Apr 25, 2020, 7:07 PM by Scott De Warren When we won the revolutionary war the losers were required by and large to vacate the territory. Exceptions were made for honorable Tory members that had not taken up arms against the patriots or support to the loyalists. Everyone else had to pack up and go. Why shouldn’t this be the precedent we follow. If we kick out our own kinsmen how much more should be not kick out an enemy group after the conflict? (CD: this is one of the propositions that has to be stated)
Theme: Responsibility
-
We must be patient
May 1, 2020, 12:12 PM [S]ometimes parents must be patient with their children; spouses must be patient with their mates; teachers must be patient with students; executives must be patient with their employees. Because we all must ‘own’ our decisions and our status-self-image system, as well as our cognitive investment in current network of ideas, plans, and habits resists pressure to adapt – except at our own speed and on our own terms. So people must own their adaptation – because they must weigh the costs and benefits and come to own their choices. Sometimes it takes minutes, sometimes hours, sometimes months, and sometimes years. So plant seeds rather than persuade, convince, or coerce. And leave the door open. And resist the call of pride in saying “I told you so”. Instead deliver the reward of “I hoped you would.”
-
We must be patient
May 1, 2020, 12:12 PM [S]ometimes parents must be patient with their children; spouses must be patient with their mates; teachers must be patient with students; executives must be patient with their employees. Because we all must ‘own’ our decisions and our status-self-image system, as well as our cognitive investment in current network of ideas, plans, and habits resists pressure to adapt – except at our own speed and on our own terms. So people must own their adaptation – because they must weigh the costs and benefits and come to own their choices. Sometimes it takes minutes, sometimes hours, sometimes months, and sometimes years. So plant seeds rather than persuade, convince, or coerce. And leave the door open. And resist the call of pride in saying “I told you so”. Instead deliver the reward of “I hoped you would.”
-
It’s Our Duty to Protect Those Victimized by Baiting Into Hazard
It’s Our Duty to Protect Those Victimized by Baiting Into Hazard https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/09/its-our-duty-to-protect-those-victimized-by-baiting-into-hazard/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 14:59:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259135915513053190
-
It’s Our Duty to Protect Those Victimized by Baiting Into Hazard
May 3, 2020, 5:51 PM by Scott De Warren [N]oblesse oblige. Yes, ironically, It is our duty to protect our people, especially the majority that lack agency and the discernment to detect the enemy’s propaganda that baits them into hazard (and pulls the rest of us down with them). The irony is that these, our own people, constantly betray us by siding with the enemy. In England, France, and even America our people were encouraged to rebel against their king and aristocracy – often on the thinnest of pretexts. In the American revolution, for ex., Samuel Adams organized the rough dock workers to attack the upper classes and destroy their fine houses over what was essentially a 1% tax imposed by Britain on legal papers. Now the descendants of those dockworkers pay 50% taxes without blinking. Yet they will still rail against kings and aristocrats – the ones that taxed them 1% to protect them militarily while praising foreign hostiles that tax them 50% while taking way their borders, liberties, and that sponsor third world invasions because it is all sold as ‘democratic’. No, the people will be protected from such lies going forward by making the liars answerable in a court of law.
—“You have no duty to those that have betrayed you. If anything, the duty to those that haven’t betrayed you is to punish those that have.”—Martin Štěpán
-
It’s Our Duty to Protect Those Victimized by Baiting Into Hazard
May 3, 2020, 5:51 PM by Scott De Warren [N]oblesse oblige. Yes, ironically, It is our duty to protect our people, especially the majority that lack agency and the discernment to detect the enemy’s propaganda that baits them into hazard (and pulls the rest of us down with them). The irony is that these, our own people, constantly betray us by siding with the enemy. In England, France, and even America our people were encouraged to rebel against their king and aristocracy – often on the thinnest of pretexts. In the American revolution, for ex., Samuel Adams organized the rough dock workers to attack the upper classes and destroy their fine houses over what was essentially a 1% tax imposed by Britain on legal papers. Now the descendants of those dockworkers pay 50% taxes without blinking. Yet they will still rail against kings and aristocrats – the ones that taxed them 1% to protect them militarily while praising foreign hostiles that tax them 50% while taking way their borders, liberties, and that sponsor third world invasions because it is all sold as ‘democratic’. No, the people will be protected from such lies going forward by making the liars answerable in a court of law.
—“You have no duty to those that have betrayed you. If anything, the duty to those that haven’t betrayed you is to punish those that have.”—Martin Štěpán
-
Dear Normies: On Intelligence
May 4, 2020, 8:39 PM DEAR NORMIES That’s not what intelligence does for you. Available intelligence vs demonstrated intelligence. You can have it, you must be willing to and enjoy using it, and you must be wiling to and enjoy using it competitively, and using it competitively by working harder and longer than your peers. Intelligence is the rate at which you learn by identifying patterns of constant relations (opportunities) and inconstant relations (errors, falsehoods, costs) As IQ increases from todays ~105/106 – the point at which you can follow instructions, repair a machine, learn by reading (build a world model from written instructions instead of being instructed), the rate at which you can learn and detect errors increases (the scope of the world model you can construct from facts outside direct physical experience). About every seven points (half a standard deviation) we can distinguish differences in ability. At about every fifteen (one full difference) we have distinct advantages over one another. As we increase in that difference we have increasing difficulty talking to one another because our frames (world models) vary in complexity: meaning degrees of abstraction. At thirty points (two standard deviations) it is quite difficult to communicate to one another. 95 is about the requirement for working in a medical office. By 85 you are all but untrainable. Below 85 even the military can’t find anything you can do without endangering others. So when a person believes he or she is intelligent and that intelligence doesn’t matter, he correctly identifies that for the scope of problems he is aware of, that if he is given time he will figure it out. For the 2/3 of people under the ‘average’ bell curve this is true. The problem is, y’all haven’t tried to teach anyone with a 80-90 iq to even flip a burger or reliably not break the equipment. And you have no experience with anything even vaguely difficult. Which is why you’re ‘average’, and struggle with these (relatively simple) concepts. And it’s why people like me found a dozen companies and solve the great problems of the age, and people like my current hero stephen wolfram solves the problem of mathematics of the age. In other words, you aren’t competent to get access to the people who run the world because your very presence makes everyone in the room dumber. There are rooms in this world I’m not competent to get access to because I lack interest in political and commercial power, compared to intellectual and wealth power. THe difference is that I could if I want have chosen that path. Average people can’t choose those paths. And they can’t even comprehend what the mind of people with much larger world models in mind, changing daily, adapting daily, think like or feel. The world above normals is purely empirical. We search for opportunities, and we have the power to act on them – because people trust us not to ‘break the machinery’. That’s what’s hard to grasp. I know how a bill gates, steve ballmer, steve jobs, the leadership at goldman sachs, the president and senate, any given general, and the top tenth of a percent of intellectuals in the world, see the world. It is not ‘unknowable’. It’s uncontrollable. Because it takes those very capable people to run the world, with all the technology and knowledge, institutions available to us. === (FWIW: 106 is the sort of ‘minimum average iq’ for a democratic polity – which is why they’re failing. About 115 is the target, and I assume 120 would be the optimum possible.)
-
Dear Normies: On Intelligence
May 4, 2020, 8:39 PM DEAR NORMIES That’s not what intelligence does for you. Available intelligence vs demonstrated intelligence. You can have it, you must be willing to and enjoy using it, and you must be wiling to and enjoy using it competitively, and using it competitively by working harder and longer than your peers. Intelligence is the rate at which you learn by identifying patterns of constant relations (opportunities) and inconstant relations (errors, falsehoods, costs) As IQ increases from todays ~105/106 – the point at which you can follow instructions, repair a machine, learn by reading (build a world model from written instructions instead of being instructed), the rate at which you can learn and detect errors increases (the scope of the world model you can construct from facts outside direct physical experience). About every seven points (half a standard deviation) we can distinguish differences in ability. At about every fifteen (one full difference) we have distinct advantages over one another. As we increase in that difference we have increasing difficulty talking to one another because our frames (world models) vary in complexity: meaning degrees of abstraction. At thirty points (two standard deviations) it is quite difficult to communicate to one another. 95 is about the requirement for working in a medical office. By 85 you are all but untrainable. Below 85 even the military can’t find anything you can do without endangering others. So when a person believes he or she is intelligent and that intelligence doesn’t matter, he correctly identifies that for the scope of problems he is aware of, that if he is given time he will figure it out. For the 2/3 of people under the ‘average’ bell curve this is true. The problem is, y’all haven’t tried to teach anyone with a 80-90 iq to even flip a burger or reliably not break the equipment. And you have no experience with anything even vaguely difficult. Which is why you’re ‘average’, and struggle with these (relatively simple) concepts. And it’s why people like me found a dozen companies and solve the great problems of the age, and people like my current hero stephen wolfram solves the problem of mathematics of the age. In other words, you aren’t competent to get access to the people who run the world because your very presence makes everyone in the room dumber. There are rooms in this world I’m not competent to get access to because I lack interest in political and commercial power, compared to intellectual and wealth power. THe difference is that I could if I want have chosen that path. Average people can’t choose those paths. And they can’t even comprehend what the mind of people with much larger world models in mind, changing daily, adapting daily, think like or feel. The world above normals is purely empirical. We search for opportunities, and we have the power to act on them – because people trust us not to ‘break the machinery’. That’s what’s hard to grasp. I know how a bill gates, steve ballmer, steve jobs, the leadership at goldman sachs, the president and senate, any given general, and the top tenth of a percent of intellectuals in the world, see the world. It is not ‘unknowable’. It’s uncontrollable. Because it takes those very capable people to run the world, with all the technology and knowledge, institutions available to us. === (FWIW: 106 is the sort of ‘minimum average iq’ for a democratic polity – which is why they’re failing. About 115 is the target, and I assume 120 would be the optimum possible.)
-
Are you a liar? Are you equating guilt by entrapment with guilt by design? Are y
Are you a liar? Are you equating guilt by entrapment with guilt by design? Are you countering legal reform that seeks to add Intent to means, motive, and opportunity?
We know what pilpul is.
That’s why we’re going to make it illegal.
And you’ll be out of business – or in prison.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-08 18:54:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258832667832979457
Reply addressees: @mrbromwich
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258484189869080577
-
(Imagine what would happen if we kept credit ratings, but ended debt collection.
(Imagine what would happen if we kept credit ratings, but ended debt collection. We might not have to do anything else.)
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-07 12:14:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258369739505586176
Reply addressees: @YvesBurri @EricLiford @Nationalist7346
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258369025073127425
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@YvesBurri @EricLiford @Nationalist7346 P increases the scope of the law to cover both false promise, and baiting into hazard, at contractual ( private contracts ) and political ( contracts of the commons ) scales. This is the weakness in the current law.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1258369025073127425