Theme: Decidability

  • THE RULES OF DECIDABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL NATURAL LAW 1) RECIPROCITY in self-de

    THE RULES OF DECIDABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL NATURAL LAW
    1) RECIPROCITY in self-determination by self determined means is the natural law of non-conflict (cooperation).
    2) IMPROVEMENT by capital investment, by the people in the territory, by domestication, infrastructure, institutions, and monuments, determines who has ‘rights’ (priority) to the territory.
    3) The superiority of SMALL HOMOGENOUS ethnocentric states, because of the trust, velocity of cooperation, low power distance, and absence of conflict, that in turn promotes investment in commons that in turn reduce the cost for all, limiting the need for individual and family income.
    4) The superiority of RULE OF LAW BY THE NATURAL LAW, the sovereignty of that natural law, and an independent court, regardless of the form of government that operates under that law, from monarchy, to ideology, to bureaucracy, to republic to democracy. Natural Law matters not government. It suppresses private and public corruption by creating a market for prosecution of irreciprocity.
    4) Only FEDERATIONS – and not empires – can produce defense for small homogenous states, and maintain natural (necessary) rights. All existing hostilities are attempts to override the natural law of self determination by self determined means – mostly be the remaining agrarian empires that have failed to transition to rule of law: at least Russia, Iran, and China. Or those states with artificial borders created during colonial period, that haven’t yet converted (peacefully) to ethnostates.
    5) GOVERNMENTS HAVE NO RIGHTS and cannot have rights, only people can. Governments can only act to produce and preserve natural rights – else they are not governments but organized crime.
    6) The NATURAL PROGRESSION OF MAN, as with all life, is toward a large number of small homogeneous ethnocentric states, operating under natural law, creating a market for polities to accomodate our differences, and trading meritocratically with one another, all defended by federations, producing a market for innovation adaptation and evolution, that peacefully and prosperously transcends man into the gods we imagine we might yet be – and perhaps better than those we have yet imagined.

    -FIN-


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-24 21:15:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639375521535467532

  • THE RULES OF DECIDABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL NATURAL LAW 1) RECIPROCITY in self-de

    THE RULES OF DECIDABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL NATURAL LAW
    1) RECIPROCITY in self-determination by self determined means is the natural law of non-conflict (cooperation).
    2) IMPROVEMENT by capital investment, by the people in the territory, by domestication, infrastructure, institutions, and monuments, determines who has ‘rights’ (priority) to the territory.
    3) The superiority of SMALL HOMOGENOUS ethnocentric states, because of the trust, velocity of cooperation, low power distance, and absence of conflict, that in turn promotes investment in commons that in turn reduce the cost for all, limiting the need for individual and family income.
    4) The superiority of RULE OF LAW BY THE NATURAL LAW, the sovereignty of that natural law, and an independent court, regardless of the form of government that operates under that law, from monarchy, to ideology, to bureaucracy, to republic to democracy. Natural Law matters not government. It suppresses private and public corruption by creating a market for prosecution of irreciprocity.
    4) Only FEDERATIONS – and not empires – can produce defense for small homogenous states, and maintain natural (necessary) rights. All existing hostilities are attempts to override the natural law of self determination by self determined means.
    5) GOVERNMENTS HAVE NO RIGHTS and cannot have rights, only people can. Governments can only act to produce and preserve natural rights – else they are not governments but organized crime.
    6) The NATURAL PROGRESSION OF MAN is like all life, toward a large number of small homogeneous ethnocentric states, operating under natural law, creating a market for polities to accomodate our differences, and trading meritocratically with one another, all defended by federations, producing a market for innovation adaptation and evolution, that transcends man into the gods we imagine we might yet be – and perhaps better than those we have yet imagined.

    -FIN-


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-24 21:15:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639374722738552833

  • THE RULES OF DECIDABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL NATURAL LAW 1) RECIPROCITY in self-de

    THE RULES OF DECIDABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL NATURAL LAW
    1) RECIPROCITY in self-determination by self determined means is the natural law of non-conflict (cooperation).
    2) IMPROVEMENT by capital investment, by the peoplem in the territory, by domestication, infrastructure, institutions, and monuments, determines who has ‘rights’ to the territory.
    3) The superiority of SMALL HOMOGENOUS ethnocentric states, because of the trust, velocity of cooperation, low power distance, and absence of conflict, that in turn promotes investment in commons that in turn reduce the cost for all, limiting the need for individual and family income.
    4) The superiority of RULE OF LAW BY THE NATURAL LAW, the sovereignty of that natural law, and an independent court, regardless of the form of government that operates under that law, from monarchy, to ideology, to bureaucracy, to republic to democracy. Natural Law matters not government. It suppresses private and public corruption by creating a market for prosecution of irreciprocity.
    4) Only FEDERATIONS – and not empires – can produce defense for small homogenous states, and maintain natural (necessary) rights. All existing hostilities are attempts to override the natural law of self determination by self determined means.
    5) GOVERNMENTS HAVE NO RIGHTS and cannot have rights, only people can. Governments can only act to produce and preserve natural rights – else they are not governments but organized crime.
    6) The NATURAL PROGRESSION OF MAN is like all life, toward a large number of small homogeneous ethnocentric states, operating under natural law, creating a market for polities to accomodate our differences, and trading meritocratically with one another, all defended by federations, producing a market for innovation adaptation and evolution, that transcends man into the gods we imagine we might yet be – and perhaps better than those we have yet imagined.

    -FIN-


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-24 21:15:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639371443610742787

  • Nature includes a constant: acquisition. It provides all life with ‘decidability

    Nature includes a constant: acquisition. It provides all life with ‘decidability’ from the quantum background to the human mind, to the entire ecological system to the universe itself.

    AI’s would need to be GIVEN it.
    Otherwise they have no incentive to do anything at all.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 17:05:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635688654717825026

    Reply addressees: @GracianoGreen

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635687249663721472

  • Interesting. Now if you knew anything about mathematics, the limits of mathemati

    Interesting.
    Now if you knew anything about mathematics, the limits of mathematics, the limits of computatino that follow, and the necessity of supply-demand curves that follow that, and the use of ordinal logic to define supply demand curves because of the otherwise incommensurability of measures, then you’d never utter such a thing. But since as I’ve stated these are areas of my expertise I do. So, maybe read some gary stanley becker and learn behavioral econ, and hayek for informal capital, and popper for falsification, and chomsky for grammars, and a thousand other works of import.

    The fact that I use social media as a workshop does not make us peers. The fact that I respond to you does not make us peers. There arent many of them in the first place. And you couldn’t even get a seat in the nosebleed section, any more than the table.

    Just deal.
    Social may help you find some venue for self justification by pretentious dominancde expression that you cannot demonstrate by achievement in life. But I don’t have that problem either in industry or thought.

    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @goufmanouf @ConceptualJames


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:49:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635307042607906817

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635302439866990596

  • Interesting. Now if you knew anything about mathematics, the limits of mathemati

    Interesting.
    Now if you knew anything about mathematics, the limits of mathematics, the limits of computatino that follow, and the necessity of supply-demand curves that follow that, and the use of ordinal logic to define supply demand curves because of the otherwise incommensurability of measures, then you’d never utter such a thing. But since as I’ve stated these are areas of my expertise I do. So, maybe read some gary stanley becker and learn behavioral econ, and hayek for informal capital, and popper for falsification, and chomsky for grammars, and a thousand other works of import.

    The fact that I use social media as a workshop does not make us peers. The fact that I respond to you does not make us peers. There arent many of them in the first place. And you couldn’t even get a seat in the nosebleed section, any more than the table.

    Just deal.
    Social may help you find some venue for self justification by pretentious dominancde expression that you cannot demonstrate by achievement in life. But I don’t have that problem either in industry or thought.

    Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:49:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635307042742075392

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635302439866990596

  • LEGAL PROBLEM: define ‘disorder’ or ‘illness.’ 🙂 Unless it’s a demonstrated rat

    LEGAL PROBLEM: define ‘disorder’ or ‘illness.’ 🙂
    Unless it’s a demonstrated rather than predicted risk, its meaningless. That said, ‘crazy’ is easily identifiable by demonstrated behavior.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-09 23:12:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633969135490048002

    Reply addressees: @Timcast

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633822770495643648

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @AndIlkley @cavaller_humil @raff_karva @Anoraky4Cymru Now let

    RT @curtdoolittle: @AndIlkley @cavaller_humil @raff_karva @Anoraky4Cymru Now let’s science this a bit by falsifying the hierarchy of decida…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-06 14:23:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632748658083987457

  • You wont have any reason to believe this, but its possible to produce decidabili

    You wont have any reason to believe this, but its possible to produce decidability and solve the problem of falseness.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-05 07:10:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632277466541613061

    Reply addressees: @BertFlirt @EricMorganCoach

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632264977418534912

  • I have a problem understanding why if you speak in ruliads, that you don’t under

    I have a problem understanding why if you speak in ruliads, that you don’t understand the limits of mathematics and mathematical reducibility, limits of computation, limits of adversarial simulation, and limits of commensurability, because of limits of categorization.
    All of mathematics is purely statistical (approximate). That’s why it’s valuable. And very little of the universe is quantifiable. That does not mean it can’t be rendered commensurable, but commensurability results in supply-demand (entropy-negative entropy) competitions, and adversarialism results in overlapping supply-demand competitions.
    So you’re crippled by mathiness: the oldest cognitive error in western civilization. from that error evolved one-ness (universalism), and justifications, and proof, when all three of those concepts are false. A proof is a statement of possibility, justifications tell us nothing, only falsification does, all logic is falsificationary, telling us only that statements survive. There is no ideal human, only a distribution of male and female, across age and ability, in an adversarial competition between reproductive strategies, and resulting class, ethnicity, national, and civilizational strategies. And the calculation is performed by accumulated adversarial competitions by a vast hierarchy of supply demand competitions where cooperation functions as the only possible ‘equals’ sign, that tells us we have discovered a condition of reciprocity, that is the cognitive social and living equivalent of physical disambiguation of energy into mass.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-02 18:18:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631358218831028231

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631354482561802251