[Previous] Simple Communication | Home | [Next] Dancing Sucks

Good People

Where are all the smart, rational people interested in intellectual discussion?

Can anyone find some somewhere besides FI?

Or is the world just kinda full of fools?

Reply in the comments below.

Elliot Temple on April 30, 2016

Comments (99)

A lot of them are leftists or centrists.

You need someone who likes Ayn Rand but isn't a christian conservative.

Anonymous at 9:25 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5147
You can also try to convert fools (willing to change) into intelligent rational people.

Anonymous at 9:28 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5148
I haven't found any.

Don't you think smart people will be smart enough to find you?

Anonymous at 9:33 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5149
> A lot of them are leftists or centrists.

I was a leftist and I've found FI.

Anonymous at 9:40 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5150
A lot of smart people are unwilling to change their mind.

Anonymous at 9:42 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5151
You want philosophy to be mainstream if you want more smart people.

There are really smart people out there who are inventing great things but are not interested in philosophy.

SK Person at 9:44 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5152
the smart, rational people interested in discussion are already dead.
the smart, rational people keep to their circle jerks.
the smart people are too 'busy' doing things.

Anonymous at 10:39 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5153
> There are really smart people out there who are inventing great things but are not interested in philosophy.

How are they really smart and capable of inventing great things if they don't know philosophy?

Are there static memes who allow high level of smartness?

Anonymous at 10:40 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5154
>There are really smart people out there who are inventing great things but are not interested in philosophy.
bullshit. where? i only ever see small progressive things and dumb things with at best good intentions.

Anonymous at 10:48 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5155
>> There are really smart people out there who are inventing great things but are not interested in philosophy.
>
> bullshit. where? i only ever see small progressive things and dumb things with at best good intentions.

isn't technology progressing? medicine?

Anonymous at 10:59 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5156
>isn't technology progressing? medicine?
>>small progressive things

Anonymous at 11:06 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5157
>isn't technology progressing? medicine?
>>small progressive things

why do you think they are small?
what would be great instead of small?

why is there small progress but no great progress?

Anonymous at 11:20 PM on April 30, 2016 | #5158
Steve Jobs was a hippie with a lot of bad ideas in his head.

I don't think Bill Gates is interested in Ayn Rand either. He is left leaning.

Anonymous at 12:00 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5159
>why do you think they are small?
>what would be great instead of small?

>why is there small progress but no great progress?

Any progress is better than no progress.

Finding fake cures by overreaching scientists would be bad.

Anonymous at 12:02 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5160
> the smart, rational people keep to their circle jerks.

that doesn't sound very rational.

> I was a leftist and I've found FI.

me too

> You need someone who likes Ayn Rand but isn't a christian conservative.

unargued attacks on some ill-defined, large group of Americans don't help

curi at 12:23 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5161
>>isn't technology progressing? medicine?
>>>small progressive things
>
>why do you think they are small?

do you read HN? tech isn't progressing much. people are too focused on making websites and IOT for non-problems than learning about solutions invented in the past.

have you read Addison Wesley - Robert L Glass - Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering? there's a paragraph in there from Steve Jenkin that the average experience level of the software profession has remained constant over time. i've also heard a variant form of this argument in other places. that there hasn't been significant progress in computer science since the 70s.

there has been what i call small progress in things surrounding medical treatments and whatever you can solve in autocad.

>what would be great instead of small?

real, implemented virtual intelligence. not more theoretical garbage or statistics machines.
negligible senescence
mind uploading
QM being taken seriously
philosophy being taken seriously
interstellar travel
basic income

>why is there small progress but no great progress?

static memes. bad parents. schools. it's hard for people to make progress when they're raised by dumb fucking parents and then thrown into school to be lectured by an even bigger idiot until they're old enough to basically have a duplicate copy of their parent's stupidity along with a mix of good and bad ideas they picked up from other kids. after all this they still have to make money to not be a 'failure' and also live. so there isn't much time to be thinking on things that aren't laid out on their 'career path'. once a career is established it's generally rare for them to recognize anything outside convention. they can't even conceive of a large number of ideas if someone were to make them a topic of conversation.

Anonymous at 12:35 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5162
> basic income

my basic income will be paid for by whom? voluntarily!?

if everyone pays for and receives one basic income it will cancel out. so your plan is to fuck the rich? or fuck some unpopular group(s)? who will consent why? or do you not care about consent?

curi at 12:40 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5163
> I was a leftist and I've found FI.

>>me too

What does that mean?

You created Fallible Ideas.

You were a leftie before you created FI?

Anonymous at 12:47 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5164
Fuck the minimum wage.

The minimum wage worker's productivity is very low.

They should be paid below $1 an hour to encourage them to find a better fucking skill.

Anonymous at 12:49 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5165
> You created Fallible Ideas.

i was a lefty when i found TCS. FI wasn't created from scratch, there was already a community which i didn't originally create.

curi at 12:49 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5166
> You created Fallible Ideas.

>i was a lefty when i found TCS. FI wasn't created from scratch, there >was already a community which i didn't originally create.

How did you change your deeply held socialist beliefs so quickly?

Anonymous at 12:57 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5167
> You created Fallible Ideas.

>i was a lefty when i found TCS. FI wasn't created from scratch, there >was already a community which i didn't originally create.

TCS is a take childrens seriously group.

Why & how did they discuss politics?

Anonymous at 12:59 AM on May 1, 2016 | #5168
> basic income

explain!

Anonymous at 3:39 PM on May 1, 2016 | #5169
> Why & how did they discuss politics?

there are connections between ideas. field boundaries are somewhat arbitrary.

Anonymous at 3:40 PM on May 1, 2016 | #5170
Are fools not allowed on FI?

If FI is only for smart people why does Rami recruit fools & Losers?

I am confused.

Do you want the best of the best or anyone who is ready to change their mind?

Anonymous at 10:15 AM on May 3, 2016 | #5171
dumb, ignorant, foolish, etc, people are allowed in general. Rami's recruiting policy is bad. it'd be better to only actively recruit promising people.

Anonymous at 2:02 PM on May 3, 2016 | #5172
>dumb, ignorant, foolish, etc, people are allowed in general. Rami's recruiting policy is bad. it'd be better to only actively recruit promising people.

Why not have separate group for people are really bad at reason & rationality and promote them into main FI if they ever improve?

Anonymous at 10:41 AM on May 4, 2016 | #5175
> Why not have separate group for people are really bad at reason & rationality and promote them into main FI if they ever improve?

feel free to make one if you think you can get enough people interested in posting there.

curi at 5:11 PM on May 4, 2016 | #5177
>>what would be great instead of small?
>
>real, implemented virtual intelligence. not more theoretical >garbage or statistics machines.
>negligible senescence
>mind uploading
>QM being taken seriously
>philosophy being taken seriously
>interstellar travel
>basic income


Seems like you're measuring greatness by prophesying what good ideas should come next.

And judging everyone as bad because they're not meeting your prophecy.

Anonymous at 3:04 AM on May 7, 2016 | #5180
(in response to the OP)

Wouldn't all the smart, rational people join FI?

So at most, if you meet a smart, rational person then they would only temporarily be outside of FI before you recruit them.

So has the population of smart, rational people been a constant for a long time?



Alternate explanation for low/nil recruitment of smart, rational people:
You're ineffective at finding new people.

FI does not look appealing. Lots of varied content that even smart, rational people will not all be interested in the proportion of. Lots of mediocre content to waste time skipping.

Hard to see how much quality there is without serious study. So there's an overhead cost to appreciating FI. You need to sell FI more effectively, make the value more clear, stop expecting people to do you the favour of putting a ton of effort into appreciating FI.

Anonymous at 3:49 AM on May 7, 2016 | #5184
Clarification:
> So has the population of smart, rational people been a constant for a long time?

I mean the population of smart, rational people *in FI*

Anonymous at 3:52 AM on May 7, 2016 | #5185
i think i'm good at finding people who have good ideas.

i don't think there's any good Objectivists or Popperians out there to find who are awesome and want to be found in English.

people who don't know Rand *or* Popper are so clueless about so much. they have so much to learn. there's such a big gap. it can be hard. it'll take them years to catch up.

i don't think my websites are good at marketing. but that wouldn't matter if you were trying to recruit me. i don't get involved with stuff because it has good marketing. that's not what i look for. i think the best people will be attracted by good ideas, not by marketing.

placing higher on Google, for more search terms, would help, though.

if someone actually joins FI list, it's easy to see it's great. they can say one thing, get criticism, find out they were mistaken. repeat several times and be really impressed. it's harder to see it's great if you don't say anything and just silently believe some of your unspoken negative judgements of posts – but why would a really great person do things that way?

> You need to sell FI more effectively, make the value more clear, stop expecting people to do you the favour of putting a ton of effort into appreciating FI.

I don't need to. i don't have to. i can do things i like to do.

the post wasn't about recruiting. it was about finding reason in the world anywhere. i think basically i got so good that i can't find people in the world who are anywhere close. what's more possible to find is someone who's interested in learning. but those are very hard to find.

i don't have a significant issue with recruiting people that matter. it's finding anyone worth recruiting that's a big problem.

curi at 10:07 AM on May 7, 2016 | #5188
>Seems like you're measuring greatness by prophesying what good ideas should come next

>>i only ever see small progressive things
>>here is a list of examples that would be great progress
>... i think you're prophesying

???

Anonymous at 1:20 PM on May 7, 2016 | #5191
I can't tell who posted that list. most anonymous comments aren't very surprising, but that one is weird to me. i don't get it. who comes here, writes that list, and then sticks 'basic income' on it? the list seemed like it could be a person familiar with FI, except then "basic income" completely doesn't.

then they didn't follow up ever when asked about it.

Anonymous at 4:42 PM on May 7, 2016 | #5193
> who comes here, writes that list, and then sticks 'basic income' on it?

people that arrive on FI from the home ed subculture in the UK.

Anonymous at 11:22 PM on May 7, 2016 | #5194
> people that arrive on FI from the home ed subculture in the UK.

the newer ones with no clue about economics don't normally know anything about SENS.

Anonymous at 1:28 AM on May 8, 2016 | #5195
>>Seems like you're measuring greatness by prophesying what good >ideas should come next
>
>>>i only ever see small progressive things
>>>here is a list of examples that would be great progress
>>... i think you're prophesying

If you're going to paraphrase you shouldn't present it as a quote.

>
>???

I don't know what the question is.

Anonymous at 3:26 AM on May 8, 2016 | #5198
>if someone actually joins FI list, it's easy to see it's great. they can say one thing, get criticism, find out they were mistaken. repeat several times and be really impressed. it's harder to see it's great if you don't say anything and just silently believe some of your unspoken negative judgements of posts – but why would a really great person do things that way?

They wouldn't. I agree.

I think my comments were based on my perception of FI which is clouded by my own hangups. It was easy to see the value when I first posted. Not so much now.

I also think I started getting lower-value responses because I was only writing mediocre posts. Or maybe the responses look mediocre to me because I'm stopping myself seeing the value.


> I don't need to. i don't have to. i can do things i like to do.
> the post wasn't about recruiting. it was about finding reason in the world anywhere. i think basically i got so good that i can't find people in the world who are anywhere close. what's more possible to find is someone who's interested in learning. but those are very hard to find.

Right. I can't remember how I mixed that up, hard to problem-solve what process caused me to make that mistake.

I need to be check the context I'm responding to more thoroughly. I think that'll help, at least.

Anonymous at 3:39 AM on May 8, 2016 | #5199
I consider anyone who is great in any particular field to be smart.

A lot of them have gone through with their lives without philosophy.

Some few who dabbled with philosophy did so for vague reasons and did not follow any particular idea in their own lives.

Anonymous at 11:59 AM on May 8, 2016 | #5204
what's your point?

Anonymous at 12:23 PM on May 8, 2016 | #5207
Have you ever considered the possibility that perhaps you're a fool and suck?

Anonymous at 6:14 PM on May 8, 2016 | #5215
yes

Anonymous at 6:54 PM on May 8, 2016 | #5216
Have you ever considered the possibility that perhaps you're a fool and suck?

Who are you addressing here?

Anonymous at 4:36 AM on May 9, 2016 | #5218
you should specify who you're talking to better.

Anonymous at 5:38 AM on May 9, 2016 | #5219
>I also think I started getting lower-value responses because I was only >writing mediocre posts. Or maybe the responses look mediocre to me >because I'm stopping myself seeing the value.

learn to see value.

Anonymous at 9:48 AM on May 9, 2016 | #5222
> I also think I started getting lower-value responses because I was only writing mediocre posts.

Or writing posts that are easy to attack, e.g. saying anything personal or using yourself as an example.

If you ignore people giving you off-topic criticisms about whether you're a "fool" or not, and avoid giving any personal information, do you get better responses?

Anonymous at 1:52 AM on May 15, 2016 | #5239
> learn to see value.

What if he's right and they're mediocre?

Anonymous at 1:54 AM on May 15, 2016 | #5240
an aside - but how does one avoid giving personal information when posting? posts have meta-information and people can use that to learn things about me. things like time of posting, frequency of typos, words I commonly use, punctuation style, topics I mention and don't mention etc. if I bring up some problem hypothetically ppl can ask why am I talking abt that and infer maybe I have that problem. a deep dive on my meta-info is gonna reveal a lot. sure I can post anonymously but it is harder to disguise my meta-info signature.

I think the idea of not revealing personal info is a fiction.

Anonymous at 5:26 AM on May 15, 2016 | #5243
you won't reveal ZERO about yourself. so what? what's your point?

Anonymous at 6:26 AM on May 15, 2016 | #5244
haha u read that I want to reveal zero info abt myself. how come? I didn't intend that meaning.

Anonymous at 4:13 PM on May 15, 2016 | #5245
it doesn't matter. you talked about not revealing zero. what is your point? i ASKED what your point is instead of building my comment around an assumption.

you didn't answer either question.

Anonymous at 4:17 PM on May 15, 2016 | #5246
whoa slow down - I was trying to understand ur first question:

> you won't reveal ZERO about yourself, so what?

I think I totally misinterpreted.

Anonymous at 5:00 PM on May 15, 2016 | #5247
> you won't reveal ZERO about yourself

that is agreeing, factually, with some of what you were saying.

Anonymous at 5:01 PM on May 15, 2016 | #5248
gotcha now! man did I read that wrong :)

so I'm saying something like u can't avoid giving out personal info. ur asking so what?

well some of that info u might not want out there or have an obligation not to reveal.

so one thing I'm wondering is what a new joiner to FI list should do? I'm concerned in the particular case of the person having a child or children. for example, should they be advised to post anon, at least at first?

Anonymous at 7:08 PM on May 15, 2016 | #5249
i'm not seeing the downside to a new kid posting anon – and generally to using an anonymous email account with the internet in general. so sounds like a good idea.

Anonymous at 7:18 PM on May 15, 2016 | #5250
Why are you harsh to adults and kinder to children?

Don't they both need equal treatment?

Anonymous at 12:14 AM on May 18, 2016 | #5314
1) who are you talking to?

2) quotes, examples, arguments that this is the case?

Anonymous at 12:14 AM on May 18, 2016 | #5315
>> Why not have separate group for people are really bad at reason & rationality and promote them into main FI if they ever improve?

>feel free to make one if you think you can get enough people interested in posting there.

I just created one.

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/fallibleideas


Irrational people from the Fallible Ideas Group are welcome here.

This Group is for irrational people & Banned Members of original FI

This group is not owned by Philosopher Elliot Temple ( Owner of the main FI).

Do visit the main group https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/fallible-ideas/info

Fallibleideas.com

Anonymous at 4:48 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5366
don't use that. name it something different. that's way too confusing to use the same name without the hyphen.

Anonymous at 5:38 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5367
also if it doesn't say who the owner is then i will recommend that no one join.

Anonymous at 5:39 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5368
>also if it doesn't say who the owner is then i will recommend that no one join.

Why do you want to know the name of the owner?

It is clear in the description that the owner is not Elliot Temple.

There is no impersonation of Elliot Temple.

The link to the original group is also given to avoid confusion and to give credit to the original group.

Anonymous at 5:53 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5369
It is pretty clear that it is not the original group.

It is only meant for banned and irrational people.

Anonymous at 5:54 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5370
if you don't change the name, and insist on using my name (FI) for your group, i will consider you an enemy. it's mine. get your own name.

curi at 6:09 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5371
> This Group is for irrational people & Banned Members of original FI

There are already groups for those people: all of the other groups on Yahoo.

Anonymous at 8:50 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5372
>i will consider you an enemy

I don't want to make the best philosopher in the world my enemy.

Anonymous at 9:12 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5374
>There are already groups for those people: all of the other groups on Yahoo.

They are not all philosophy groups.

Anonymous at 9:14 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5375

Anonymous at 9:47 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5376
If you want me to remove the FI completely here:

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Irrationalideas

Inspired by Elliot Temple
Banned members of Fallible Ideas are welcome here.

Anonymous at 9:54 AM on May 20, 2016 | #5377
those names are acceptable

Anonymous at 2:14 PM on May 20, 2016 | #5378
[Note about the alternative version:

I've been thinking about what Ayn Rand said in the Art of Fiction about characters being integrated. A character who is integrated is a character true to himself. It acts consistently with its own personality traits.

I think making Spiegelei suicidal, even if his intention was not to die, was not making him integrated. He was not rational. I decided to experiment rewriting the scene with a reality-bound character. Spiegelei is not a bum wishing he was rich. He is not unhappy in his world. He owns it. He's rich. Rich enough to make Requiem a proposal.

I am happy with this result.]

[Old Chapter 2 for comparison]

[The Story so far (old)]

Chapter 2:

Requiem arrives at the coffee shop. He scans the tables but Elegia was not there. He arrived early. He orders a mug of hot chocolate. His favorite table was not free so he sits in another corner, by the window. People enter and leave. Some people enter and leave straight away because they see him and he creeps them out. He knows, but he doesn't care. He looks at the window and drinks his hot chocolate slowly. It didn't taste like anything. It didn't give him any pleasure. He was too anxious. He checks his phone. He had no customers booked for tonight. It was drop in. What if Elegia decided to drop in? He couldn't bear the thought. If she did drop in and if he refused service, she might go to another dreamer. Maybe that's what she is planning to do tonight. No, she was going to show up at the coffee shop with her sketchbook. And all would be well.

Time passes slowly, tortuously. The phone rings. It was an unknown number.

"Hello?"

A male voice answers:

"Hi. Are you free tonight?"

"No!" Requiem hangs up.

The phone rings again. Same number.

"What do you want now?"

"Can I make a booking for tomorrow?"

"I don't know if I'm available tomorrow. I'll call you back when I'm free. Is this your personal number?"

"Yes."

"What's you name?"

"Spiegelei."

"How do you spell that?"

"S-P-I-E-G-E-L-E-I"

"Ok. I'll call you back."

He puts the phone back down on the table and reaches for his mug for a sip but it was cold. He gets up to order another hot chocolate. The clerk looks at him and says:

"You've been here a long time today. Are you waiting for someone?"

Requiem never engaged in chit chat. He looked at the clerk silently, waiting for his hot chocolate. The clerk pushes his case:

"I don't mean to be rude, but I'd prefer you didn't stay any longer today. Customers don't like you and it's affecting business. You'll be welcome back tomorrow."

Requiem leaves. He crosses the road and stands on the other side, facing the coffee shop, waiting, watching. No Elegia anywhere. It gets dark. What did Elegia call him? Unprofessional. That is right, he had been unprofessional. And he paid the price. It was the first time he had acted like this. He never had any personal interest in other people. He didn't want to save anyone. And all the people who entered his pod entered it already dead. That's what made the job possible. But this girl who liked to draw him obsessively... Who looked at him with love and not repulse. Why did she chose death over him? Wait, there is no contradiction. He was death. He misunderstood her interest. And he lost a customer. It wouldn't happen again. He picks the phone and calls Spiegelei.

"Hello? Mr. Speegullaz? I had a cancellation. You can come if you like."

---

Spiegelei enters Requiem's home decisively. He sits down on the black sofa where Requiem awaited him.

"What is your dream?" Requiem asks.

"I want to buy your building."

Requiem looks at Spiegelei with apprehension and says:

"It's not for sale."

"My offer is one million."

Requiem raises one brow. That was a lot of money for a decreptic old building that everyone considered an eyesore. Why was this man offering so much for his home? The building was unique and in that way it was priceless. Requiem asks:

"What would I do with your million? I couldn't buy another building like this one."

"That much is true. But you do not know to what extent this building is valuable."

"What do you mean?"

"This pod where you live is a small spacecraft that can fly a short distance to a space station in the moon. The station has teleporters to other worlds, a mind transfer machine and several robot bodies left unused. Everyone could be living free, immortal lives full of adventure. Instead, the world regressed and now we are all trapped here, dying a slow death in a static world."

"You don't know what you are talking about."

Spiegelei gets up and goes around the wall touching it in a series of places in sequence.

"What are you doing?" Requiem asks.

Several white lights appear in the wall. Requiem is surprised. He never saw those before.

Spiegelei touches the lights in sequence. A hidden trapdoor slides in the opposite side of the room. Spiegelei goes under and calls Requiem to follow him.

There was a dim light from the ceiling illuminating strange machinery. Spiegelei explains:

"This is the engine of the spacecraft. And if you crawl over this way... Look: there is a trapdoor up here that leads to the control room..." He presses around an imagined shape on the metal surface but nothing happens. "Well, it's sadly broken."

Requiem feels cheated. Why did he believe this man for a moment?

"I never saw this basement before, but I'm sure it has to do with the pod's heating and other maintenance technology that keep it going."

"You never saw it before and you are sure? What makes you sure? Your arrogant ignorance?"

"I think it's time you leave."

Spiegelei presses on:

"With the money I'm offering you could retire from killing people for a living."

Requiem looks at him gravely:

"I do not kill people. I help the suicidal get what they want."

"You could help me instead. I know you've grown bored of your profession."

"What makes you say that?"

"Elegia told me."

"Elegia?! Did you say Elegia?! You know Elegia?!"

"Yes."

"Where is she?"

"I won't violate her privacy to tell you."

"It's important!"

"Help me and I might persuade her to see you again."

"Help you do what? I'm not giving up my home for your foolish dream."

"You don't have to give up your home. Work with me. Let me return tomorrow with my engineers."

Requiem is unsure and hesitates. He doesn't like this strange man. He doesn't like the idea of this man bringing his engineers to poke around in his pod. But he wants to see Elegia again. Spiegelei had said tomorrow. Requiem didn't have to give him more than one day.

"Bring Elegia as well." Requiem instructs.

"Deal." Spiegelei extends his hand to Requiem with a smile.

Requiem is glad Spielelei agreed and smiles slightly but doesn't shake his hand. He simply turns away.

---

Requiem is back alone in his pod with a open trapdoor to its entrails that he doesn't know how to close. The lights on the wall were gone. He presses the wall in several spots but doesn't know where to press. Even if he did, he doesn't know the right sequence.

The bell rings.

"What do you want?" Requiem asks through the intercom.

A unfamiliar voice replies.

"A dream."

"Hold on."

With difficulty, Requiem pushes the sofa towards the opposite corner of the room, over the trapdoor. He drags the table as well, so it looks like it had always been there.

Anonymous at 6:31 PM on May 20, 2016 | #5380
why did you post that here?

Anonymous at 6:39 PM on May 20, 2016 | #5383
>why did you post that here?

To make you appreciate the story.

It is a good story.

Anonymous at 6:56 PM on May 20, 2016 | #5384
You should stop criticizing and start liking it.

Breaking people isn't cool

Anonymous at 6:57 PM on May 20, 2016 | #5385
seems off topic. you should have posted a link instead. and only posted it if you had some way it was relevant to this thread and wrote down the relevance.

Anonymous at 6:58 PM on May 20, 2016 | #5386
>seems off topic. you should have posted a link instead. and only posted it if you had some way it was relevant to this thread and wrote down the relevance.

Sorry about that.

You can delete that post. I will post the link to the story.

Anonymous at 7:00 PM on May 20, 2016 | #5387
>seems off topic. you should have posted a link instead. and only posted it if you had some way it was relevant to this thread and wrote down the relevance.

http://www.leonorgomes.com/2016/05/requiem-for-spiegelei-alternative.html

Anonymous at 7:00 PM on May 20, 2016 | #5388
I have found an Objectivist smart person for you.

Mark Pellegrino (Huge Ayn Rand Fan + Co-Founder of The American Capitalist Party)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8unxdBHU1U

FF at 8:01 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5565
you don't understand Objectivism so you can't judge whether someone is a good Objectivist or not.

Anonymous at 8:12 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5566
>you don't understand Objectivism so you can't judge whether someone is a good Objectivist or not.

Someone else who is willing to spend time can check him out.

You needed a smart person. I gave you one.

Anonymous at 8:14 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5567
He is not a libertarian.

He is an atheist.

Anonymous at 8:16 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5568
>you don't understand Objectivism so you can't judge whether someone is a good Objectivist or not.

You or someone else can check if he is a good objectivist or not.

Anonymous at 8:18 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5569
you aren't smart and can't judge who is smart.

if an FI person wants to spend time they'd follow their own leads, not your leads. your leads are worse than what we can find on google.

Anonymous at 8:22 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5570
>if an FI person wants to spend time they'd follow their own leads, not your leads. your leads are worse than what we can find on google.

You are judging the source..

Just saying..

Anonymous at 8:26 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5571
I don't think he is worse than you can find on google.

I judged him by his positions on stuff.

Anonymous at 8:28 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5572
To know a good cake you don't need to be a chef

Anonymous at 8:29 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5573
> You are judging the source..

i didn't judge it. i judged whether to spend my time on it. why would i spend time on FF's ideas? he's stupid and ignorant. i have better ideas to spend time on.

Anonymous at 8:45 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5574
> I don't think he is worse than you can find on google.
>
> I judged him by his positions on stuff.

your judgement is worthless. not only do you have pretty much no idea which positions we consider good, you also have a history of having tons of terrible ideas and extraordinarily bad judgement (worse than Joe Public).

Anonymous at 8:46 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5575
> To know a good cake you don't need to be a chef

this analogy is wrong in various ways. just like your judgement.

Anonymous at 8:47 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5576
>your judgement is worthless. not only do you have pretty much no idea which positions we consider good, you also have a history of having tons of terrible ideas and extraordinarily bad judgement (worse than Joe Public).

You could have spent a fraction of time you spent on bashing me to google his positions. But that's okay.

I hope some FI member googles him.

I did not create him from my imagination.. He is real person out there.

I have some basic idea of what your positions are.

Anonymous at 8:53 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5577
>you also have a history of having tons of terrible ideas and extraordinarily bad judgement (worse than Joe Public).

I agree that Stefan Moleneux ( The guy I recommended ) was bad.

I have come to know the differences between you and him.

Anonymous at 8:56 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5578
you are trying to spend other people's time

Anonymous at 9:02 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5579
>you also have a history of having tons of terrible ideas and extraordinarily bad judgement (worse than Joe Public).

The average joe is more dangerous and evil than me.

I am better than a terrorist.. Thats for sure lol

Anonymous at 9:04 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5580
>you are trying to spend other people's time

If you don't want to reply then don't.

I am replying to your post.

I am not forcing you to reply..

Anonymous at 9:05 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5581
I forgot to mention. He is a classical liberal.

Anonymous at 9:08 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5582
>your judgement is worthless. not only do you have pretty much no idea which positions we consider good, you also have a history of having tons of terrible ideas and extraordinarily bad judgement (worse than Joe Public).

You can say I don't have a deep understanding of your positions but you cannot say I don't have any idea.

You are in your own purist world not knowing how dangerous the average joe of today's world is.

The average Joe is much much worse than me.

Anonymous at 10:05 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5583
even if you're better than 90% of people it doesn't mean you have a clue how to find awesome people who are better than 99.999% of people.

Anonymous at 11:49 PM on May 25, 2016 | #5584
> even if you're better than 90% of people it doesn't mean you have a clue how to find awesome people who are better than 99.999% of people.

I found you didn't I ..lol

Anonymous at 4:00 AM on May 26, 2016 | #5585
> To know a good cake you don't need to be a chef

false. food tasters are often also chefs or know enough about how food is cooked and food standards to be able to appreciate if something was well done or not.

ppl with low knowledge on food are happy to eat crap.

leonorgomes.com at 4:07 AM on May 26, 2016 | #5586
I said good cake not great cake ..

I didn't mean food taster level quality..

You can taste a difference between a good and bad cake without being a chef

Anonymous at 4:16 AM on May 26, 2016 | #5587

What do you think?

(This is a free speech zone!)