Theme: Responsibility

  • INSURANCE FOR PUBLIC SPEECH? If one had to be insured to issue public speech (so

    INSURANCE FOR PUBLIC SPEECH?

    If one had to be insured to issue public speech (sort of like homeowners insurance – everyone had it) then we would rapidly evolve classes in making public speech, which would demonstrate how to witness (truth telling). (Heinlein suggested something of this order.) Now some speech advocates theft, and some does not. Some purports to convey truths, and some does not. This is essentially restoring the greek discipline of rhetoric in an age where media replicates faster than greek era human voices could quell. This is also much closer to anglo saxon law. Why is it that I an produce a ladder that subjects people to harm and am accountable, but if I advocate a political policy that causes millions of deaths, I am not accountable?

    (Looking for non-reactionary problems with this, without giving a lot more detail, so that I don’t color it too much.)


    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-27 02:00:00 UTC

  • Under Propertarianism, Operationalism Prevents Harm.

    —“[A]ll arguments put into the marketplace of ideas function as conceptual goods – products for our use. Now since we are producing goods we do have the ability if not the necessity to provide consumer protection. This is all that operationalism does for us. It doesnt say you’re doing good (telling the truth) it tests whether or not you are doing HARM. It makes sure that you’re not using verbalisms. Under Propertarianism we require you warranty your goods and services. And those warranties are subject to legal enforcement by universal standing where the loser pays.”—-

  • Under Propertarianism, Operationalism Prevents Harm.

    —“[A]ll arguments put into the marketplace of ideas function as conceptual goods – products for our use. Now since we are producing goods we do have the ability if not the necessity to provide consumer protection. This is all that operationalism does for us. It doesnt say you’re doing good (telling the truth) it tests whether or not you are doing HARM. It makes sure that you’re not using verbalisms. Under Propertarianism we require you warranty your goods and services. And those warranties are subject to legal enforcement by universal standing where the loser pays.”—-

  • SNIPPETS OF OATHS (truth, property, insurance : aristocracy) Speak the truth, ev

    SNIPPETS OF OATHS

    (truth, property, insurance : aristocracy)

    Speak the truth, even if it leads to your death.

    Take not that wasn’t justly paid for.

    Safeguard the helpless.

    Punish the wicked.

    Virtue knows no convenience and apology,

    Only duty, and celebration or mourning.

    Nobility is a choice.

    Choose.

    .


    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-24 03:23:00 UTC

  • (We not only tell the truth, we warranty our words.)

    (We not only tell the truth, we warranty our words.)


    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-20 10:01:00 UTC

  • ROTHBARDIANS CAN CLAIM THEY ARE ANARCHISTS AND LIBERTINES, BUT NOT LIBERTARIANS,

    ROTHBARDIANS CAN CLAIM THEY ARE ANARCHISTS AND LIBERTINES, BUT NOT LIBERTARIANS, OR ETHICAL AND MORAL MEN.

    Anarchist is true, libertine is true, libertarian is false, moral man is false.

    There is no liberty in rothbardian libertinism. No means of obtaining it nor means of holding it.

    Rothbard would have us return to the ethics of the nomadic pastoralists an their endemic warfare. We all bring our cultural heritage with us. As such we can look at the results of pastoral heritage. If we acted as Rothbards’ ghetto inhabitants, or Rothbards’ pastoralists, or Rothbard’s wandering merchants, we would be treated like them: landless, despised, ostracized, and frequently decimated. We cannot construct absurdly utopian social systems on absurdly unsuccessful social systems. The western militia led by professional warriors of equal status, is a unique social system.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-14 01:44:00 UTC

  • DEAR UKRAINIANS: THE PROBLEM IS YOU. Another day dealing with pervasive ukrainia

    DEAR UKRAINIANS: THE PROBLEM IS YOU.

    Another day dealing with pervasive ukrainian incompetence. If any protocol is non trivial in that it crosses boundaries of responsibikity, then in true soviet fashion there is a near certsinty a ukrainian will fuck it up by not handling the exception and instead laziliy and incompetently following the rule.

    And they dont even understand that they fucked up, or that the primary reason they are poor is their failure to understand that they fucked up.

    Here is the rule: if you ate aware of it or can be aware of it, its your problem until you are aware it is fixed completely.

    Soviet version is that you are only responsible for that about which you do not have to think.

    Every time you do not take responsibility for everything not right of which you are aware, you are stealing from the possible prosperity of you and your people.

    There are no conditions – ever – under which you are not responsible for that of which you are aware.

    Ukraine is poor because no one takes responsibility for making it prosper. And what makes a people prosper is not a few big things by government but a million billion tiny things by each individual.

    So the next time you wonder why you are poor, look in the mirror at the person to blame.

    If you are aware of it, then you must fix it until someone else promises you that they will fix it faster and better than you will instead.

    Ukraine is poor for this single reason. People do not pay for the common things that make a people economically efficient and free of risk to compete with the rest of the world.

    Look in the mirror.

    The problem is YOU. Not your culture, not your government, but YOU.

    The culture and the government are made of people just like YOU.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-13 04:38:00 UTC

  • OUT THERE ON THE HORIZON WITH WHATEVER CAPITAL YOU HAVE. I used to be so patient

    OUT THERE ON THE HORIZON WITH WHATEVER CAPITAL YOU HAVE.

    I used to be so patient with business partners, customers, employees, and to really work with them to try to help them to understand whatever broader point I was trying to get across. And I worked constantly on my business partners and board members in particular, to help them ‘see’ what I always took to be relatively obvious, or to get them to test what I saw what but was unsure of.

    As a CEO I assume I am wrong, and use my management team to test my theories. If I cannot get them on board, then I assume my theory is either wrong or insufficiently thought out. For this reason we did and I always did, try to get unanimous consent. (This turns out to be a deterministic behavior resulting from INTP personalities, but I didn’t know that at the time.)

    Of course, back then, while I understood the scientific method, Popperian skepticism, the theory of incentives and Austrian economics, the problem of ‘calculation’, and of course, market competition, I did not have Propertarianism figured out, or the relationship between Operationalism and Intuitionism and performative truth, even though I had intuited some aspects of it much earlier.

    So what I saw as open to intuition if I just pressed on with people, and kept trying to ‘help them see’, was really not available to them at all. I think like most people they saw pedagogy, fragments of reason, end results of my efforts, but they never really understood much at all. And that’s because it was so vast a leap, that it was impossible.

    So in retrospect, while I am still angry that I could not get them to help me avoid the recession-depression, nor recover from it, they paid in their wealth for not helping me.

    But it was far too much to expect from even well read, well educated, scientifically knowledgeable, technology savvy, financially sophisticated, business savvy people. I might as well have been talking to high school kids.

    And I sort of feel sorry for them instead. An myself. For my naivety. Lacking sufficient empathy, I was unable to intuit what ordinary people do, or what ordinary professors usually do.

    This is the first time I have felt this kind of revelation. Which is again, a problem of autistic incompetence. Incompetence only solved through the kind of neurogenesis we get from time and mental exercise. Just as we repair our ability to walk or think after an accident. Food, water, sleep and mental exercise.

    Businesses are run by above average people, employ average people, and by and large serve average and below average people. Very smart people rarely accumulate great wealth, because nothing in that process is all that interesting really. Until the rise of technology, which all but eliminated the capital requirements for the creation of disruptive business value. (although, I suspect, like the competitive value of electricity, the competitive value of this era of ‘calculating’ software has nearly reached its zenith. And it will require ‘thinking’ software to create another such leap. And as such the world returns to normal: above average people run everything of consequence, in the service of average and below average people. And exceptional people make-do with the playthings and problems available to them.

    The only place for people like me (and some of you) is in entrepreneurial positions where we do not require a great deal of external consent in order to compete and innovate. Because it is impossible to equip external parties with the knowledge and understanding to make rational choices. They can only gamble on what they cannot understand using fragments of what they do understand. And for us, that means largely self funding one’s efforts.

    If you are sufficiently out there on the horizon then you are standing there, alone, with whatever capital you have.

    Same goes for philosophy.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-05 12:16:00 UTC

  • What Can The Indian Government Do To Protect The Rights Of Indian Laborers In Foreign Countries Especially In The Middle East? Why Has It Not Taken Any Action Till Now?

    Nothing other than trade sanctions, which would only cause those countries to deport the workers. 

    One has no “rights” external to the territory we stand in.  That is a phrase of modern mysticism.  The USA postwar effort to encourage all states to care for their citizens in order to be treated as legitimate is or was a function of US military and Ideological dominance.

    As the postwar consensus fails, and american hegemony declines, and the american mandate for fixed borders and human rights declines, and america can no longer project sufficient power to mandate fixed borders and human tights, neither fixed borders nor human rights will remain. 

    We have seen Russia conquer Ukraine.  Mexico invade the USA through mass immigration. Israel extend its borders. China invade russia through mass immigration.  China conquer the nearby sea and threaten Japan. And ISIS and Iran try to reestablish the caliphate.

    Meanwhile the euro project is failing. Civil wars and and secessionist  movements are spreading.

    So if you cant keep your own country’s economic house in order (and india cant because of corruption – india is too big), and the USA cannot play world policeman, then you will be subject to whatever arbitrary rules exist wherever you are standing.

    https://www.quora.com/What-can-the-Indian-government-do-to-protect-the-rights-of-Indian-laborers-in-foreign-countries-especially-in-the-Middle-East-Why-has-it-not-taken-any-action-till-now

  • CONTRA JUSTIFIED TRUE BELIEF Justified true belief is not an important question

    CONTRA JUSTIFIED TRUE BELIEF

    Justified true belief is not an important question – it is purely utilitarian. Your belief is not an ethical question. Your testimony is however, an ethical question. . You may believe whatever you have knowledge of use of. But you may not testify that you know that which you cannot construct in operational language.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-06-18 13:21:00 UTC