Curt Doolittle

Theme: Deception

  • Repeating Myself (Bitcoin), Trolls And Stupid People

    I’m not doing well with trolls lately. Last week some idiot on discord trolled the hell out of me, and succeeded in making me furious. Tonight some idiot tried to debate me about bitcoin. I ended up having to cut him off. So, really, I’m going to just do my thing, and cut the trolls out immediately. I’ve finally surrendered as have most public intellectuals. It’s just not worth debating amateurs. I’m going to let my work speak for itself. WHY IS THAT? Well, you know, I build a foundation for my arguments, and it takes me quite a while to establish that foundation. And I am very precise with terms. And that is just not useful for colloquial conversations. BITCOIN CRITICISMS – NOT THE IDEA, THE MARKETING AND THE EXECUTION My criticisms of BTC are technical. In other words, it’s not with the idea, it’s with the money claims and the execution. My problems are with BTC are: (a) BTC is a novel invention that combines the properties of token money and shares in a speculative startup, to create fractional shares backed only by demand for such shares, and the existence of that network. This mens that yes, it can serve as a medium of exchange, but that it is a ‘money substitute’ that is highly dependent upon an institution that poses a threat to the world order. This is a purely technical observation that is of interest only to people who want to understand where BTC fits in the spectrum of financial instruments. (b) there is zero chance of any form of money substitute persisting outside of the central bank system, because it would destroy the world order, and nations would go to war over it. The long arm of the USG is very powerful worldwide. The opposite is true: digital share development is serving as off book R&D for future government application. The future of taxation depends upon it. And the future of liquidity distribution depends upon it. Because the financial system, which evolved to distribute hard currency is now an impediment to demand generation that reorganizes the economy in response to demand changes and shocks. (c) the limitations of the technology are unavoidable. The empirical evidence is that the user interface problem has been a failure, particularly for businesses, the processing time has been a failure, the scale problem has not been solved, the repeated thefts have not been solved, and the benefit is less than the cost of transition. The world will only accept an escrow-release model. (d) There is an exit problem because of these issues. It is fine as a speculation vehicle but it is a ponzi scheme where late players will be destroyed UNLESS a superior network ‘buys’ or ‘merges’ with BTC trading BTC (customers and their inventory) for replacement currency on a superior network. That is what will happen I’m certain. Since the BTC tech is simply … amateurish. e) IMHO the optimum use of BTC is fractional shares of highly stable assets, thereby making them available to consumers rather than institutions. Propertarianism has taught me that artificially priced debts must not be transferrable (escapable). Ergo, I would prefer banks bring in capital, and sell fractional shares in the income streams, but hold the assets. And the public would also. Now, precisely what have I said above that either 1) is false, or 2) says that BTC will fail? Nothing. SO: 1) If BTC crashes something will replace it. 2) If BTC survives it will be well funded enough to reform (refactor). 3) If something supersedes BTC before it can reform, then they best way to make that superior technology beneficial is to trade BTC fractional shares for fractional shares of that digital substitute. (as far as I know that tech exists, and is just not far enough along yet.) 4) If somethig gets too far out of hand such that black market activity and money laundering are too effective for the state to police, AND BTC crashes, AND there are prosecutions, then it will take a few decades to recover from that – not technically. But politically. And we need this technology. So please don’t come to the table to argue with me without knowing what I am arguing. THE WORLD IS TOO STUPID FOR ME TODAY. Sigh.

  • REPEATING MYSELF (BITCOIN), TROLLS AND STUPID PEOPLE I’m not doing well with tro

    REPEATING MYSELF (BITCOIN), TROLLS AND STUPID PEOPLE

    I’m not doing well with trolls lately.

    Last week some idiot on discord trolled the hell out of me, and succeeded in making me furious. Tonight some idiot tried to debate me about bitcoin. I ended up having to cut him off.

    So, really, I’m going to just do my thing, and cut the trolls out immediately. I’ve finally surrendered as have most public intellectuals. It’s just not worth debating amateurs.

    I’m going to let my work speak for itself.

    WHY IS THAT?

    Well, you know, I build a foundation for my arguments, and it takes me quite a while to establish that foundation. And I am very precise with terms. And that is just not useful for colloquial conversations.

    BITCOIN CRITICISMS – NOT THE IDEA, THE MARKETING AND THE EXECUTION

    My criticisms of BTC are technical. In other words, it’s not with the idea, it’s with the money claims and the execution.

    My problems are with BTC are:

    (a) BTC is a novel invention that combines the properties of token money and shares in a speculative startup, to create fractional shares backed only by demand for such shares, and the existence of that network. This mens that yes, it can serve as a medium of exchange, but that it is a ‘money substitute’ that is highly dependent upon an institution that poses a threat to the world order. This is a purely technical observation that is of interest only to people who want to understand where BTC fits in the spectrum of financial instruments.

    (b) there is zero chance of any form of money substitute persisting outside of the central bank system, because it would destroy the world order, and nations would go to war over it. The long arm of the USG is very powerful worldwide.

    The opposite is true: digital share development is serving as off book R&D for future government application. The future of taxation depends upon it. And the future of liquidity distribution depends upon it. Because the financial system, which evolved to distribute hard currency is now an impediment to demand generation that reorganizes the economy in response to demand changes and shocks.

    (c) the limitations of the technology are unavoidable. The empirical evidence is that the user interface problem has been a failure, particularly for businesses, the processing time has been a failure, the scale problem has not been solved, the repeated thefts have not been solved, and the benefit is less than the cost of transition. The world will only accept an escrow-release model.

    (d) There is an exit problem because of these issues. It is fine as a speculation vehicle but it is a ponzi scheme where late players will be destroyed UNLESS a superior network ‘buys’ or ‘merges’ with BTC trading BTC (customers and their inventory) for replacement currency on a superior network. That is what will happen I’m certain. Since the BTC tech is simply … amateurish.

    e) IMHO the optimum use of BTC is fractional shares of highly stable assets, thereby making them available to consumers rather than institutions. Propertarianism has taught me that artificially priced debts must not be transferrable (escapable). Ergo, I would prefer banks bring in capital, and sell fractional shares in the income streams, but hold the assets. And the public would also.

    Now, precisely what have I said above that either 1) is false, or 2) says that BTC will fail? Nothing.

    SO:

    1) If BTC crashes something will replace it.

    2) If BTC survives it will be well funded enough to reform (refactor).

    3) If something supersedes BTC before it can reform, then they best way to make that superior technology beneficial is to trade BTC fractional shares for fractional shares of that digital substitute. (as far as I know that tech exists, and is just not far enough along yet.)

    4) If somethig gets too far out of hand such that black market activity and money laundering are too effective for the state to police, AND BTC crashes, AND there are prosecutions, then it will take a few decades to recover from that – not technically. But politically. And we need this technology.

    So please don’t come to the table to argue with me without knowing what I am arguing.

    THE WORLD IS TOO STUPID FOR ME TODAY.

    Sigh.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-12-16 23:14:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle’s answer: Because while the marxists-boazians-freudians failed by

    Curt Doolittle’s answer: Because while the marxists-boazians-freudians failed by pseudoscientific (rousseauian) visions of man, and where communists failed by pseudoscientific history, and where the socialists failed by pseudoscientific economics, and where the libertarians failed by pseudoscient…

  • Curt Doolittle’s answer: Because while the marxists-boazians-freudians failed by

    Curt Doolittle’s answer: Because while the marxists-boazians-freudians failed by pseudoscientific (rousseauian) visions of man, and where communists failed by pseudoscientific history, and where the socialists failed by pseudoscientific economics, and where the libertarians failed by pseudoscient…

  • KEY PHRASE: “Society Expects….” “Society Expects” is one of the feminine cogni

    KEY PHRASE: “Society Expects….” “Society Expects” is one of the feminine cognitive biases that the left took advantage of exploiting. Like NAXALT it’s a genetically consistent proclivity that the male brain is not subject to. The division of labor under low burdens (taxation) is the only means of providing a woman with family and consumption, and a man with family and consumption. Fertile women in the workplace is merely Veblen’s criticism put to exploitive means by the left (social democrats) as a means of overthrowing meritocracy (paternalism)

  • KEY PHRASE: “Society Expects….” “Society Expects” is one of the feminine cogni

    KEY PHRASE: “Society Expects….”

    “Society Expects” is one of the feminine cognitive biases that the left took advantage of exploiting. Like NAXALT it’s a genetically consistent proclivity that the male brain is not subject to. The division of labor under low burdens (taxation) is the only means of providing a woman with family and consumption, and a man with family and consumption.

    Fertile women in the workplace is merely Veblen’s criticism put to exploitive means by the left (social democrats) as a means of overthrowing meritocracy (paternalism)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-12-16 09:29:00 UTC

  • KEY PHRASE: “Society Expects….” “Society Expects” is one of the feminine cogni

    KEY PHRASE: “Society Expects….” “Society Expects” is one of the feminine cognitive biases that the left took advantage of exploiting. Like NAXALT it’s a genetically consistent proclivity that the male brain is not subject to. The division of labor under low burdens (taxation) is the only means of providing a woman with family and consumption, and a man with family and consumption. Fertile women in the workplace is merely Veblen’s criticism put to exploitive means by the left (social democrats) as a means of overthrowing meritocracy (paternalism)

  • What Do You Think About People Who Withhold Information To Get Ahead?

    We all act in our interests at all times, given the balance between costs and benefits. There are many costs and benefits. Physical, emotional, intellectual, social, political, legal, material. We are exceptionally good at calculating those benefits and making use of them.

    https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-about-people-who-withhold-information-to-get-ahead

  • Do You Know Of Any Shootings Committed By White People That Are Not Reported In The Main Stream Media?

    I ANSWER UNPLEASANT QUESTIONS AS TRUTHFULLY AS POSSIBLE

    You know, I answer controversial topics, because that’s my job, and I know the data. And so I’ve ended up being one of the people that counter-signals anti-everything.

    So I sort of get angry now when I get asked to respond to questions like this, only to have my posts redacted by someone *helping to preserve ignorance and deceit* under the guise of protecting people from uncomfortable truths. In other words, protecting their market for falsehoods from correction. Because that is what all of us do. We all seek information that confirms our priors, because our priors reflect our age, gender, class, ethnic, racial evolutionary strategies. And it would be against evolution’s interests for us to seek the truth, rather than whatever is in the interest of our reproductive strategy

    The main stream media tells stories that advance the postmodern (anti-aristocratic, meaning paternal, meaning anti-western, anti-meritocratic ) narrative. There are very good economic reasons for doing so. There are very good secular religious reasons for doing so.

    There are a lot of self defense shootings, perhaps daily, but they media doesn’t report it so that they aren’t seen as advancing the use of violence.

    Black on white hate crime is rarely reported. White on black hate crime is over-reported. The media tries to cast mass killers as conservative, yet as far as I know, all mass killers are liberals. The media tried to report that conservatives were less intelligent. This turns out to be an artifact of the population sizes, not reality. (There are a lot of self-identifying conservatives, and few self identifying liberals). For example, republicans are smarter than democrats, but liberals are smarter than conservatives. Libertarians are the smartest of all. THey’re just statistically insignificant.

    I would go into the reasons for this but that’s for another time.

    Research “False Consensus Bias”, and all the other social cognitive biases.

    1. The business (like Quora, FB, Google,), the media, academy(including schools) and the government produce ‘stories’ that sell. Not truths. BEcause they all have ‘customers’ to satisfy by ‘marketing’. And in exchange for producing that marketing, they obtain ‘power’. Economic power, academic power, and political power.
    2. There is a greater market for comforting falsehoods than uncomfortable truths.
    3. It is much cheaper to produce comforting falsehoods than produce uncomfortable truths.
    4. Cheap and comforting falsehoods spread faster than expensive and uncomfortable truths.
    5. It is (usually) prohibitively expensive to falsify (reverse) desirable falsehoods with undesirable truths.

    But for some of us, out of statistical consequence, uncomfortable truths are precisely what advance our reproductive strategies. And so we soldier onward, as does everyone else.

    And those of us who understand science, economics, and history are forever the victims of the many who understand none of them.

    https://www.quora.com/Do-you-know-of-any-shootings-committed-by-white-people-that-are-not-reported-in-the-main-stream-media

  • Is There Any Country In The Industrialized World That Has More Students (per Capita) Whose Parents Have Been In The Criminal Justice System As Does The Us?

    Dishonest (Postmodern) question in my opinion.

    The USA prosecutes many more minor offenses than does any other nation which accounts for our ability to leave our doors unlocked, and not fence in our yards, or put bars or grids over our windows as does the rest of the world. The only places where we must act like the rest of the world is in our immigrant cities.

    We have far less ‘petty crime’ than other nations (except japan for example). We have far less ‘observable’ corruption. We have a huge drug issue and many people in the system for it.

    And we have (I will get the usual Quora punishment for truth speaking for saying this) but heterogeneous societies degrade trust, degrade norms, and increase crime. For the simple reason that homogenous and wealthy peoples are marginally indifferent and redistributive and heterogeneous and poor peoples are marginally different and resist redistribution (in either direction).

    If you compare ethnic groups they have the same crime rates in america as they do in their home countries. The reasons for this are finally fairly well understood (see Emmanuel Todd’s work on europe for example, or the recent books on the wealth of nations being dependent upon the size of the underclasses, or even Trust by Fukuyama. )

    These are just painful truths that are counter to both secular and supernatural religions, as well as marxist postmodernist pseudoscience of the 19th and 20th centuries.

    https://www.quora.com/Is-there-any-country-in-the-industrialized-world-that-has-more-students-per-capita-whose-parents-have-been-in-the-criminal-justice-system-as-does-the-US