. In other words, I view these well meaning fools as useful idiots in the destruction of western civlization. Which is how I pretty much view everyone.

  • Grid Explaining Commons-ism

    GRID:

    ........................CHILD............................
.........ANARCHIST........VS..........COMMUNIST 
......(heterogeneous, no commons, just consumption)
(diasporic, tribal, imperial subjects, "the men will do it")
.....no capitalization............no capitalization
......individual.....................collective
.......inequality.....................equality
.
MALE......................VS.........................FEMALE
.
.......inequality.....................equality
.......familial...................collective familial
...max capitalization .............max consumption
..(landed, national, self rule, "we're the men who do it")
..........(homogenous, commons, over consumption )
.........COMMONSIST........VS..........SOCIALIST 
.........................PARENT............................

    Humans have very comprehensible differences in instincts, and evolved to express those very comprehensible instincts, and then to make up stories justifying them.’ “THE ECONOMICS OF NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM”

    1) Commons are a non consumable capitalization from which everyone benefits – a park where you can raise small children cuts the cost of yard ownership for example. Lacking a park where you can raise small children increases the cost of homes and yards, driving people out of high investment parenting. 2) Commons solve the problem of high investment parenting, without requiring high familial economic investment by every family. Families buy access to commons by high investment parenting, which creates incentive for the production of commons and their high returns. 3) We use high investment parenting in the production of high investment commons. We use high investment commons to facilitate high investment parenting. 4) This is what the middle working, and lower working classes sense is being stolen from them – the ability to use commons to produce high investment parenting. Best example is that they can’t afford to move away from malcontents by denying them access. 5) Low investment parenting immigrants and classes, decrease the incentive to produce commons that are then consumed for purposes of other than raising families. Low investment parenting immigrants and classes increase consumption that is upwardly redistributable to the financial sector, and decrease production of commons as redistribution to 6) Elites (advertising, media, financial, academic, political), will happily consume profits and income instead of investing in commons if lower working, working, and middle classes tolerate it. 7) The laboring, lower working, working, middle, and increasingly upper middle class, will only tolerate it until the low hanging fruit of consumption has been exhausted, and the demand for commons is restored. 8) Christianity is exceptional at producing respect for commons because behavior in the church environment (suppression of impulse) and the sacredness of the properties, extend to the commons. 9) In the absence of universal christian indoctrination we must us the law to suppress consumption (destruction) of the incentive to produce high trust, ‘sacred’ commons, suitable for the raising of children. And exporting ‘exploratory’ (teen, young adult) behavior (pre-maturity) to labor (markets) sport(competition) and external (wild) commons.
    WE ARE TRYING TO ARTICULATE “NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM” by Luke Weinhagen I have a suspicion that what many are grasping at within NatSoc is not a socialization of the economy but rather a commonization (not communization) of the government. This is what the west was aimed at solving but without full-accounting under P’s complete description of property, government became just another marketable commodity under globalist capitalism. What we are really trying to articulate is a form of National Commonsism. The resistance to “socializing” any part of our civic under our current model of “governance as commodity” is it effectively means selling whatever was socialized to big interest and international agents. There is no trust. National Commonsism == Kinship Capitalism == reciprocity protected by full-accounting — CD: Always count on luke for genius. Edit

    (Y’all gotta thank Luke Weinhagen for that framing. Been fussing with it myself and wasn’t until he put the frame around it that I could write the economics of it. But this concept has legs.) “Commons-ism”

  • Grid Explaining Commons-ism

    GRID:

    ........................CHILD............................
.........ANARCHIST........VS..........COMMUNIST 
......(heterogeneous, no commons, just consumption)
(diasporic, tribal, imperial subjects, "the men will do it")
.....no capitalization............no capitalization
......individual.....................collective
.......inequality.....................equality
.
MALE......................VS.........................FEMALE
.
.......inequality.....................equality
.......familial...................collective familial
...max capitalization .............max consumption
..(landed, national, self rule, "we're the men who do it")
..........(homogenous, commons, over consumption )
.........COMMONSIST........VS..........SOCIALIST 
.........................PARENT............................

    Humans have very comprehensible differences in instincts, and evolved to express those very comprehensible instincts, and then to make up stories justifying them.’ “THE ECONOMICS OF NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM”

    1) Commons are a non consumable capitalization from which everyone benefits – a park where you can raise small children cuts the cost of yard ownership for example. Lacking a park where you can raise small children increases the cost of homes and yards, driving people out of high investment parenting. 2) Commons solve the problem of high investment parenting, without requiring high familial economic investment by every family. Families buy access to commons by high investment parenting, which creates incentive for the production of commons and their high returns. 3) We use high investment parenting in the production of high investment commons. We use high investment commons to facilitate high investment parenting. 4) This is what the middle working, and lower working classes sense is being stolen from them – the ability to use commons to produce high investment parenting. Best example is that they can’t afford to move away from malcontents by denying them access. 5) Low investment parenting immigrants and classes, decrease the incentive to produce commons that are then consumed for purposes of other than raising families. Low investment parenting immigrants and classes increase consumption that is upwardly redistributable to the financial sector, and decrease production of commons as redistribution to 6) Elites (advertising, media, financial, academic, political), will happily consume profits and income instead of investing in commons if lower working, working, and middle classes tolerate it. 7) The laboring, lower working, working, middle, and increasingly upper middle class, will only tolerate it until the low hanging fruit of consumption has been exhausted, and the demand for commons is restored. 8) Christianity is exceptional at producing respect for commons because behavior in the church environment (suppression of impulse) and the sacredness of the properties, extend to the commons. 9) In the absence of universal christian indoctrination we must us the law to suppress consumption (destruction) of the incentive to produce high trust, ‘sacred’ commons, suitable for the raising of children. And exporting ‘exploratory’ (teen, young adult) behavior (pre-maturity) to labor (markets) sport(competition) and external (wild) commons.
    WE ARE TRYING TO ARTICULATE “NATIONAL COMMONS-ISM” by Luke Weinhagen I have a suspicion that what many are grasping at within NatSoc is not a socialization of the economy but rather a commonization (not communization) of the government. This is what the west was aimed at solving but without full-accounting under P’s complete description of property, government became just another marketable commodity under globalist capitalism. What we are really trying to articulate is a form of National Commonsism. The resistance to “socializing” any part of our civic under our current model of “governance as commodity” is it effectively means selling whatever was socialized to big interest and international agents. There is no trust. National Commonsism == Kinship Capitalism == reciprocity protected by full-accounting — CD: Always count on luke for genius. Edit

    (Y’all gotta thank Luke Weinhagen for that framing. Been fussing with it myself and wasn’t until he put the frame around it that I could write the economics of it. But this concept has legs.) “Commons-ism”

  • It’s the other way ’round when it is the other way ’round. 😉

    Apr 28, 2020, 8:57 AM

    Adage: “Better to be silent in public and thought a fool rather than speak and remove all doubt”.

    Inverse: ‘Better to argue honestly in private with other fools and add to one’s doubts, than fail to argue, and retain them.”

  • It’s the other way ’round when it is the other way ’round. 😉

    Apr 28, 2020, 8:57 AM

    Adage: “Better to be silent in public and thought a fool rather than speak and remove all doubt”.

    Inverse: ‘Better to argue honestly in private with other fools and add to one’s doubts, than fail to argue, and retain them.”

  • The Hardware Problem Limiting AI

    Apr 28, 2020, 9:44 AM Yep. The problem is the entire industry is built for central computation limited by frequency (heat) rather than distributed association and prediction limited only by numbers(cool) – and what we need is billions of trivial circuits whose primary difference from neurons(really dendrites-synapses) is in creating many local logical (addresses) rather than physical (dendritic-synaptic) connections, storing trivial (sparse) bits of memory in sequences. In addition the context (episode) creates an index in time AND space and each fragment of information is locally co-associated with those positions. Every neuron, micro-column, macro-column, region of the brain is trivially simple, but in concert they produce in parallel what cannot be done by increasing frequency(and heat). Graphics processors are architected for parallel processing and so we ‘hijacked’ them in the 2000’s for AI use. And since the human brain uses triangles and hexagons for producing its world model, the graphics processor does solve HALF of the underlying problem: the neocortex is a doubling (folding over) with six layers, of the entorhinal cortex (three layers), dividing the responsibility of identity (top) and relative position (bottom), with the outputs passed forward in the cognitive hierarchy in a vast market competition for coherence. So it’s not that we don’t (at least now, because this is all recent knowledge) know how to create general intelligence (I certainly do). Its that (as turing said) we built the machines for math (top down) instead of thinking (bottom up) with math as merely one of the grammars (logics) resulting from it. So the current issue as I understand it, is that we cannot achieve in software what we need hardware for. So we need a manhattan project to produce thinking machines only because the industry is constructed for the opposite aim, and current (primitive) neural networks can categorize but only do so with vast amounts of information and manual tuning. In this illustration from the attached web page, we see the limit of what current AI is able to do: categorize, and only after lots of training and tuning. This means application specific hardware because the hardware is constructed ‘incorrectly’ still for the task of general intelligence. Conversely there are many functions where we do not want a general intelligence – which exchanges increase in possibility of error for decrease in cost of adaptation. Robots are dangerous because they’re not intelligent, but there are many cases where not-intelligent danger, and intelligent danger are a trade off. So we have market demand for (a) simple software problems (b) application specific ai problems, and (c) general ai problems.’