Property in propertarianism is like quant in quantum mechanics: a system of measurement of complex phenomenon.
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-23 17:36:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1131614873199161344
Theme: Measurement
-
Free trade regardless of cost vs any trade that does not externalize cost. Failu
Free trade regardless of cost vs any trade that does not externalize cost. Failure to account for genetic, social, institutional capital. Measuring consumption rather than productivity. etc.
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-17 11:08:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1129342997450166273
Reply addressees: @PoseidonAwoke
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1129338746107830272
IN REPLY TO:
@PoseidonAwoke
@curtdoolittle Accounting requires a boundary : external vs internal. The trick is in how the boundary is defined = gerrymandering = “cherry picking”. I get that. What are the features of capitalism that function to move/hide the boundary? (discretionary)
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1129338746107830272
-
The problem with economics, which Taleb states somewhat poorly, is selective acc
The problem with economics, which Taleb states somewhat poorly, is selective accounting of measured capital and the use of pseudoscientific, quantitative sophism (innumeracy), and linguistic sophistry, to obscure export of cost and risk, without warranty of due diligence.
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-11 18:14:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1127275884434604032
Reply addressees: @Bryan_of_Sweden @JayMan471
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1127256226990055424
IN REPLY TO:
@Bryan_of_Sweden
@curtdoolittle @JayMan471 Based on a specific scientific theory? I assume your theory is not be-all & end-all of this subject?Theories are always based on ceratin types of evidence & reasoning,if it within the realm of economic theory it is also highly probable that it will never be proved consclusively.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1127256226990055424
-
I separate what I intuit, from what I can write a proof for, from what groups ex
I separate what I intuit, from what I can write a proof for, from what groups express in normative and legal force. That’s the purpose of my work: to produce a formal operational logic that makes in nearly impossible to engage in the pretense of knowledge, or ignorance of bias.
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-11 14:58:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1127226577429893121
Reply addressees: @Bryan_of_Sweden @JayMan471
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1127218604947193856
IN REPLY TO:
@Bryan_of_Sweden
@curtdoolittle @JayMan471 Ok, do you ever think about your own thinking? I know many people who are not fully aware of the influences that affect it, it can include fairly basic things as preconceptions, biases & certain things that they take for granted, gaps in the relevant knowledge.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1127218604947193856
-
I don’t make mistakes. you’re defining feminine and masculine by arbitrary measu
I don’t make mistakes. you’re defining feminine and masculine by arbitrary measure and I am by methods of conflict. Islam abandons reason, emphasizes subjectivity, emotional indiscipline, lying, underming, familism, equality, parasitism female cognitive and conflict strategy.
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-07 17:03:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125808260966223875
Reply addressees: @MetaMetaGhost @johann_theron
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125795851190693890
IN REPLY TO:
@MetaMetaGhost
@curtdoolittle @johann_theron Nope you are hopelessly wrong. Islam = counter reaction to Judeo Christianity from the bottom. Hence more openly violent. Lacks intellect for deception. More masculine. Everything is relative. It’s clear between X & Y which one is evolutionarily more stable. The rest are details.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125795851190693890
-
We can understand the curve and vary our actions in relation to conditions, as l
We can understand the curve and vary our actions in relation to conditions, as long as we stay within the ‘truth’ of the curve. So rather than ideals, ranges. This is one of the central principles I’m trying to teach: there are optimum institutions govt depends on conditions.
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-06 12:46:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125381423391805442
Reply addressees: @I_Vae_Victis_I
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125377819280855040
IN REPLY TO:
@I_Vae_Victis_I
@curtdoolittle If men’s desires are within a set and that set is limited to the constraints of Nature*, can we then find the optimal, and within that optimal have a bell curve where subjective value resides?
*Realizing that technology can push this boundary, but that’s for later discussions.Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125377819280855040
-
So in the sense you mean math (positional naming for scale independent measureme
So in the sense you mean math (positional naming for scale independent measurement), or the grammar facility (continuous recursive disambiguation), exchange is a facility like grammar. But yes, markets are an institutional byproduct of continuous suppression of criminality.
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-05 19:44:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125124127227031553
Reply addressees: @vgr
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125111210184065024
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125111210184065024
-
“greater precision often reveals new dimensions of ignorance”—Micah Pezdirtz
—“greater precision often reveals new dimensions of ignorance”—Micah Pezdirtz
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-03 22:53:51 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1124447003709042688
-
“We are moving towards greater precision, yet never achieving perfection, which
—“We are moving towards greater precision, yet never achieving perfection, which is ok. With each leap of precision we revolutionize society.”— Noah J Revoy
(technically speaking we shift the window of marginal utility, but the general sentiment is correct.)
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-03 21:58:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1124433173046149122
-
Um. Because ratios are scale independent. That’s why. For some reason this is a
Um. Because ratios are scale independent. That’s why. For some reason this is a cognitive problem for us. Positional names produce ratios. In this sense there is only one reference, ‘one’. and many references (numbers) each of which is a ratio.
Source date (UTC): 2019-05-03 14:18:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1124317291569655808