There is no evidence anywhere that kin preference and kin selection are ever abandoned except at the margins, where there is a massive incentive to adjust classes (the bottom) or take advantage of shared advantage (the top) where we mate by profession and mind more than body and…
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-20 20:08:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704588313808568517
Reply addressees: @BasedTorba
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704575704728223865
Correct.
Or more generally: all human organizations produce calcification by means of free riding, rent seeking, and parasitism until they collapse by deviation from what is tolerable by the population within, or they are unable to respond (adapt) to any of the spectrum of…
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-20 18:33:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704564386084368722
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704558023388098727
That is true. But it is also true that they have no choice. So they merely make the rational choice. And I would have to agree with that choice. Yet having made that choice they require defense by others who made the opposite choice to pay for their choice. So is it really a…
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-20 14:51:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704508616500215958
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704507295739048298
There is no value in mining asteroids for prescous metals which if done, would only decrease the value of those metals via inflation of supply.
There is lilttle other than radioactive material that is worth mining, and unfortunately that material isn’t concentrated in dense form, but in small parts per million.
I had assumed that given Sol is a third or fourth generation star that there might be different elements of greater mass (energy) and density elsewhere in the universe, which would provide some promise of new sources of energy. But this appears to be either unlikely or irretreivable given the necessary density, temperature, and pressure.
My understanding, admittedly uncertain at present, is the value of asteroid mining is limited to use by ships, very large ones, that want to avoid the costs of gravity well resources, given the poor weight to cost ratio of going up and down that well.
Most of our science fiction and ambitions of the future are dependent upon finding something to power us safely with a far higher energy to weight and volume ratio than we are capable of producing today in any form.
At present our hopes are on cold fusion, but while the math says it’s possible, my undersetanding of the physics that this math describes says not.
Hence many of my criticisms of ‘mathiness’ in physics.
Reply addressees: @hawkevick @radiofreenw
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-19 20:49:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704236302659387394
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704218263243145604
Not at scale. And it is scale that combination of capital that produces that wealth which frees us from nature’s scarcity. 😉
I don’t hold these positions because I like to. I hold these positions because I will not lie to my people even if they desire so. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-19 20:28:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704230971698995564
Reply addressees: @radiofreenw
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704229755216875868
There is no rational incentive for the individual woman to engage in family formation and retention in this advanced economy other than during her offspring’s infancy. Marriage and family are an agrarian age institution of necessity. We are all rational actors. Even if men almost exclusively explain our actions rationally.
There is nothing to stop us from historical norms still observable in Africa where men and women lead totally separate lives, sometimes separated by small distance and boys leave mother to join men as soon as they mature enough to be able. Or, any other if the pre agrarian sexual organizations.
Reply addressees: @IvanIvez440026 @tim47386
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-19 16:13:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704166772813832193
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1704158743183732947
“WHO IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PERSON IN YOUR COMPANY?”
@TheEconomist
Despite that it made everyone uncomfortable I would at least once a year, at bi-annual strategy meetings draw a relationship between the money and the people who produced it from one direction, and then whom the people who worked in the company depended upon most from the bottom up. You sort of have to do this by location. And we tried to keep locations with some range of the Dunbar number.
This annual process of analysis ensures that the people who help the bbusines and the people who help the business execute are given their due.
Conversely we would identify people at risk, and associate partners (minor shareholders) would volunteer (and sometimes other staff) to make them successful. And it pretty much always worked.
I’ve been rightly accused as running my companies as social science experiments, and that’s largely true. But the flip side is that I build companies people want to work in, and who take care of each other and the customer. And I visciously cut out politicking and divisiveness root and stem at every opportunity.
We even had an anonymous gossip and question submission form, and answered those questions monthly.
Plus if you can’t tell from my writing here and elsewhere, I communicate with employees profusely.
Because in my mind, I want as many people depriving me of the work as possible.
If you didn’t know, that’s the mission of european aristocracy throughout the milennia. 😉
And I’m not sure there are many of us following that tradition left. 😉
https://t.co/l0hJA6i0Jl
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-19 04:12:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1703985509171712000
I do not see the incentives for extreme female behavior fading. And as long as the incentives exist the behavior exists whether feminist doctrine continues its evolution as ideology and propaganda in the academy and media.
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-18 21:42:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1703887315343450358
Reply addressees: @junkodama10
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1703874878166761797
–“husbands are outcompeted by money. Children are also outcompeted by money”–
I didn’t take it that far, but yes. More abstractly, you mean that women are, instinctually, selfish, consumption, stimulation, attention, status, signaling, gossiping, and hypergamy wh–rs that have no more self regulation than five year olds with candy in matters of society, economy, and politics – unless they have four or more children. There is a reason women have those instincts and without it applied to children as a regulator at ten, and as a mother before they’re fully mature at twenty-two, the evidence is that this spirals into catastrophe for society, economy, polity, and civilization. Pandora didn’t get the punishment she deserved. And we have given her the box, by the ballot.
And no, I absolutely hate knowing this – and it’s the one painful truth that I have most personally resisted. I wish desperately for the return of women to the pedestal. And that’s despite that as far as I know one of my most important contributions to the history of thought is to reduce all human differences to sex differences in cognition and behavior. So, while reducing all biology to evolution was controversial. Reducing all social science to demonstrated intersts (property) is something most rebel against. Reducing all human behavioral sciencde to sex differences in cognition is — well, I expect more hate directed at me than Darwin, Galileo, and Aristotle combined. 😉
Reply addressees: @RanjitCordeiro @decofuturism
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-18 20:49:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1703874011166334977
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1703870356489126124
I’m just aware of how very wealthy people hire others who specialize in investments to manage their money, and how those money managers, try to fit the individual’s tastes, strategy, reputation, and obvious transparency the public and government require. Most of the time very wealthy people and their financial managers have access to novel information that they can take advantage of, because they are swimming in strategic information by virtue of their many associations. In this case gates has a someone ‘religious’ devotion to medical technology, and his organization is deeply integrated with the care-giving world. So it’s hard for me to see malfeasancde in this trade because any such suggestion would require he has prescient knowledge of how this episode would play out. And I don’t know him very well, but that certainly doesn’t fit my undersetanding of him.
Reply addressees: @Decidibilidad @iluminatibot
Source date (UTC): 2023-09-18 18:30:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1703839022898946048
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1703828330053583078