Curt Doolittle

Theme: Incentives

  • DAVID’S MISUNDERSTANDING OF AI-AGE ECONOMICS @DaveShapi David. Sorry man. Love y

    DAVID’S MISUNDERSTANDING OF AI-AGE ECONOMICS

    @DaveShapi

    David. Sorry man. Love you, but you’ve malinvested in an unlikely determinism because you cannot imagine, despite historical evidence, what could be done if in fact much white collar labor is replaceable. But you have overcommitted at this point and won’t correct because of that malivestment and overcommitment: you’re a normal human.
    We will, like the Athenians and Egyptians reallocate labor from text to action and improve our commons. Eventually we will find new opportunities that favor a different set of status signals and their pursuit by a different category of production.

    RE:

    Source date (UTC): 2026-03-21 02:09:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2035176917788500299

  • What Would Happen In An All Female Society? Curt. Question: –“1) All human male

    What Would Happen In An All Female Society?

    Curt.
    Question:
    –“1) All human males have been eradicated. 2) They master and can maintain the infrastructure for healthy sexual reproduction (using artificial genetic recombination) of exclusively more females.
    Given feminine cognitive biases and ternary logic, is a societal equilibrium possible? If so, what allows (or would allow) an equilibrium to exist, and how does the nature of status incentives, future history, the economy, governance and social organization, institutions, norms, the distribution of the application of the three methods of coercion, conflict and warfare, and especially geopolitics change? (in essence, what kind of equilibrium would emerge and a comprehensive account of the dynamics of such equilibrium).
    Also, how does the percentage of women on their periods on any given day influence the nature of the dependent variables stated above?
    Thank you.
    Suki”-    –
    Suki — excellent thought-experiment. It operationalizes what happens when we remove the male cognitive and coercive pattern entirely. Let’s run it under Natural Law: full accounting of demonstrated interests, reciprocity, and decidability.
    1. Definitions (so we test the same thing)
    • Feminine cognition (modal distribution): Higher neuroticism, agreeableness, verbal/social intelligence; lower systematizing/spatial; bias toward immediate empathy, risk-externalization (“someone else pays”), and short time-preference in commons. Coercion via GSRM (gossip, shaming, rallying, moralizing) instead of direct violence.
    • Ternary logic: “Both/and + context + feelings” relational processing vs. male binary true/false decidability. Produces nuance but high undecidability at scale — can’t falsify costs via empirical test.
    • Equilibrium: Sustainable low-friction cooperation producing surplus (tech, defense, innovation) without external subsidy or collapse.
    2. Is equilibrium possible?Short-term and small-scale: yes — like existing matrilineal societies (Mosuo, Minangkabau, Khasi). They persist at village/clan level via kin selection and female property transmission. Civilizational scale (billions, infrastructure, geopolitics): no. Without male variance (IQ tails, aggression, long-term abstraction), the system cannot maintain the physical/competitive substrate. Reproduction is technically solved (artificial), but everything else regresses. History shows zero true matriarchies (women running defense, heavy production, large-scale war). All “female-led” examples rely on male muscle or external protection.
    3. What kind of equilibrium emerges — and how the variables changeThe society stabilizes at low-surplus, kin-based, high-internal-drama matrilineal clans (think amplified Mosuo + Umoja village on a planetary scale). Dynamics:
    • Status incentives: Pure social capital via gossip networks and victimhood hierarchies. No male “hero/provider” status — prestige from emotional manipulation, alliance-building, and shaming. High conformity pressure; outliers (high-systematizing women) get excluded as “cold.”
    • Future history: Cyclical and relational. Narratives center on interpersonal betrayals, emotional legacies, and “healing” rather than conquest, discovery, or civilizational arcs. No grand projects; progress stalls.
    • Economy: Service/care/relational sectors dominate. Heavy industry, infrastructure maintenance, large-scale logistics, and frontier tech collapse (male spatial + risk-taking tails gone). Trade shrinks to local barter; innovation rate plummets. Artificial reproduction becomes a massive state burden — dysgenic selection toward “easy” genetics.
    • Governance and social organization: Consensus-seeking paralysis. Ternary logic + pathos produces endless moralizing debates with no decisive resolution. Institutions become therapy circles or shaming tribunals. Norms: extreme emotional surveillance (“vibe checks” as law). High-agency women rise briefly, then get torn down by coalitions.
    • Institutions and norms: Family = matrilineal clans. Education = relational empathy training. Law = restorative “feelings” justice (no strict tort/restitution). Religion/myth = goddess cycles and emotional unity.
    • Distribution of coercion: 100% GSRM. No male physical violence monopoly — instead, psychological warfare, ostracism, rumor campaigns. Conflict resolution = endless talking circles that externalize costs.
    • Conflict and warfare: Internal only — feuds via exclusion, psychological attrition, sabotage. No standing armies or territorial conquest (no male aggression specialization). Wars of maneuver impossible; “wars” become total social ostracism campaigns.
    • Geopolitics: None externally (all-female planet). Internally: balkanization into thousands of feuding emotional enclaves. No global coordination — infrastructure grids fail within generations. The species survives at pre-industrial equilibrium, vulnerable to any external shock (asteroid, climate, AI remnant).
    4. How menstrual cycles influence the dependent variablesOn any given day, ~3-4% are menstruating, but luteal/PMS phase (hormonal volatility) affects 15-25%+ with measurable spikes in neuroticism, emotion dysregulation, impulsivity, and conflict proneness (studies on cyclical mood, suicidality, decision volatility).
    Result: periodic instability multiplier. Policy swings every ~7-14 days as “mood clusters” align. Governance becomes even more erratic — short-term empathy raids followed by regret. Economy: higher absenteeism, risk-aversion. Conflict: gossip waves intensify. Ternary logic amplifies it (“I feel both ways”). Net: the system never escapes low-level chaos; equilibrium is fragile and regressive.
    5. Bottom lineThis experiment proves the computational necessity of sexual dimorphism under Natural Law. Feminine cognition excels in small-scale relational maintenance. Male cognition supplies the violence, abstraction, and long-horizon accounting that scales civilization. Remove one — equilibrium collapses to subsistence drama.
    The stable solution isn’t all-female or all-male. It’s reciprocal sovereignty: demonstrated interests, sex-specialized roles, multi-house institutions (one containing pathos inputs), and full cost accounting. Mixed-sex polities with Natural Law filters (responsibility, net contribution) are the only configuration that passes the test.
    The heckling in Congress you hear? That’s the modal outcome without male counterbalance.
    Happy to run variations (e.g., high-agency female subset only) or cite the underlying studies on cooperation/decision differences.
    Cheers
    Curt
    Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2026-03-20 16:28:38 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/2035030765990449312

  • @walterkirn : known phenomenon: three generations of status signaling driving ta

    @walterkirn
    : known phenomenon: three generations of status signaling driving talent to seek achievement within the discipline, and competitive population density in a region.

    Source date (UTC): 2026-03-20 13:00:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2034978279615341014

  • THE SCOPE OF TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ATTEMPT TO CONTROL WORLD OIL PRICES AND SUPPLY

    THE SCOPE OF TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ATTEMPT TO CONTROL WORLD OIL PRICES AND SUPPLY
    The United States employs a multifaceted strategy to exert control over global oil supplies, often framed within broader geopolitical competition, particularly to limit adversaries like China’s access to affordable energy. This includes direct interventions, sanctions, military posture, alliances, and domestic policies. Below is a breakdown of key actions beyond those directly involving Venezuela and Iran (such as recent military interventions and sanctions that have disrupted Chinese imports from these sources).

    Sanctions and Enforcement on Other Oil Producers

    Russia: The US has maintained extensive sanctions on Russian oil exports since the Ukraine conflict, aiming to reduce Moscow’s revenues and limit discounted supplies to China (which has become a major buyer). However, in early 2026, the US temporarily lifted some sanctions on Russian oil to stabilize global markets amid price spikes from the Iran conflict. This selective easing demonstrates US leverage in modulating supply. Additionally, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) imposed new sanctions on major Russian firms like Rosneft and Lukoil in late 2025, further tightening control.
    Pressure on Buyers: The US has demanded that China cease imports of Russian and Iranian oil, using diplomatic and secondary sanctions to enforce compliance. This extends to using newly controlled Venezuelan oil to pressure countries like India to halt purchases of discounted Russian crude and to cut off supplies to Cuba.

    Military and Geopolitical Leverage in Key Regions

    Middle East Dominance: Through US Central Command (CENTCOM), the US maintains a significant military presence (over 30,000 troops, bases in allied countries) in the region, which holds nearly half of global oil reserves. In a conflict scenario, this allows the US to block oil shipments to China via chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz (handling ~20% of global oil flows and most of China’s Middle East imports), Suez Canal, or Bab al-Mandab. This posture preserves options to disrupt ~50% of China’s seaborne oil imports, enhancing US leverage in great-power competition.
    Engagement in Resource-Rich Areas: The US is expanding diplomatic and economic ties in Latin America (e.g., lithium in Chile/Argentina), Africa (to counter Chinese dominance in cobalt/rare earths), and Central Asia (oil/gas infrastructure investments) to diversify supply chains away from China and secure alliances. This indirectly influences oil flows by reducing China’s embedded presence in these regions.

    Domestic and Export Policies

    Boosting US Production and Exports: Under the “energy dominance” agenda in the 2025 National Security Strategy, the US has prioritized saturating global markets with American hydrocarbons (oil and LNG) to deepen alliances, provide energy security to Europe and Asia, and undercut adversaries’ revenues. US crude output averaged ~13.8 million barrels per day in 2025, with 2026 projections holding steady at ~13.5 million b/d, positioning the US as a “swing exporter.” New LNG facilities (e.g., Plaquemines, Golden Pass) are expanding capacity to ~16.3 billion cubic feet per day by 2026, further enhancing export leverage.
    Strategic Petroleum Reserve Management: The US uses its SPR (world’s largest at 714 million barrels capacity) to influence prices, with rebuilds since 2023 providing a buffer for releases during disruptions. President Trump has considered restricting US oil exports to manage domestic supply and curb inflation, prioritizing strategic stockpiling.

    Trade and Regulatory Tools

    Tariffs and Export Controls: Broad tariffs on imports (including energy-related tech) and restrictions on Chinese firms in clean energy/critical materials aim to slow China’s ascent and limit its access to advanced equipment, indirectly affecting global energy dynamics. Ongoing negotiations could adjust tariffs on oil/gas-related goods under sections like 232.
    Supply Chain Reshoring: Massive subsidies and incentives (e.g., via the Inflation Reduction Act remnants) rebuild US manufacturing for batteries, solar, and strategic tech, creating resilient chains outside China and treating industrial capacity as national defense.

    These efforts collectively aim to sustain US influence over ~20% of global oil production (including indirect control via Canada, Guyana, and Venezuela) while countering de-dollarization trends in energy trade. Analysts view this as seeking leverage against China, akin to China’s control over rare earths, by dominating energy supply chains. However, global oversupply projections for 2026 (e.g., 4 million b/d surplus) could temper prices, potentially deferring investments and setting up future shortages.

    Source date (UTC): 2026-03-14 02:58:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2032652448813428836

  • (Painful Humor) WE’VE BEEN HERE BEFORE…. (AI) 😉 –“We’re in the 1990’s porn p

    (Painful Humor)
    WE’VE BEEN HERE BEFORE…. (AI) 😉
    –“We’re in the 1990’s porn phase of 2020’s AI. There is a lot of early-entry nonsense being produced, almost none of it including material insight or durable economic value, but the result of all this ‘junk ai’ work is generating the hype that’s generating interest in the funding needed for the core R&D that might eventually pay off.”– (From a chat with Dr Brad)

    Humans are fascinating. They almost demonstrate intelligence. And they’re trying to make machines almost demonstrate it too. Meanwhile Chimpanzees are entering the stone age use of tools…. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2026-03-10 22:18:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2031495058139324745

  • @havivrettiggur Stunned by the extraordinary quality of your interview on the Wi

    @havivrettiggur

    Stunned by the extraordinary quality of your interview on the Winston Marshall Show released today March 7th.
    In one hour you provided the audience with more explanatory power constructed from rational incentives driving the shifts in the world, free of ideology or bias than I have seen worldwide on the matter.
    And your advice, particularly to Europeans was worth repeating and with emphasis.
    My training as a critic demands I provide some contribution rather than just fawning accolades. 😉
    So, I had only one minor comment: you are correct in your assessment of international law, however I might position it slightly different as a set of conventions that prevent conflict and assist in cooperation among first world polities during the postwar order. In this sense they are documentation of norms rather than laws – which was the point you elegantly made.
    Thanks again.
    Extraordinary.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2026-03-08 03:43:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2030489469120581659

  • Peter, (all); I disagree with the optimism. (a) our primary constraints at prese

    Peter, (all);
    I disagree with the optimism.
    (a) our primary constraints at present are the capacity to conduct tests that produce the information necessary for innovation.
    (b) our secondary constraints are the limit of human permutability (modeling) because of irreducibility of chemical, biochemical, biological, systems.
    (c) Our third constraint is the resistance of humans who have made investment and malinvestment in disciplines vs the population who has not or cannot.
    d) Our primary disadvantage is that siloing produces all sorts of negative externalities because of the inability to identify patterns across disciplines.
    e) Our primary advantage from AI is presently discovery of interstitial opportunity given the siloing of disciplines in order to ‘fit’ reasoning into a domain accessible to human cognition.
    I know in my case I had to master all the disciplines of high dimensionality and high closure (language, logic, neuroscience, economics, law, comparative civilization,) before I saw the failings of mathematics in particular and programming less so, and formal logic more so as the result of low dimensionality low closure – meaning low reducibility.
    So IQ: Not so much. Its value is limited to available information and the structure of that information. So AI? AI’s current advantage is associative breadth and depth despite it’s incapacity for innovative prediction other than by unregulated hallucination.
    So AI’s will expand the interstitial (inter-discipline) knowledge by discovery and application of patterns.
    But at some near point those discoveries will run out (be exhausted) for the same reason we have exhuasted the innovations of a century ago in physics most visibly, but in all sciences as well.
    Unfortunately, the constructivist and performative revolutions only partly succeeded, and unfortunately ‘philosophy’ went sideways and dead ended by the sixties. And while he’s still skewed more than a little, at least Wolfram has identified reducibility as the problem that cannot be overcome.
    Cheers
    CD

    Source date (UTC): 2026-03-03 21:34:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2028947194750136645

  • Because (a) forcing europe to pay her way instead of free riding on americans (b

    Because (a) forcing europe to pay her way instead of free riding on americans (b) depleting the russian war machine (c) depleting the russian economy (d) depleting the russian political class (e) in the hope that unification of russia into a federation with europe is possible.

    It’s been working flawlessly.

    Source date (UTC): 2026-03-02 17:53:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2028529184604303774

  • You will only be such a scholar if it interests you, and if the approval of othe

    You will only be such a scholar if it interests you, and if the approval of others means something to you, and your creativity is limited to patiently serving others. There are many interests competing for your attention, some of us want to control our applied creativity, and some of us couldn’t care less what others think, or delay gratification serving others academic ambitions. To make matters worse some of us develop the ‘fully suite’ earlier or later than others. Some of us just pursue what we want (especially in my generation: Gates, Jobs, Ellison) rather than seek approval necessary for academic performance.
    Only after you are quite skilled do you realize that anything that can be tested is of limited innovative value.

    Source date (UTC): 2026-03-01 23:41:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2028254288146026658

  • (WORTH READING) Sr Fellow Luke, on “AI Doesn’t Think It Has Incentives” (With Ru

    (WORTH READING)
    Sr Fellow Luke, on “AI Doesn’t Think It Has Incentives”
    (With Runcible (AI) + Oversing (Platform) we are trying to solve the problem of AI bias by avoiding universalism and instead explaining the incentives of the ‘sides’ and recommending possible exchanges that produce mutual benefit.)

    Source date (UTC): 2026-02-23 17:01:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2025979394720981166