> Robert Laird
Incoherent nonsense.
> Curt Doolittle
Not an argument. A dunning kruger assertion.
> Robert Laird
Friends with Yuri N Maltsev and 4 others
Not an argument. You’re right. Just my judgment that you’ve produced incoherent nonsense. Lots of people think they know how to write. Almost all of them are wrong. You’re in that bunch.
> Curt Doolittle
I do my craft in public like an old village smith. People can watch the process. FB is not my end result but my sketch pad. And people can join along in the journey with me.
So, you know, I don’t ‘compose’ every idea I put down. …See More
> Robert Laird
I’m twice the writer you’ve ever been. You’re pretentious, sententious, and a bore. Don’t patronize me, or I’ll have a real fling at you.
> Curt Doolittle
I’m baiting you as I bait all critics, in to making a substantive argument. I have never claimed to be a great writer… I claim only to be right. 😉
So dish it if you can. 😉
> Robert Laird
Village smith. What a joke. You drape words around half baked ideas. I really am a great writer. My wife asks, “Why bother with this guy?” I tell her I have a duty to mess with the incoherent poseurs. I’m probably wrong. Don’t care how many “follow” you. You’re a fool on a fool’s mission. You can’t write a single paragraph. Why I poked at you in the first place. Go away now. You haven’t earned another word.
> Curt Doolittle
Now, any sophist of any scale will argue quite obviously that you make no argument whatsoever. But then intuitionistically accessible prose illustrating the mundane, is quite different from the composition of novel argument.
So. Given that ‘incomprehensibility’ has been a sophist’s criticism that I’ve lived with for decades, and yet there are plenty of people (demonstrably) who can grasp the insights, and who are ‘moved’ by them, it’s just an empirically demonstrated fact that I’m producing novel content.
Now if you have an argument (I know you don’t, or you would make one, like those who do form criticisms) then please make one.
As far as I know I have NO, meaning ZERO material critics, but many empty hats railing against that which they cannot grasp.
What I have done here is profound. And until you can construct an argument against one of the central propositions you’re just a poser. (which is common.)
Dunning Kruger rules you. 😉
Source: Original Site Post
-
Q&a: Curt: Big Data?
Q&A: CURT: BIG DATA? —“It’s overrated.”—Herbert S Vogelsang Um. Pretty much. In Knowledge of Human Beings: I think that big data is a substitute for praxeology, because it is impolitic to speak praxeological under postmodernism – big data provides excuses for action without admitting that human behavior is predictable and stereotypical. In Economics: It does assist us in inventory management (efficiency) at the cost of increasing economic fragility (stored capital). There is a fairly low limit to what can be learned about people from big data and almost all of it is predictable. In Business: Most business uses of data serve to prevent mal-entrenchment of the bureaucracy (lessening innovators dilemma) Much business use of data tends to direct a business to certainty of revenue production rather than innovation, thereby maximizing short term and destroying the long term viability of the company (Sun, Microsoft, Apple, and now Google). Most marketing uses of data simply decrease the cost of advertising to those who aren’t interested. Big data does provide short term competitive advantage. In government: All increases in data have led to increases in taxation. All increases in taxation have led to decreases in liberty. All decreases in liberty have led to calcification. Now if you look at that series of statements it’s rather obvious that the same behavior of increasing certainty and rents is the normal human behavior that leads to exhaustion of an opportunity, whereas what preserves the value of capital structures is GENERATING OPPORTUNITY that can then be exploited. At present, small companies generate opportnity, producing off book losses that are hidden in the economy. While large companies buy the R&D of those smaller companies and obtain the profits of them through preservation of the concentration of capital in a customer-access organization. -
Q&a: Curt: Big Data?
Q&A: CURT: BIG DATA? —“It’s overrated.”—Herbert S Vogelsang Um. Pretty much. In Knowledge of Human Beings: I think that big data is a substitute for praxeology, because it is impolitic to speak praxeological under postmodernism – big data provides excuses for action without admitting that human behavior is predictable and stereotypical. In Economics: It does assist us in inventory management (efficiency) at the cost of increasing economic fragility (stored capital). There is a fairly low limit to what can be learned about people from big data and almost all of it is predictable. In Business: Most business uses of data serve to prevent mal-entrenchment of the bureaucracy (lessening innovators dilemma) Much business use of data tends to direct a business to certainty of revenue production rather than innovation, thereby maximizing short term and destroying the long term viability of the company (Sun, Microsoft, Apple, and now Google). Most marketing uses of data simply decrease the cost of advertising to those who aren’t interested. Big data does provide short term competitive advantage. In government: All increases in data have led to increases in taxation. All increases in taxation have led to decreases in liberty. All decreases in liberty have led to calcification. Now if you look at that series of statements it’s rather obvious that the same behavior of increasing certainty and rents is the normal human behavior that leads to exhaustion of an opportunity, whereas what preserves the value of capital structures is GENERATING OPPORTUNITY that can then be exploited. At present, small companies generate opportnity, producing off book losses that are hidden in the economy. While large companies buy the R&D of those smaller companies and obtain the profits of them through preservation of the concentration of capital in a customer-access organization. -
“general criticism: accusations of reductionism”— Isn’t that a sophist’s non a
—“general criticism: accusations of reductionism”— Isn’t that a sophist’s non argument? It’s science. It’s true. Now you might make the traditional argument that DEFLATION of the experiential dimensions (reaction) such that we understand the CAUSAL dimensions is precisely the function of testimony (personal), science(natural), and mathematics(relations). So conversely, isn’t the attempt to attribute cause to effect merely an error? (or a deception.) People will make excuses for the preservation of the intuitionistic (animal) in order to avoid the rational (human). -
“general criticism: accusations of reductionism”— Isn’t that a sophist’s non a
—“general criticism: accusations of reductionism”— Isn’t that a sophist’s non argument? It’s science. It’s true. Now you might make the traditional argument that DEFLATION of the experiential dimensions (reaction) such that we understand the CAUSAL dimensions is precisely the function of testimony (personal), science(natural), and mathematics(relations). So conversely, isn’t the attempt to attribute cause to effect merely an error? (or a deception.) People will make excuses for the preservation of the intuitionistic (animal) in order to avoid the rational (human). -
“Trust provides a means of measurement which affords sufficient decidability in
–“Trust provides a means of measurement which affords sufficient decidability in certain domains.”–Bill Joslin -
“Trust provides a means of measurement which affords sufficient decidability in
–“Trust provides a means of measurement which affords sufficient decidability in certain domains.”–Bill Joslin -
Decidability does not require trust. It requires decidability, and decidability
Decidability does not require trust. It requires decidability, and decidability alone. -
Decidability does not require trust. It requires decidability, and decidability
Decidability does not require trust. It requires decidability, and decidability alone. -
Joseph Ross shares last year’s post on education
Joseph Ross shares last year’s post on education.