curi blog comments http://curi.us/comments/recent Explanations for the curious en-us Anonymous Experts
Why does this merit profanity (a high level of emphasis)?

> I’m reminded of a thing people do.

The paragraph starting with that sentence does a poor job of communicating what you mean. An example would help.]]>
Tue, 15 Oct 2019 14:58:45 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13802 http://curi.us/comments/show/13802
curi curi's Progress Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:31:12 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13801 http://curi.us/comments/show/13801 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
http://curi.us/1298-some-of-richard-feynmans-wonderfulness

> Feynman went to speak to the [math] teacher, who didn't know who Feynman was and treated him like an idiot. The teacher even accused Feynman of not knowing anything about math. [...] In the long run he had to teach math to his daughter personally.]]>
Tue, 15 Oct 2019 11:32:57 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13800 http://curi.us/comments/show/13800
Anonymous Some of Richard Feynman's Wonderfulness
said stuff to address it

> what do u mean? What did Feynman do?

RAFO]]>
Tue, 15 Oct 2019 11:28:09 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13799 http://curi.us/comments/show/13799
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
![](https://curi.us/img/9XCnSGoJzSlSzIk-697x964.png)]]>
Tue, 15 Oct 2019 11:25:38 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13798 http://curi.us/comments/show/13798
Anonymous Some of Richard Feynman's Wonderfulness
how so?

> Finally Feynman stopped biting his tongue.

what do u mean? What did Feynman do?]]>
Tue, 15 Oct 2019 05:43:17 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13797 http://curi.us/comments/show/13797
Anonymous Experts
——

Quoting from #2087 (I think the author is Stephen)

> Let me put it another way. We need a word for the people we seek out whose knowledge in a given area is more valuable than the average Joe's.

The focus on a *word* is interesting. what’s also interesting is the lack of explanation for why we need the word or how this is connected to the content of Elliot’s post (which Stephen’s comment is supposedly engaging with).

> When you have a plumbing leak, you are not going to seek out Deutsch, you are going to seek out someone who is a (fill in the blank) in the area. This doesn't mean you will completely trust everything they say and do. It means you know they have knowledge in the area that you don't and it will be fruitful to have their (fill in the blank). You would be unlikely to ask them about a difficult epistemology problem you are trying to figure out, as you might with Deutsch, if you could.
>
> So, if you don't want to fill in the blank with 'expert,' what do you fill it with?

Stephen’s question is interesting. It’s got a premise in there, that Elliot doesn’t want to use the word “expert”. But I read Elliot’s post and all the comments and I don’t think Elliot expressed or implied a preference to not use the word “expert”. So like where the fuck did Stephen get his idea?

I’m reminded of a thing people do. Say somebody notices that somebody else’s idea disagrees with theirs. Then they try to criticize the target idea. But they do it in a way where their own ideas infect the target idea, and they don’t recognize that they’re doing it. They end up criticizing a straw man. I guess part of what’s happening is mixing up two things: (1) understanding an idea, and (2) criticizing the idea.]]>
Tue, 15 Oct 2019 05:37:02 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13796 http://curi.us/comments/show/13796
curi curi's Progress Tue, 15 Oct 2019 00:25:39 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13795 http://curi.us/comments/show/13795 Alisa Alisa Discussion Mon, 14 Oct 2019 16:17:19 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13794 http://curi.us/comments/show/13794 curi curi's Progress
Sent out newsletter #97 to 607 people.

Today, Project Veritas put out their video with a CNN insider. I want to watch that soon. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7XZmugtLv4]]>
Mon, 14 Oct 2019 13:54:26 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13793 http://curi.us/comments/show/13793
Begin Logic Project Anne B Anne Discussion
- do practice LSAT questions

- brilliant.org logic course

- learnlogictheeasyway.com

- Peikoff logic course

- look for logic errors in Discord chat, posts, comments, articles, books, etc.

I will try some or all of these and see what I think. Other ideas are welcome.]]>
Mon, 14 Oct 2019 05:33:49 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13792 http://curi.us/comments/show/13792
End Grammar Project Anne B Anne Discussion Mon, 14 Oct 2019 05:23:17 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13791 http://curi.us/comments/show/13791 Updated Alisa's Paths Forward doc Alisa Alisa Discussion
- Moved reading list to a [separate doc](https://hg.sr.ht/~petrogradphilosopher/fi/browse/default/pf.md).
- Added a short section listing 4 specific mistakes I want to avoid, namely: false statements, unclear statements, non sequiturs, and formatting errors.
- Added a prioritized list of things I plan to learn. The list is, essentially: grammar first, then *Yes or No Philosophy*.
- Reviewed all the items to review with deadlines. I wasn't ready to tackle any of them. I plan to revisit them after I learn more about grammar and *Yes or No Philosophy*. I bumped the review date year on all but one of them from 2019 to 2021.]]>
Mon, 14 Oct 2019 01:23:57 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13790 http://curi.us/comments/show/13790
curi curi's Progress
Having a busy weekend.]]>
Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:52:15 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13789 http://curi.us/comments/show/13789
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/dh11dg/pretty_much_sums_it_up/]]>
Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:24:24 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13788 http://curi.us/comments/show/13788
Dagny Open Discussion (2019) Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:18:40 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13787 http://curi.us/comments/show/13787 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:14:04 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13786 http://curi.us/comments/show/13786 Postmortem: incorrect quoting Alisa Alisa Discussion
In an earlier draft, the example sentence was in quotation marks at the end of the sentence that introduces it. Even here, I should have added some text indicating that the quote was my own, not Good's.

I think I moved the example sentence to a separate block quote because I thought that made it stand out more clearly. If I had any ideas warning me that this kind of quoting could be confusing, I didn't give them enough importance.]]>
Sun, 13 Oct 2019 01:28:34 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13785 http://curi.us/comments/show/13785
Helping verbs Alisa Alisa Discussion
> *Detail:* Verbs can be modified by other verbs. Modifier verbs are called “helper” or “auxiliary” verbs, not adverbs. In “I will practice grammar.”, the verb “practice” is modified by the helper verb “will” which changes it from present tense to future tense.

There is a song that I call the "[Jingle Bells Helping Verbs Song](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F2JWKY63K0)". It is a short song that lists 23 helping verbs, sung to the tune of *Jingle Bells*:

> Helping verbs, helping verbs,

> there are 23.

> Am, is, are, was and were,

> being, been, and be [hey]!

> Have, has, had, do, does, did,

> will, would, shall, and should.

> There are 5 more helping verbs:

> may, might, must, can, could!

In [The Forgotten Helping Verbs](https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/dictionary/the-forgotten-helping-verbs/), Neal Whitman discusses several different views on how many helping verbs there are. Whitman brings up "ought" and "having" as examples of helping verbs that aren't in the Jingle Bells Helping Verbs Song.

In [Understanding the Parts of Speech](https://www.grammar.com/download-grammar-ebooks/), Edward Good argues that "had better" should also be regarded as a helping verb, for example:

> You'd better watch your step.

Good also argues that "better" alone can be a helping verb (though this usage seems informal to me), for example:

> You better watch out, you better not cry, you better not shout, I'm telling you why.]]>
Sun, 13 Oct 2019 00:43:07 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13784 http://curi.us/comments/show/13784
Remembering that adverbs can modify non-verbs Alisa Alisa Discussion
> There are two types of modifier. An adjective is a modifier for a noun, and an adverb is a modifier for anything else. [...]

> *Warning:* Despite having the word “verb” inside it, an “adverb” doesn’t only modify verbs. Adverbs can modify verbs, adjectives, adverbs, and more.

I found it hard to remember that adverbs can modify non-verbs. In search of a memory aid, I looked up the [etymology of "adverb" in Webster's 1913](http://www.websters1913.com/words/Adverb):

> Ad"verb (?), n. [L. *adverbium*; *ad* + *verbum* word, verb...]

So, earlier in the evolution of the word "adverb", the string "verb" actually meant *word*!

Interestingly, the [first **English** definition of "verb" in Webster's 1913](http://www.websters1913.com/words/Verb) is also "word", though this definition is marked as obsolete.

> Verb (?), n. [... L. *verbum* a word, verb...]

> 1. A word; a vocable. [Obs.] South.

I hope that info will help me remember that adverbs can modify more than just verbs.]]>
Sun, 13 Oct 2019 00:41:54 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13783 http://curi.us/comments/show/13783
Well that sux A Open Discussion (2019)
Disappointing.]]>
Sat, 12 Oct 2019 20:41:14 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13782 http://curi.us/comments/show/13782
curi curi's Progress Sat, 12 Oct 2019 20:08:23 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13781 http://curi.us/comments/show/13781 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:19:37 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13780 http://curi.us/comments/show/13780 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:19:05 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13779 http://curi.us/comments/show/13779 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
> why does curi think that criticisms of his methods or ideas = trolling?

does curi handle criticism well? Doesn't seem like it.]]>
Sat, 12 Oct 2019 12:13:20 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13778 http://curi.us/comments/show/13778
Other Anon Open Discussion (2019) Sat, 12 Oct 2019 12:06:23 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13777 http://curi.us/comments/show/13777 curi curi's Progress Fri, 11 Oct 2019 19:33:49 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13776 http://curi.us/comments/show/13776 curi Open Discussion (2019) Fri, 11 Oct 2019 13:49:47 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13775 http://curi.us/comments/show/13775 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
>> At 39:57-40:04 curi said: "This is just a bunch of socially pressuring euphemisms. I don't want to talk that way, it's evil."

>> My response to that was:

>>> What's socially pressuring about this

>>> "Hey, I'm not sure if you are understanding what I'm saying correctly but we cannot tolerate hostility here, this has to be a healthy environment with good will in order to function properly. I think you are mad at me because of some misunderstandings so I purpose to discuss this with you another day when things are calmer"?

>>> Where are the euphemisms? I think it's explaining things in a way that is friendly and honest. I think your intuitions about how you should talk to people should change drastically. You should have known that saying "would anyone object to me banning cat?" would led to him leaving. Actually, you probably know what's the normal reaction to that. People usually prefer to leave when they read that (e.g. C_Boss also said that if he was going to be banned for not answering questions then he would leave by himself). Any threat of ban is not helpful when there are other ways of dealing with someone.

> For example, saying "this has to be a healthy environment" pressures people to act in a "healthy" (according to you) way, says that "has" to happen (= must, = hard requirement or rule, just like the aggressive "cannot tolerate" statement which is basically saying there is no limit to how much you will escalate to get your way)

Again, try to see things in context. This was an equivalent way to express what I saw your beliefs were. You didn't tolerate his behaviour and you escalated to a threat of a ban. Given that, I gave this suggestion which I thought expressed your beliefs in a fair way. Now you are disagreeing with the morality of what I tried to made equivalent.


> and insults anyone who disagrees as unhealthy. It's an aggressive way to attack anyone who disagrees with you without acknowledging it's a disagreement or treating it as an area for truth-seeking.


That's a pretty lax use of the word insult. Why do you think people get offended with that? Why do you think people don't get offended by the way you speak? Is offensiveness important to you? If you think that matters, I suggest you to stop expressing what (you think) people are. If you think someone is an asshole, you don't need to say that. If you think that something I said is "shit" as you said on stream, do not say that too, what's the matter with you? People get offended by that, do not say those bad things without any silver lining.


I don't think people, generally, get insulted by anyone saying "this has to be a healthy environment". I think this is a bad choice of words by you. People can disagree about that, sure. I disagree with that also. But that was not the point I was trying to make with that suggestion as I already said.



> And the word "healthy" is a euphemism that doesn't refer its literal meaning of physical, bodily health, but instead refers certain moral and intellectual values.

See:
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/healthy
Or
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/

healthy can be used the way I used it. You did not even go search the definition of a word after I asked you to do an effort responding to me. You are trying to find a mistake and exposing it like it makes all of what I said wrong. You think you don't owe me your effort and I don't want to loose my time trying to explain things to whom does not want to see or try any harder. You're arguments are flawed and are not in register with what I am really saying. You are diverting this conversation in really unhelpful ways to you. I believe you are doing this unconsciously. I've already got what I was trying to get with this discussion. So, if you think I'm delusional and you are making 100% sense don't bother to respond. I have to be positively surprised to reply.]]>
Fri, 11 Oct 2019 13:42:59 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13774 http://curi.us/comments/show/13774
Anonymous Fuck China Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:57:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13773 http://curi.us/comments/show/13773 Anonymous Fuck China Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:45:14 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13772 http://curi.us/comments/show/13772 curi Open Discussion (2019)
> meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1, maximum-scale=1, user-scalable=0"

Seems better for me. Tell me if you have problems.]]>
Fri, 11 Oct 2019 01:06:27 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13771 http://curi.us/comments/show/13771
curi Open Discussion (2019)
> The quote link is fine for quoting one comment but if you want to look back over other comments while replying and also read/include stuff from other comments you need to scroll up. Same if you accidently delete stuff while replying.

> Focusing the comment box shouldn't cause other text to rescale and go off the side of the screen. When I hit reply/quote the comment box is initially about half the screen width with tiny text. Everything magnifies and rescales after focusing. So I suggest make the comment box have text in the same font as everything above and initially at the width of the screen so it doesn't rescale on focus.

I don't expect scrolling back up and quoting from multiple comments to be convenient on mobile. If you want to do that, I suggest you use a mobile text editor app and compose your comment there. I think that will work better overall and will avoiding scrolling down to the textarea then back up again.

I see that it zooms way in when I focus the textarea on my iPhone. I don't like that. It zooms in so much you don't even see the whole text area at once.

I Binged briefly and didn't find any useful guide for how to make a textarea work well on mobile with CSS.

If anyone wants to figure out some better CSS, I can add it.]]>
Thu, 10 Oct 2019 21:02:05 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13770 http://curi.us/comments/show/13770
curi Open Discussion (2019)
> At 39:57-40:04 curi said: "This is just a bunch of socially pressuring euphemisms. I don't want to talk that way, it's evil."

> My response to that was:

>> What's socially pressuring about this

>> "Hey, I'm not sure if you are understanding what I'm saying correctly but we cannot tolerate hostility here, this has to be a healthy environment with good will in order to function properly. I think you are mad at me because of some misunderstandings so I purpose to discuss this with you another day when things are calmer"?

>> Where are the euphemisms? I think it's explaining things in a way that is friendly and honest. I think your intuitions about how you should talk to people should change drastically. You should have known that saying "would anyone object to me banning cat?" would led to him leaving. Actually, you probably know what's the normal reaction to that. People usually prefer to leave when they read that (e.g. C_Boss also said that if he was going to be banned for not answering questions then he would leave by himself). Any threat of ban is not helpful when there are other ways of dealing with someone.

For example, saying "this has to be a healthy environment" pressures people to act in a "healthy" (according to you) way, says that "has" to happen (= must, = hard requirement or rule, just like the aggressive "cannot tolerate" statement which is basically saying there is no limit to how much you will escalate to get your way) and insults anyone who disagrees as unhealthy. It's an aggressive way to attack anyone who disagrees with you without acknowledging it's a disagreement or treating it as an area for truth-seeking. And the word "healthy" is a euphemism that doesn't refer its literal meaning of physical, bodily health, but instead refers certain moral and intellectual values.

The issue here is not merely ignorance of the meaning of what you wrote. Partly you wrote it because you do understand what it means and what it communicates to others and how they react and so on. By writing something which you actually know pressures people, then asking what's pressuring about it and claiming it's "friendly and honest", you're being dishonest. If you continue to be dishonest *and* adversarial at the same time, expect this conversation to end fast. If you could manage to friendly/cooperative *or* honest, I'd be more interested in trying to help you.]]>
Thu, 10 Oct 2019 20:49:50 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13769 http://curi.us/comments/show/13769
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
California's power policy sucks. Old article by George Reisman.]]>
Thu, 10 Oct 2019 20:29:30 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13768 http://curi.us/comments/show/13768
Mountains of Mourning Alisa What To Read
> Did you read any of the other books first?

No. Today I finished *Mountains of Mourning* (the first novella in the *Borders of Infinity* collection), though.

Warning: **SPOILERS AHEAD**

*Mountains of Mourning* is a detective story.

One thing I that thought was poorly written: around 85% of the way through the story, there's a scene in which the perpetrator enters the room where they will be interrogated by Miles:

> The door swung inward, and Dea stepped forward, raising his hand. The hypospray hissed.

Immediately after, the author refers to the perpetrator by name, without re-explaining the perpetrator's role or their relation to the other characters. It's as if the author expects the reader to recognize the perpetrator's name, but the perpetrator was only referred to by that name *once* before in the story, around 60% of the way through. (I opened the Kindle version and searched for the perpetrator's name to figure out who they were.)]]>
Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:04:39 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13767 http://curi.us/comments/show/13767
curi curi's Progress
Played vindi less than i wanted yesterday. Will do that later. Might start recording or steaming some vindi video at some point.

Plan to do something else philosophy related later today. Undecided on what.]]>
Thu, 10 Oct 2019 12:53:47 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13766 http://curi.us/comments/show/13766
curi Open Discussion (2019)
Your comment is saved on a short todo list which I do fully catch up on periodically, it doesn't just grow indefinitely.

I don't operate on your schedule. Not my job. I'm in philosophy for the long term. If someone loses interest fast, I don't care if I talk with them.

Stop being pushy and demanding with me, and stop treating me like a random, disorganized idiot or liar. If you want to talk with me, give me the benefit of the doubt, treat me with some good will, etc. And don't say things like "you don't tell" after I already did tell you the status of the issue, and you did not actually engage with what I said. Similarly, don't psychologize me with no quotes or reasoned analysis.]]>
Thu, 10 Oct 2019 12:33:59 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13765 http://curi.us/comments/show/13765
anon80085 Open Discussion (2019) Thu, 10 Oct 2019 12:11:22 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13764 http://curi.us/comments/show/13764 curi What To Read
I think Oliver asked because he was skeptical. He thought Miles didn't believe his own religious crap. He was right. I think that's a fairly typical kinda thing to ask.

Suegar's answer admitted Miles is a faker. Suegar, too, realized Miles was faking his religious convictions. However, Suegar believes something like: Miles is trying to be a faker, but actually he's following God's plan. God planned for Miles to not actually believe in God but then do God's work anyway. So while Suegar didn't think Miles was genuine (in Mile's opinion), Suegar decided to go along with Miles anyway.

---

I think the feathers stuff is cryptic bullshit where people pretend stuff has deep meanings but don't explain.

---

Did you read any of the other books first?]]>
Wed, 09 Oct 2019 20:02:34 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13763 http://curi.us/comments/show/13763
The Borders of Infinity Alisa What To Read
Warning: **SPOILERS AHEAD**

Miles can't talk openly about his escape plan, because his every communication is being monitored by his jailers. So he hints by using words with multiple meanings. On one level, he's talking about religious stuff. Meanwhile, on another level, he's talking about his escape. This way, the people he needs to communicate with get his point, but his jailers don't.

When Miles' escape opportunity finally arrives, it comes as a surprise to his jailers, but his fellow prisoners are prepared to take advantage of it.

All along, Miles' allies have also been monitoring his communications, and his hints were meant for them as well:

> “I wouldn’t have even attempted to expand this operation in midstream if I hadn’t known they were monitoring me, and could translate all those oblique hints back into orders.”

> “Did they get ’em all right?” asked Tung. “We argued over some of their interpretations of your double-talk on the vids.”

During most of the story, neither the reader nor Miles' jailers are privy to the hidden meanings of Miles' words. I didn't figure out what was actually going on until Miles' escape, and then some earlier things made sense in retrospect. Here's an example:

> “Very uplifting,” sneered Oliver. “

> “‘Uplifted’ is just what I intend you all to be. You’ve got to understand, Oliver, I’m a fundamentalist. I take my scriptures very literally.”

When I originally read that, I thought that Miles was talking about a spiritual uplifting, but he was actually alluding to the way his rescue ships will lift everyone up.

One bit I still don't understand is this:

>“Sh . . .” Oliver’s voice trailed off. He glanced for confirmation, oddly enough, at Suegar. “Is this guy for real?”
> “He thinks he’s faking it,” said Suegar blandly, “but he’s not. He’s the One, all right and tight.”

Why did Oliver ask Suegar that question? And what did Suegar's answer mean?

Another thing I didn't understand was Miles' reference to the color of the feathers in his hat:

> “Do you see the hat?”

> She was beginning to be amused. “Yes . . .”

> “Do you see the feathers on the hat?”

> “Yes . . .”

> “Describe them.”

> “Oh— plumy things.”

> “How many?”

> “Two. Bunched together.”

> “Do you see the color of the feathers?”

> She drew back, suddenly self-conscious again, with a sidewise glance at her companions. “No.”

> “When you can see the color of the feathers,” said Miles softly, “you’ll also understand how you can expand your borders to infinity.”

> She was silent, her face closed and locked. But the patrol leader muttered, “Maybe this little runt better talk to Tris. Just this once.”

It seems as if there is some hidden meaning there, but I don't know what it is.]]>
Wed, 09 Oct 2019 19:55:45 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13762 http://curi.us/comments/show/13762
curi curi's Progress
**Paths Forward vs. Closed and Certain**

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/fallible-ideas/t4EFvWhuTRY/0PHNUmtxDAAJ]]>
Wed, 09 Oct 2019 13:56:00 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13759 http://curi.us/comments/show/13759
curi curi's Progress
2350 words + 2 hours consulting (+ some prep) + whatever misc stuff I do during the day (e.g. I saw Ella replied re AGI, I expect I'll get to that) = enough for a day. While I can push for more, that's tiring. The bottleneck is mental energy/focus/attention/creativity, not time. And I need to save enough mental energy to do non-braindead stuff pretty much all day or else I get bored. I'll be playing some Vindictus today as a (relatively) easy and different thing which is skill-based and interesting. I read a lot of fiction recently but currently I want a break from that (partly it's tiring to read a ton, partly I found a bunch of flaws in Bujold and idk if I wanna read more from her, but I don't have other fiction to read.) I just realized South Park started again, so now I have 2 TV shows to watch (the other is Succession). Actually as I wrote this I just realized I should check when Mountain Men and Life Below Zero seasons start, and there are actually a bunch of eps already out. Other than that I can watch speedrun stuff and maybe a Vindictus stream, which I'd mostly use as a multitask, not a primary activity.]]>
Wed, 09 Oct 2019 13:38:54 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13758 http://curi.us/comments/show/13758
Vindictus curi Open Discussion (2019)
There is a challenge mode (Ein Lacher) with 80 different bosses to solo. Gold medal for taking 3 or fewer hits.

The game has many minor downsides but no dealbreakers. It's a bit old (2010 release), is Korean (we get content in NA with like a 3 month delay), freemium with some questionable but not game-ruining pay2win elements, and in order to focus on the latest content they made most of the older content really easy and made leveling up much faster, which is partly good but makes it boring and leveling up to the new content still takes like 10 hours (it's not boring for your first time playing, that's not nearly enough time to learn your way around the game). The game also has quite complicated itemization systems that were incrementally built up over the years. Combat remains streamlined.

A lot of people, playing games in general, want to fight every boss once (maybe replay a few bosses a few times), and win they just barely manage to win, they declare victory and move on. Vindictus expects you to fight the same bosses many times and try to get better at them.

Example gameplay solo (you can play in a party vs. bosses too, there are also regular enemies):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0W5q5RMvx68]]>
Wed, 09 Oct 2019 12:01:01 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13757 http://curi.us/comments/show/13757
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
> Large swaths of Northern California woke up without power early Wednesday as Pacific Gas & Electric began its sweeping plan to shut off electricity to about 800,000 customers in a desperate attempt to avoid wildfires sparked by wind-damaged power equipment.

They count one home or business as one customer, so it's millions of people without power.

In huge ways, California is failing at both power and water. There are also many unsafe, unsanitary streets and parks. California was one of the best places in the world, but it's destroying itself due to bad ideas.]]>
Wed, 09 Oct 2019 10:39:41 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13756 http://curi.us/comments/show/13756
Alisa Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 09 Oct 2019 01:38:28 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13755 http://curi.us/comments/show/13755 Seconds pendulum Alisa Open Discussion (2019)
Due to its simplicity and accessibility to people around the world, the seconds pendulum was once a leading candidate for a standard of length. It was proposed for that purpose by the Royal Society around 1660 [1].

In 1790, future U.S. president Thomas Jefferson, then serving as the first U.S. Secretary of State, submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives a report entitled "[Plan for establishing uniformity in the Coinage, Weights, and Measures of the United States](https://web.archive.org/web/20080629003842/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Gene_Nygaard/t_jeff.htm)". This technical document proposes basing the standard of length on a seconds *rod* (similar to a seconds pendulum) and discusses various physical factors, including latitude and altitude, that affect the length of a seconds rod [2].

In 1791, however, during the French Revolution, the French National Assembly abruptly and mysteriously accepted a different standard of length, defining the unit that would come to be known as the *meter* as [1/40 000 000 of the "Paris meridian"](http://www.herongyang.com/Physics/Space-Distance-Meter-Based-on-Earth-Meridian.html), i.e. setting 1 meter equal to the length of the arc from the North Pole to the Equator going through Paris. How this came about is examined in "[Why does the meter beat the second?](https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0412078.pdf)" by Agnoli and D’Agostini (2004).

[1] So Wikipedia [claims](http://web.archive.org/web/20190701203420/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seconds_pendulum), but I haven't been able to find a primary source. The proposal, or something similar, *might* be in a 1662 paper by Robert Hooke titled "[The measuring of a degree, & the universal standard of measure, & of the use of the pendulum](https://web.archive.org/save/https://collections.royalsociety.org/dserve.exe?dsqIni=Dserve.ini&dsqApp=Archive&dsqCmd=Show.tcl&dsqSearch=RefNo==%27Cl.P%2F20%2F34%27&dsqDb=Catalog)", but I haven't been able to view the paper's contents.

[2] "... the scientific matter in the report had been carefully reviewed and confirmed by [the astronomer, clockmaker, mathematician, surveyor, and scientific instrument craftsman] David Rittenhouse before the document was submitted to Congress." Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, "[A HISTORY OF THE METRIC SYSTEM CONTROVERSY IN THE UNITED STATES](https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GOVPUB-C13-0adbb6ace3b9fcbb09cd7fd0fbd5f76e/pdf/GOVPUB-C13-0adbb6ace3b9fcbb09cd7fd0fbd5f76e.pdf)" (1971)]]>
Wed, 09 Oct 2019 01:35:38 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13754 http://curi.us/comments/show/13754
curi Open Discussion (2019) Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:05:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13753 http://curi.us/comments/show/13753 anon80085 Open Discussion (2019) Tue, 08 Oct 2019 14:56:32 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13752 http://curi.us/comments/show/13752 curi What To Read
The series feels kinda like a TV show where the more it goes along, the more it escalates to ridiculous plots. *Mirror Dance* had some good parts but not great overall IMO. It also had some typical (of Bujold) bullshit plot holes like where Mark had an intuition, which he couldn't explain very well, which correctly solved (part of) a major mystery that lots of other people were getting wrong.

IMO the best books are the Miles ones prior to *Brothers in Arms* (where Mark was introduced). That's *The Warrior's Apprentice*, *The Vor Game*, *Cetaganda* and the three novellas in *The Borders of Infinity*.]]>
Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:48:36 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13751 http://curi.us/comments/show/13751
Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors J|ai|L]]> Tue, 08 Oct 2019 11:00:44 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13750 http://curi.us/comments/show/13750 Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors Lore]]> Mon, 07 Oct 2019 15:45:57 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13749 http://curi.us/comments/show/13749 Reading Anne B Anne Discussion
It's too hard to not read anything while I build up better reading skills. So I end up reading low-quality stuff. That seems wrong when I can be reading good stuff instead.]]>
Mon, 07 Oct 2019 14:45:47 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13748 http://curi.us/comments/show/13748
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
here is a computer-generated transcript of the stream you linked/commented on. if you decide you want to pursue a serious discussion, this might be useful. it's not accurate enough to paste directly from, but you could still e.g. edit some relevant part for accuracy and paste your edit.

https://pastebin.com/vzgSK2FV]]>
Sun, 06 Oct 2019 18:25:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13747 http://curi.us/comments/show/13747
Anonymous Food
Diet is 90% of physical and mental health. First question any doctor or psychologist should be asking is - what are you eating?]]>
Sun, 06 Oct 2019 10:11:04 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13746 http://curi.us/comments/show/13746
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
does curi handle criticism well?]]>
Sun, 06 Oct 2019 10:00:58 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13745 http://curi.us/comments/show/13745
anon80085 Open Discussion (2019)
> Also I can tell from skimming what you wrote, even with lots of missing context, that the quality of thinking and argument is far too low to persuade or educate me. I assume you can't do a 10x better job, so instead I'd suggest slowing way down. To avoid chaos when you lack skill, you need to go one little thing at a time, not try to argue a bunch of complicated points at once.

> If you neither follow this methodology nor criticize it – if you ignore it – then you should expect to be ignored.

> Also if you continue, please pick a name so it's easier to tell you apart from other anonymouses. I didn't think you were writing all the troll comments, but maybe some, idk. Any name, e.g. anon80085, is fine.

Ok, I'll transcribe something specific you talked about on stream and then I will quote what I already asked:

At 39:57-40:04 curi said: "This is just a bunch of socially pressuring euphemisms. I don't want to talk that way, it's evil."

My response to that was:

> What's socially pressuring about this

> "Hey, I'm not sure if you are understanding what I'm saying correctly but we cannot tolerate hostility here, this has to be a healthy environment with good will in order to function properly. I think you are mad at me because of some misunderstandings so I purpose to discuss this with you another day when things are calmer"?

> Where are the euphemisms? I think it's explaining things in a way that is friendly and honest. I think your intuitions about how you should talk to people should change drastically. You should have known that saying "would anyone object to me banning cat?" would led to him leaving. Actually, you probably know what's the normal reaction to that. People usually prefer to leave when they read that (e.g. C_Boss also said that if he was going to be banned for not answering questions then he would leave by himself). Any threat of ban is not helpful when there are other ways of dealing with someone.]]>
Sun, 06 Oct 2019 08:03:31 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13744 http://curi.us/comments/show/13744
curi What To Read
I read *Brothers in Arms*. It was just OK Miles book.

Bujold partly does what I would call *high fantasy*, which is the type where magic items and high level spells are common, as against low fantasy like Game of Thrones where magic is rarer, it's more gritty and harsh, the average power level of people in combat is lower, there's more realism with stuff being hard for main characters and very dangerous situations actually being dangerous (instead of it always being fake danger and the main characters always turn out fine after facing super extreme danger). Bujold keeps trying to escalate to more important plots with bigger stakes, more drama, stuff like that. I thought *The Warrior's Apprentice* was pretty big, it escalated quite quickly during the book from smaller to big. Some of the other earlier books started smaller and escalated a lot. But now the books start big and go even bigger. And then if a book was ever more normal, it'd be a big letdown, her books need need pretty epic plots just to keep up with prior books. I think that's a problem. I think Sanderson and Heinlein are better at it.]]>
Sat, 05 Oct 2019 19:25:49 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13743 http://curi.us/comments/show/13743
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Sat, 05 Oct 2019 18:14:35 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13742 http://curi.us/comments/show/13742 Anonymous FI Posting Tips Sat, 05 Oct 2019 06:45:15 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13741 http://curi.us/comments/show/13741 How an automobile differential works Alisa Open Discussion (2019)
The above video from 1937 clearly explains how automobile differentials work. The video starts out by explaining the problem the differential solves (how to turn the wheels at different speeds to prevent the wheels from sliding when a car turns a corner). It then introduces the solution in stages.

4 of the top 10 comments are about how much easier this video from 1937 is to understand than videos from today.]]>
Fri, 04 Oct 2019 23:20:11 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13740 http://curi.us/comments/show/13740
Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors Fri, 04 Oct 2019 15:15:19 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13739 http://curi.us/comments/show/13739 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
Also, when he claims to answer all criticism now we know he is lying. So when Curi pretends to be an expert in Biology, Psychology, and Philosophy. Know he is being dishonest.]]>
Fri, 04 Oct 2019 14:10:40 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13738 http://curi.us/comments/show/13738
Exposed FI Posting Tips
It is a common self-defense mechanism that people with gigantic egos and huge insecurities engage in.

He also often pretends to be anonymous and hunted minors IRC.

Curi never has understood CR and never will. He would have to embrace fallibility and admit that Randianism is incompatible with CR. He can't drop Oism because it protects his ego.

TLDR, don't bother offering real criticism toward curi, he doesn't deserve the gift of criticism.]]>
Fri, 04 Oct 2019 14:06:31 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13737 http://curi.us/comments/show/13737
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
Everyone has to watch his boring video and link time stamps and worse yet transcribe it for him, but he refuses to transcribe his own videos?

curi is unreasonable.]]>
Fri, 04 Oct 2019 13:57:08 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13736 http://curi.us/comments/show/13736
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
does curi handle criticism well?]]>
Fri, 04 Oct 2019 13:40:36 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13735 http://curi.us/comments/show/13735
curi Open Discussion (2019)
Also I can tell from skimming what you wrote, even with lots of missing context, that the quality of thinking and argument is far too low to persuade or educate me. I assume you can't do a 10x better job, so instead I'd suggest slowing way down. To avoid chaos when you lack skill, you need to go one little thing at a time, not try to argue a bunch of complicated points at once.

If you neither follow this methodology nor criticize it – if you ignore it – then you should expect to be ignored.

Also if you continue, please pick a name so it's easier to tell you apart from other anonymouses. I didn't think you were writing all the troll comments, but maybe some, idk. Any name, e.g. anon80085, is fine.]]>
Fri, 04 Oct 2019 12:48:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13734 http://curi.us/comments/show/13734
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
There are multiple points that are connected and are important to be talked about. Because he responded on video it's a little harder to follow but it isn't too bad.

Curi:
> The quote "too complex" is a misquote of me. Misquotes are one of the few things people here are asked not to do. If you misquote me again, I probably will actually end the conversation.

Yes, my bad. Wasn't quoting you actually, only using has a figure of speech but my mistake.

You are usually quick responding, should I assume you gave up this conversation without saying nothing?

Also, if you are confused which anonymous is the one you were talking to initially (me) just say, don't want any misunderstandings.]]>
Fri, 04 Oct 2019 12:17:32 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13733 http://curi.us/comments/show/13733
Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors only 90?]]> Fri, 04 Oct 2019 11:20:57 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13732 http://curi.us/comments/show/13732 Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors Fri, 04 Oct 2019 09:08:57 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13731 http://curi.us/comments/show/13731 Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
I thought Randians were advocates of self-reliance?]]>
Fri, 04 Oct 2019 09:05:46 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13730 http://curi.us/comments/show/13730
:( Open Discussion (2019) Thu, 03 Oct 2019 23:58:13 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13729 http://curi.us/comments/show/13729 oh my god it's turpentine Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Thu, 03 Oct 2019 23:28:18 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13728 http://curi.us/comments/show/13728 oh my god it's turpentine Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Thu, 03 Oct 2019 23:27:03 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13727 http://curi.us/comments/show/13727 Crypto-Anti Popperians FI Posting Tips
This is problem avoidance and shows ignorance of Popper's epistemology.

Problem avoidance is stupid. You should stop pretending to be a fan of Popper. It is dishonest.]]>
Thu, 03 Oct 2019 21:54:20 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13726 http://curi.us/comments/show/13726
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
Does curi not know that ladders have been invented?]]>
Thu, 03 Oct 2019 21:44:41 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13725 http://curi.us/comments/show/13725
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Thu, 03 Oct 2019 21:42:00 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13724 http://curi.us/comments/show/13724 John Galt Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Thu, 03 Oct 2019 21:37:41 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13723 http://curi.us/comments/show/13723 Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors
name one]]>
Thu, 03 Oct 2019 17:52:14 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13722 http://curi.us/comments/show/13722
Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors Thu, 03 Oct 2019 17:21:59 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13721 http://curi.us/comments/show/13721 Exposed Open Discussion (2019)
Calling GISTE only competent to be a Walmart cashier.

Is curi a part time meneal job worker? Curi is projecting and being dishonest.]]>
Thu, 03 Oct 2019 16:55:36 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13720 http://curi.us/comments/show/13720
Rando Open Discussion (2019) Thu, 03 Oct 2019 16:50:10 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13719 http://curi.us/comments/show/13719 oh my god it's turpentine Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors Thu, 03 Oct 2019 13:54:37 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13718 http://curi.us/comments/show/13718 curi Open Discussion (2019)
About project with backing like NYT and Smithsonian to emphasize slavery much more in US history.

I'm half way through and one of the things they *don't* criticize is the idea that **slavery works**. I think slavery and exploitation is *not very productive*, but some of the left thinks it's so super-productive that it's where most of US wealth comes from. That's a very pro-slavery view which declares slavery *highly practical* and effective. That's so evil and also false. It's saying it's in people's self-interest to be slavers if they can get away with it. The left broadly thinks violence is more practical and effetive than reason. There are many manifestations of this including many common ones among center-left "moderates" (you see elements of this in their desire to impose minimum wage laws, and many other things, by force instead of persuading people to do it).]]>
Thu, 03 Oct 2019 13:45:33 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13717 http://curi.us/comments/show/13717
Dagny Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Thu, 03 Oct 2019 10:24:20 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13716 http://curi.us/comments/show/13716 Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors Thu, 03 Oct 2019 09:58:01 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13715 http://curi.us/comments/show/13715 Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Thu, 03 Oct 2019 08:47:02 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13714 http://curi.us/comments/show/13714 Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors Thu, 03 Oct 2019 07:26:20 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13713 http://curi.us/comments/show/13713 Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors is it true btw? never said it was. just heard it]]> Thu, 03 Oct 2019 05:08:11 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13712 http://curi.us/comments/show/13712 Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors Thu, 03 Oct 2019 04:58:53 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13711 http://curi.us/comments/show/13711 Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors
Libeling people is serious business. Stop]]>
Thu, 03 Oct 2019 04:43:27 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13710 http://curi.us/comments/show/13710
Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors Thu, 03 Oct 2019 04:23:13 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13709 http://curi.us/comments/show/13709 curi What To Read
It doesn't have to be terribly intelligent to outcompete low-mental-energy alternatives like watching TV. It's hard to find TV shows which are half the quality of these stories. (At the moment I'm watching Succession and that's it. Other than that I'd rather watch speedrun related content or YouTube stuff. No movies either.)]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:31:05 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13708 http://curi.us/comments/show/13708
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
Sparks are flying in this heated battle!]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 15:38:02 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13707 http://curi.us/comments/show/13707
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
I gave a couple of arguments at #13685, pick and choose. It's your turn now.

> You seem more interested in flaming though.

I'm not flamming, I'm just trying to help you see things clearly. I don't have much hope to be honest, it seems I'm not the first one telling you this kind of stuff.]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 14:25:26 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13706 http://curi.us/comments/show/13706
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:12:39 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13705 http://curi.us/comments/show/13705 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
Temple should be thanking me for the criticism I offered for free. Not even going to bother to stick around for his response. I know exactly what he will say as he has not changed one bit.]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:11:35 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13704 http://curi.us/comments/show/13704
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
> I agree with the sentiment. That Temple is irrational, unreasonable, and pedantic.

Fragment

> More importantly, he is socially inept.

> He has butchered CR to

Into

> an unrecognizable monstrosity. His epistemological ideas are basic copies of school curriculums. Temple does not understand how problem-solving and creativity works.

Work, singular.


> Temple works hard to stamp out original thougts

Thoughts

> from his group. Consider,

Unnecessary comma

> how poorly everyone one

Double word; should be "every one"

> of his "fans" think of themselves, and how upset Temple gets if anyone does not embark

Think you mean "embarks" not "does not embark." That's a major error that a native speaker wouldn't typically make

> on their own projects without his permission. It is perverse.

> He will never learn because he can't take criticism.

7 grammar errors plus hate and lies]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:11:23 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13703 http://curi.us/comments/show/13703
curi Open Discussion (2019)
> He has butchered CR to an unrecognizable monstrosity.

"butchered ... to" is either wrong or poor English.

> His epistemological ideas are basic copies of school curriculums.

So I have say 50 ideas, each of which is, individually, a copy of an entire school curriculum? Writing error.

It's also unclear what the word "basic" means here.

> Temple does not understand how problem-solving and creativity works.

"work" not "works".

> Temple works hard to stamp out original thougts from his group.

"stamp out ... from" is wrong or poor English.

> Consider, how poorly everyone one of his "fans" think of themselves, and how upset Temple gets if anyone does not embark on their own projects without his permission. It is perverse.

The first comma is an error, should be deleted.

"poorly" here means they do poor quality thinking about themselves. That's not the intended meaning. The intent is to say they have a low opinion of themselves.

Should be "every one" not "everyone one" (or, better, "each one" or, even better, just "each").

"thinks" not "think". And "himself" not "themselves".

It says Temple gets upset if people *don't* embark on their own projects without permission. The intended meaning is the opposite. So "does not embark" should be "embarks".

> It is hopeless though. Temple is so pedantic that he will ignore all criticism if there a single typo in a whole paragraph worth of important criticisms.

I found ten errors above in two paragraphs :)

That's over one error per 7 words, and 1.66 errors per sentence.

> Even if there is 0 mistakes

You're either not fluent in English or not trying.]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:09:45 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13702 http://curi.us/comments/show/13702
Anonymous Social Rules Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:04:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13701 http://curi.us/comments/show/13701 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
Temple is never wrong, Temple is infallible. ;)]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:58:22 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13700 http://curi.us/comments/show/13700
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:56:12 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13699 http://curi.us/comments/show/13699 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:52:00 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13698 http://curi.us/comments/show/13698 Solzhenitsyn, sanction, and lying Alisa Alisa Discussion
> What does it mean, not to lie? [...] It simply means: *not saying what you don’t think*, and that includes not whispering, not opening your mouth, not raising your hand, not casting your vote, not feigning a smile, not lending your presence, not standing up, and not cheering.

This reminds me of (what I understand of) Ayn Rand's ideas about [*sanction*](http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/sanction.html). It is lying to indicate, by any means, that you agree with something with which you disagree.]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:50:28 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13697 http://curi.us/comments/show/13697
curi Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:49:26 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13696 http://curi.us/comments/show/13696 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
I agree with the sentiment. That Temple is irrational, unreasonable, and pedantic. More importantly, he is socially inept.

He has butchered CR to an unrecognizable monstrosity. His epistemological ideas are basic copies of school curriculums. Temple does not understand how problem-solving and creativity works.

Temple works hard to stamp out original thougts from his group. Consider, how poorly everyone one of his "fans" think of themselves, and how upset Temple gets if anyone does not embark on their own projects without his permission. It is perverse.

He will never learn because he can't take criticism.]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:47:24 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13695 http://curi.us/comments/show/13695
curi Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:45:50 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13694 http://curi.us/comments/show/13694 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:37:18 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13693 http://curi.us/comments/show/13693 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:33:05 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13692 http://curi.us/comments/show/13692 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
Temple is bad at taking criticisms.

Temple is overreaching when it comes to social interactions. He does not understand how to communicate. He never will because he doesn't know how to take criticism. He has not improved in this matter for over 12 years. Still as socially awkward as ever.

Overreaching is anti CR btw.]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:29:49 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13691 http://curi.us/comments/show/13691
Dagny Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:25:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13690 http://curi.us/comments/show/13690 curi Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 12:00:45 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13689 http://curi.us/comments/show/13689 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 11:56:54 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13688 http://curi.us/comments/show/13688 curi Open Discussion (2019) Wed, 02 Oct 2019 11:39:53 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13687 http://curi.us/comments/show/13687 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
It's missing a part of the sentence here "This has to be a space of ideas where that kind of unfruitful, negative judgments.". The rest of it is "negative judgments don't come in."]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 11:37:20 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13686 http://curi.us/comments/show/13686
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
I think you shouldn't have commented that on stream. It's harder to have a proper discussion.
Because it's too laborious to transcribe big sections of what you've said, I will point out the time intervals of what I'm responding to.

(*If you are streaming and not still convinced, please jump to the last paragraph*)

38:08-38:26: Those are connected (force and you banning someone). You do ban when someone is using force. When I asked you when is the threat of ban justified you said:

> When they use force and then reject problem solving, refuse to stop, and use more force.


So, if you ban someone, a condition for that happening is that that person must be using force. It follows that discussing an issue related to bans has to have some type of force in it.

39:12-39:17: Are you saying that to me? Either that's to me or him, it's not a constructive thing to say.

39:21- 27: Here you say you didn't kick him out. You threaten him of you doing so. My initial question was related to threat of ban and I never said you did kick him.

39:32-39:44: My main goal of me coming here was to try to change your attitude. If you are going to call people assholes it's evident they are not going to be comfortable. This has to be a space of ideas where that kind of unfruitful, negative judgments. Sure people can do things bad and be wrong and harm others but that's because they don't know better. We should help those people, not ostracize them. It's very rare that people like to harm others just for the sake of it. If that's their objective than we can't help. In this case -- and I'm supposing things here -- he was being hostile on purpose because he thought that was fair and good. We could tell him why that was in reality unhelpful and if persuaded, his intuition would have changed. Can you backup your affirmation that he was not interested in learning or thinking?

39:57-40:04: What's socially pressuring about this

"Hey, I'm not sure if you are understanding what I'm saying correctly but we cannot tolerate hostility here, this has to be a healthy environment with good will in order to function properly. I think you are mad at me because of some misunderstandings so I purpose to discuss this with you another day when things are calmer"?

Where are the euphemisms? I think it's explaining things in a way that is friendly and honest. I think your intuitions about how you should talk to people should change drastically. You should have known that saying "would anyone object to me banning cat?" would led to him leaving. Actually, you probably know what's the normal reaction to that. People usually prefer to leave when they read that (e.g. C_Boss also said that if he was going to be banned for not answering questions then he would leave by himself). Any threat of ban is not helpful when there are other ways of dealing with someone.

40:10-40:16: Again, you called shit to my suggestion. That's very insulting. I don't want to be repeating myself here but you have a problem of attitude. Answering your question: This is too ambiguous, if the following doesn't answer your question and/or you want to know more about other aspects of what I wrote you can ask. I'm going to answer when is postponing some discussion useful: precisely in situations like this, i.e. people being hostile and "having a need" to take a break to calm themselves down and possibly to reflect.

40:16-40:29: You're reflecting your own worldview onto other people's. If you are being honest, there is nothing about what my suggestion that leads to the other person getting more mad. You are seeing things completely wrong. I feel like you think that because there are euphemisms. Can you tell me an example of an euphemism of my suggestion? What is the euphemism in that example and how should that information be said without it? I'm really curious.

40:30-40:34: You are interpreting wrong what I'm saying. I don't think this is a problem of communication from my end. If you take in consideration that there is another person doing an effort to express something meaningful then you should wait and think a little about what I mean. I mean that you brought that subject -- you escalated to that subject.

I'll end here because there are a lot of things to respond to already. I have another suggestion to you: reply to the last post I made the best you can and then answer only to the things that are still unchanged. I'll say some more things before terminate.

One thing you mentioned was about me not responding, in the previous message, to what you wrote. I just wanted to know what were those circumstances to inform myself and others (you should consider putting this info in the pages that lead to the discussion platforms). Maybe I will dispute the misquotation type of force in the future, we'll see how we do in this one.

The second is that my questions at the end are not aggressive nor hostile. I'm asking them quite literally. As I said, posing those questions can help to clear our prejudices. Now, after seeing your response, I want to emphasize those questions because you were too quick answering what you were reading. You are not trying really hard to understand what I'm trying to tell you and you get insulted by me telling you this. You are dismissing a lot of information and giving me more work. Much of what I've said could possibly be understood first try.

For the last, please do not reply to me on stream because I don't think you're doing your very best at that. You have the pressure of people watching which may be affecting how much time you are giving to reply.]]>
Wed, 02 Oct 2019 11:33:44 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13685 http://curi.us/comments/show/13685
curi Social Rules Wed, 02 Oct 2019 11:12:34 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13684 http://curi.us/comments/show/13684 Anonymous Social Rules Wed, 02 Oct 2019 09:09:17 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13683 http://curi.us/comments/show/13683 Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
The claim that males have a protective instinct is an unargued assertion. If you want to have a productive discussion, you'll have to go into detail instead of saying things like "The basic data from psychology backs this up." with no citation.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 18:49:22 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13682 http://curi.us/comments/show/13682
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
Doing zelda botw shrines without being able to see, but with twitch chat seeing the game and giving tips.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 18:44:19 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13681 http://curi.us/comments/show/13681
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
I'm not going into great detail because there isn't a need to, not for making such an elementary point that biology matters and affects how the individual integrates with reality.

The basic data from psychology backs this up. Male and females have different biological drives, these drives affect our nature, and if individuals are not integrate with their nature, they can not live a fully optimal life. We didn't stop being monkeys because we became fully conscious.

Ideas matters but an individual isn't satiated by ideas alone. For example, "loneliness is fatal" because human beings are social animals, and if people don't have some honest social connections it leads to mental health problems, and potentially suicide. I'm sure you can find data for this in psychology today.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 18:37:54 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13680 http://curi.us/comments/show/13680
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Tue, 01 Oct 2019 18:16:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13679 http://curi.us/comments/show/13679 curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
Yeah, being male affects muscles.

> Females multi-task better, because their brains are wired different than mens.

This is the kind of thing I think is false. In order to reach a conclusion about this, one has to go into details, but you aren't doing that. How do you know your claim? By science, by logical reasoning, or what? And then give the details of your arguments. etc. You will neither read and engage with my arguments – readily available by searching my blog or at the links I've provided – nor give details for yours. I think that's because you don't know much about this – but instead of being curious you're already very biased for a conclusion.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 17:56:43 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13678 http://curi.us/comments/show/13678
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
"Nature-the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it."

I mean nature of the person as a whole, mind and body. Our mind cant do anything, unless it works through the body. Our mind isnt divorced from the body.

Since your not a Leftist, Im assuming you understand why it is wrong for "male biological individuals who identify as female" to compete against females. This is one obvious way in which the nature of males and females are different. Men being bigger and stronger on average, is 1 example of males and females having a different nature.

Males have more of an innate drive to reach the top of the field, sport, or whatever competitive area (on average), than women.

Females multi-task better, because their brains are wired different than mens.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 17:48:21 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13677 http://curi.us/comments/show/13677
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Tue, 01 Oct 2019 17:15:12 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13676 http://curi.us/comments/show/13676 Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Tue, 01 Oct 2019 17:06:59 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13675 http://curi.us/comments/show/13675 curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
You don't want to discuss it because, as a non-expert who is unfamiliar with arguments that disagree with you – such as http://bactra.org/weblog/520.html – you are so confident you're right that discussion is a waste of time? That's irrational.

Evolution created our brain but all brains have the same fundamental capabilities similar to how all PCs can run the same apps. Being an intelligent person, or not, is binary. How effectively one thinks is due to which ideas one uses to think, not due to hardware.

You could have found this out by reading material I've already written, but you refused to even try to learn in that way.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 17:02:40 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13674 http://curi.us/comments/show/13674
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
I don't see a point though continuing, because there is clearly a genetic component to IQ. Why would evolution affect everything except our brain? Especially given that our brain becoming big enough to understand ideas, is how we survive?

Does biology affect a males nature vs a female?]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 16:41:55 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13673 http://curi.us/comments/show/13673
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
> I don't think IQ is biological.

You aren't listening and don't seem interested in trying to get better at this.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 15:46:40 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13672 http://curi.us/comments/show/13672
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
You said it doesn't, implying "humans are only ideas." Is this a fair assessment of your view, or what you meant?

I don't have to get into the nitty gritty of it to demonstrate that it matters, because my point isn't "to what degree it matters" my point is only that it matters.

The link you provided demonstrates that you do know it matters to some degree, other wise you would haven't finished it with,


"So, while I disagree about many of the details regarding IQ, I'm fine with a statement like "criminality is mainly concentrated in the 80-90 IQ range"

You wouldn't make a statement like this unless you understand that it does matter to some degree.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 15:43:22 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13671 http://curi.us/comments/show/13671
Anonymous Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors
https://nypost.com/2019/08/09/jeffrey-epsteins-alleged-sex-slave-reveals-the-men-she-claims-she-was-forced-to-sleep-with/

> “I have never met, spoken with or had any contact with Ms. Giuffre,” the statement said. “In my contacts with Mr. Epstein I never observed or suspected any inappropriate conduct with underage girls. I only learned of his actions when they were reported in the media related to his prosecution in Florida. We have had no further contact.”

> Minsky’s widow, Gloria Rudisch, denied to The Post that he had sex with Giuffre or any of the other girls at Epstein’s residences.

> She said that she and Minsky visited Epstein’s residences in New York and Palm Beach “three or four times at the most” and that they always went as a couple.

> “We were always together,” she said. “We didn’t stay at his house or anything.”

> Rudisch said that there young girls at Epstein’s residences, but that “none of them seemed very young.”

> “I’m a pediatrician, I think I would have noticed,” Rudisch said.

> Of Epstein, she said nothing about him struck her as suspicious and that he seemed like “just a rich guy interested in science.”

I quoted extra b/c there are various signs of lying. But in particular she seems to be saying they never went to the island, whereas Gregory Benford, who is defending Minsky, says Minsky was there and that the girl really did approach him.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 15:31:38 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13670 http://curi.us/comments/show/13670
Minsky allegations Alisa Dishonest Thinking About Sex with Minors
According to [jacquesm on HN](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20996077) (footnotes mine):

> I actually haven't seen Minsky being accused. That court transcript [1] says that she was 'directed to have sex' with Minsky but nowhere does it say she did and there is an eyewitness claiming he - Minsky - turned her down [2].

[1]. Cryptome published a zip file containing [~2000 pages of Giuffre v. Maxwell files that were unsealed on Aug 9, 2019](https://twitter.com/_cryptome_/status/1159946492871938048). Giuffre's remarks about Minsky (who [died in 2016](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Minsky#Death)) are in the file giuffre-278.pdf starting at page 145 of the pdf. Here is a manually-cleaned-up version of that section (based on the output of the Unix `pdftotext` command):

> Q: Where did -- where were you and where was Ms. Maxwell when she directed you to go have sex with Marvin Minsky?

> MR. EDWARDS: Object to the form.

> A: I don't know.

> Q (BY MS. MENNINGER): Where did you go to have sex with Marvin Minsky?

> A: I believe it was the U.S. Virgin Islands, Jeff's -- sorry, Jeffrey Epstein's island in the Virgin Islands.

> Q: And when was that?

> A: I don't know.

> Q: Do you have any time of year?

> A: No.

> Q: Do you know how old you were?

> A: No.

> Q: Other than Glenn Dubin, Stephen Kaufmann, Prince Andrew, Jean Luc Brunel, Bill Richardson, another prince, the large hotel chain owner and Marvin Minsky, is there anyone else that Ghislaine Maxwell directed you to go have sex with?

> A: I am definitely sure there is. But can I remember everybody's name? No.

[2]. [Gregory Benford](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Benford) apparently [told Instapundit](https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/):

> Note, never says what happened. If Marvin had done it, she would say so. I know; I was there. Minsky turned her down. Told me about it. She saw us talking and didn’t approach me.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 14:29:18 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13669 http://curi.us/comments/show/13669
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
You don't have to start by trying to debate an expert on a complex issue. Start with something that is easier, have some success, try something 30% harder after that, repeat and work your way up.

Or try it with a different attitude. Go slower, more organized, ask for help on some points, etc. You're posting chaotically.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 12:54:48 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13668 http://curi.us/comments/show/13668
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
I am new to debate, but you have to start somewhere.

We disagree about IQ. I am not an expert, its true, but I do know enough of the science to know that IQ is biological to some degree. I am not interested in your work particularly, because Ive seen the arguments against Nassim Taleb.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 12:52:25 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13667 http://curi.us/comments/show/13667
curi Open Discussion (2019)
The comments end at 49:20, so go back like 10min before that.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 11:58:38 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13666 http://curi.us/comments/show/13666
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
Setting aside that IQ is largely a myth, and just treating it as a vague approximation which is poorly measured by badly designed tests ... I don't think IQ is biological.

I judge that you are not interested in my work on this subject and that you're a beginner who doesn't know much about logic, research, citations, quotes, or debate, but doesn't realize it.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 11:44:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13665 http://curi.us/comments/show/13665
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
> in general, no

This is from the pdf of the discord discussion with Felix the cat (available at http://curi.us/ebooks):

Felix The Cat 21-Aug-19 09:13 PM
Does it happen often to you that you are accused of being hostile but you think you're not?

curi 21-Aug-19 09:14 PM
cat, do you think your question is hostile?

Felix The Cat 21-Aug-19 09:15 PM
Yes, I think you're hostile and the fact that you are so confused that you think you are not is even
worse.

curi 21-Aug-19 09:15 PM
ok, so you're being hostile on purpose. it's an open, conscious intention.
not a slip up. not an old habit. but your actual goal.

Felix The Cat21-Aug-19 09:17 PMI don't like abusive people. Like imagine a teacher behaved the way you do toward a student. Forcing them to adapt how to communicate towards the teacher or receive hostile arguments.

curi 21-Aug-19 09:17 PM
not being the puppet of memes without realizing it. you want to be hostile.
that is inappropriate here. that is not what this chatroom is for. please stop or leave.

Felix The Cat21-Aug-19 09:18 PM
You are avoiding the question. Does it happen often that people find you hostile, and you did notintend to be? Either you lack social skills or you are intentionally hostile.

curi21-Aug-19 09:18 PM
would anyone object to me banning cat?
@TheRatWayFelix
The Cat21-Aug-19 09:19 PM
ah censor too
I can leave on my own. but think about it says a lot more about you than me
peace

I'm not sure if he was saying "yes" to your question "cat, do you think your question is hostile?" given what he says in his 9:17PM message. You could also consider the possibility of what is his definition of hostility, it could mean to him some negative appraisal of you which in this case -- the message carried some negative feeling. I really think this conflict was a problem of communication. I don't believe, also, from what I've seen, that Felix the cat was someone which would deny problem solving.

I don't think you gave him another chance too. You told him to stop and then he didn't realized the severity of what you were asking. Instead of you saying "would anyone object to me banning cat?" you could have said "Hey, I'm not sure if you are understanding what I'm saying correctly but we cannot tolerate hostility here, this has to be a healthy environment with good will in order to function properly. I think you are mad at me because of some misunderstandings so I purpose to discuss this with you another day when things are calmer". Escalating to bans so quickly seems inappropriate (hostile even) given what he was saying -- he wasn't insulting you nor the message had an obvious interpretation of that intention. Giving time for the other person to reflect can be a good strategy too.

Sometimes people don't realize what kind of place FI is. They are not ready to read some types criticisms of them. This has to be explained to them every time someone comes to the community. There are too few people interested in Fallible Ideas and it's good to give some extra opportunities to them. They come for some reason, don't give them other reasons to go.

We are complex. Reason should reach all domains of knowledge. We can be blind to reason at some of them. Humans are fallible, a lot. Having an open mind is so hard sometimes. The confidence of our believes gives us an inability of seeing the other side clearly. We have to drop what we judge as true sometimes and really pose the hypothesis that we are wrong. What if you are not as clear at communicating as you think? What if you are not as friendly as you think? What if you are not as good at reading other people psychology as you think? What if you have emotions that make you act unreasonably?]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 11:30:08 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13664 http://curi.us/comments/show/13664
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
IQ also matters with higher level abstractions and only genius with IQ over a certain level can discover/create "general relativity" or "Objectivism." The actual IQ number is irrelevant, just the point that it takes a certain amount to be the 1st one to grasp it.

Biology includes male and female too. Females amoore born paying attention to faces, while men are born paying attention to things. This is 100% outside of human consciousness. I don't need to get into specifics beyond this because just 1 example proves the point that biology matters and affects our lives in ways that define our natural nature.

Ayn rand did understand there is a difference between men and women, otherwise she would never have made the statement about a female president.
https://youtu.be/cL8g7zy6qxw]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 11:21:18 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13663 http://curi.us/comments/show/13663
Anonymous Analyzing How Culture Manipulates You by Pulling Your Puppet Strings
After you do what you can, you can read other people's analysis and compare and learn some things you missed.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 11:19:41 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13662 http://curi.us/comments/show/13662
Dagny Open Discussion (2019)
I think Brook's motivation here was that Reisman thought of and wrote an argument Brook wanted and did it better than Brook could.

This is the tiniest crack in the embargo on Reisman. Better than nothing but not much.

Doing a couple quick web searches, I have found Brook promoting Reisman zero times online.]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 10:54:56 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13661 http://curi.us/comments/show/13661
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
If a person can put together a few sentences reasonably coherently or get a 70 on an IQ test (rather more like a 0), then what differentiates that person from me, intellectually, is ideas not biology. It's not 40% biology or even 5% biology, it's not biology.

The difference between you and me is ideas. Every single one of the comments by you or I is enough to determine we're intelligent human beings, who can think, not entities with broken brains. So, as usual, the issue is ideas.

I don't think you have given any topical arguments that are half as high quality as what I've read in the past or could readily find on Amazon; nor found any error in any quote I wrote, quoted it, and then explained the error; nor done much research to find and read much of what I've already written about the nature/nurture debate (search the blog). If you can't or won't do those things, I don't know why I would want to speak with you further. What value are you offering?]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 09:48:56 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13660 http://curi.us/comments/show/13660
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
I understand your point about the 2%, what I meant was that 98% of us is monkey and only our human consciousness is a blank slate. I already pointed out Koreas, so ideas matter greatly.

If you want to look at the human being as a "horse body with a human head" it would help for my point here...Human consciousness is 100% surrounded by our monkey body, and EVERYTHING our consciousness wants to do in reality, it has to do it within our nature (if its going for an optimal life).

So, I stick by my first statement, where I said that the link you provided me sounded very apologetic toward the "biology and nurture" debate. Because you go on and on about the flaws in the test, how culture and religion affect it, but then you end it with the quote

"So, while I disagree about many of the details regarding IQ, I'm fine with a statement like "criminality is mainly concentrated in the 80-90 IQ range"."


So, basically you agree with my original statement, "Biology matters."



You were misrepresenting yourself when you said,

>> If Ayn Rand really thought biology didnt matter, then she was wrong.

> Then David Deutsch and I are wrong too. Did you want to have a rational debate about this? We could do it e.g. in this thread: http://curi.us/2056-iq



What you are trying to debate is "how much does biology matter?" That is a different debate than "does biology matters?"

Even if biology matters only 1%, my point is made.

This is similar to an Objectivist trying to debate someone who doesnt believe in free will. The person has to acknowledge that free will matters in order to have the debate.


You have already accepted that biology matters.





If you want to know more about what I think, I am John Nelson, and I talked about my idea for a religion for "rational egoism and free market capitalism" on Mr. Croppers show....I admit I am not comfortable yet being on camera, but I comment all over the comment section and try to clarify my thoughts more.

Here is a link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ1VnbDDtSc&t=14s]]>
Tue, 01 Oct 2019 09:24:02 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13659 http://curi.us/comments/show/13659
Anonymous Two Discord Logs Tue, 01 Oct 2019 02:18:21 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13658 http://curi.us/comments/show/13658 curi Open Discussion (2019)
in general, no

> and interfering negatively (like spamming) while conversations are taking place.

yes. that's basically vandalism which is violating property rights. it's also basically in the category of disobeying simple rules which were a precondition of permission to use the forum (which is someone's property). there are default forum rules like not spamming persistently and heavily enough to make it unusuable, just like if someone invites you into their home there is an implied rule that you won't yell and scream for hours at a time (and if you do, certainly you can be asked to leave, and if you refuse to leave, you are now violating their property rights). similarly, posting a bunch of irrelevant advertisements is not acceptable.

another type of force is doxing.

there's rarely much debate or controversy about stuff like this (above). it's common sense.

a common force issue where there is controversy is to misquote people, not as an accident, but as a persistent policy where you're committing fraud about what they think. misstating people's views – and saying it's their view, not your interpretation or opinion – is a similar issue where you can spread fraudulent misinformation about facts about other people. it's similar to e.g. telling the public that coke is a poison that causes cancer (which, if you did it in a venue that matters, you were famous enough, etc.) would get you deservingly sued by coke.

> Have you ever thought about what I'm asking you as deeply as I am asking? If yes, is that written somewhere?

Yes, and this stuff has been discussed in writing many times before, you can look through the various archives.

Also if you have a criticism of any particular moderator action, you can share that using specifics. They aren't secret.]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 14:02:43 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13657 http://curi.us/comments/show/13657
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
I don't know what you mean by force. Can you put in general terms what are the circumstances you consider someone is using force in a public chat? I'll give two answers to this question that I think you would agree: Being hostile purposefully and interfering negatively (like spamming) while conversations are taking place. Can you give me some more answers?

Your response quoted above seems a little confusing to me. You say "refuse to stop", you are saying refuse to stop using force, right? Then you say "and use more force"; well, if they refuse to stop using force, doesn't that imply that they will use more?

So, to be clear about what you wrote. You are saying that if someone uses force, you try to change his behaviour without any threats — by problem solving conversationally. If he rejects that and continues, what do you do? Do you threat him with a ban, do you just ban him or it depends on the character of the force he's using?

Have you ever thought about what I'm asking you as deeply as I am asking? If yes, is that written somewhere?

Also, if some platform is unmoderated, doesn't that mean you shouldn't control what it's happening there?]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:54:35 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13656 http://curi.us/comments/show/13656
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
> Why dont you give me a link to your multi-blog series rather than someone elses stuff?

I did directly link you to my writing – the IQ posts. You have not written a substantive response to any specific part.

You are at a blog named Curiosity, on the domain curi.us. I, curi (aka Elliot Temple), wrote the posts here.

Saying "monkey nature" is not specific or clear.

> I didnt say "ideas play such a small role in life" you're quite dismissive and catty, are you being serious?

You put them at 2%.]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:02:20 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13655 http://curi.us/comments/show/13655
curi Open Discussion (2019) Mon, 30 Sep 2019 12:58:39 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13654 http://curi.us/comments/show/13654 Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
Why would someone send me a link to someone elses work? I obviously thought you were directly linking something specific you wrote.

Why dont you give me a link to your multi-blog series rather than someone elses stuff?

I didnt say "ideas play such a small role in life" you're quite dismissive and catty, are you being serious?

Monkey nature, I defined what type of nature in the sentence.

Ideas matter greatly, as Mr. Cropper points out "North and South Korea."

If you want to be serious and have me look at your work, then can you provide me a direct link to your work.]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 12:54:37 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13653 http://curi.us/comments/show/13653
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
Your comments strike me as aggressive, unserious and ignorant. If you don't want to say something substantial – either about your own views or about something I've written – we can just drop it.

I'm kind of amazed that you would call my multi-blog-post series – and much more in the archives and elsewhere – inadequate for explaining my position but then provide 2 vague sentences and call those adequate. Your summary suggests something like we're 98% defined by our nature, and 2% by our ideas and concepts, but doesn't explain what that nature consists of or why you think ideas play such a small role in life.]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 12:37:50 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13652 http://curi.us/comments/show/13652
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
I did define my position, "The human is born with a monkey nature, because we are 98% monkey. Only 2% of us is blank slate, because we arent born with innate ideas or concepts."

Did you not read what I wrote?]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 12:34:04 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13651 http://curi.us/comments/show/13651
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
> I read it and it sounded like an apologist. The person didn't flat out say biology matters or biology doesn't matter, they just went on about how culture influences it.

I can't tell if you're accusing me of being an apologist or the other guy.

You can read my existing writing on the matter like that series and many others and then *engage with it*. Don't ask questions like "Define your position." which are asking me to start at the beginning with you. Ask questions or give arguments related to particular text that I already wrote so that we aren't starting over from zero. I'm not interested in creating a zero-to-know-everything lecture course for you, in comments, from scratch, without reusing anything. Point out errors or gaps in my existing material using quotes or specifics.

You also haven't defined your own position, and there is no way for me to look up more info about it. That's a major asymmetry. And what you say is quite vague, e.g. are males are females "different"? They are different in some ways and not other ways, e.g. having a penis is a difference. The differences of interest to me and Objectivism are along the liens of intellectual capacity differences due to genetics, which are what we deny.]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 12:03:35 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13650 http://curi.us/comments/show/13650
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
Define your position.

Does biology matter or not?

IQ isn't the only area either. Male and female, and how it has an effect on an individual's overall nature. Are you someone who doesn't believe males and female are different?

Biology has more influence on IQ than culture. Culture does influence it, and consciously a culture can have a long term (more than one life span) influence on the overall IQ of their people through self confidence and character building. On any one individual life, biology plays a bigger role than culture.]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 11:49:05 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13649 http://curi.us/comments/show/13649
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
No. I'm no leftist. I'm a fan of David Horowitz and Ann Coulter. Ted Cruz was my first choice for president, Trump second. I want a southern border wall, to end anchor babies, etc.]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 11:17:39 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13648 http://curi.us/comments/show/13648
curi Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
Then David Deutsch and I are wrong too. Did you want to have a rational debate about this? We could do it e.g. in this thread: http://curi.us/2056-iq]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 11:01:33 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13647 http://curi.us/comments/show/13647
Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
I am an admirer of Rand and she helped me a good deal, but I am not an Objectivist. I will never be one. I am a rational egoist and radical for capitalism.

I have been following the Objectivism drama over the last few months, and to me it seems like it is

ObLeftivism- the objectivists who are trapped in their conceptual theoretical world (same way that many professors in academia are only living in a theory world, detached from reality's overall nature)

and the "non-dogmatic Objectivists" ...

I consider Mr. Cropper in the "non-dogmatic group" so I was wondering if you were with the "Harry B.'s" of ObLeftivism...

If Ayn Rand really thought biology didnt matter, then she was wrong. So, if Mr. Cropper being objective about the fact that biology matters, because evolution is real, then good on him for leaving a dogmatic cult.

I dont know if Ayn Rand really thought biology doesnt matter, BUT IF she did, she was wrong.

The human is born with a monkey nature, because we are 98% monkey. Only 2% of us is blank slate, because we arent born with innate ideas or concepts.


Rand also did not know how to work a room, nor did she understand why it is important to play the crowd, correctly... Ill take Ben Franklins methods of socializing to Rand's. Every individual is on the chessboard of life, friends and allies are important.]]>
Mon, 30 Sep 2019 10:56:51 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13646 http://curi.us/comments/show/13646
curi Open Discussion (2019) Mon, 30 Sep 2019 10:06:33 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13645 http://curi.us/comments/show/13645 Bans Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Mon, 30 Sep 2019 08:43:17 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13644 http://curi.us/comments/show/13644 Kate Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:35:01 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13643 http://curi.us/comments/show/13643 Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist Sun, 29 Sep 2019 11:39:00 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13642 http://curi.us/comments/show/13642 Anonymous Brandon Cropper Is Not an Objectivist
Is he a good representation of Objectivism?]]>
Sun, 29 Sep 2019 06:22:15 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13641 http://curi.us/comments/show/13641
Tip for applying decals with Windex Frisco Open Discussion (2019)
> When applying any decal try a little windex mist on the sticky side of the decal and the part. Then apply while wet. You can then slide decal into perfect position and remove all bubbles no problem. Then just work the decal until windex is worked out and wipe dry. I've applied many decals including large ones on pop machines this way. Windex will dry in a few minutes and decal will be locked down nicely.]]>
Sat, 28 Sep 2019 20:31:47 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13640 http://curi.us/comments/show/13640
Alisa Alisa Discussion Sat, 28 Sep 2019 16:45:41 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13639 http://curi.us/comments/show/13639 Anonymous Alisa Discussion
Mostly, other people can't program you. But then can punish you unless you accomplish certain things they choose, pass certain tests, etc. Those threatened and actual punishments can motivate some programming (partly to please the threateners, partly to lie to and trick the threateners).

Also, to some extent, your culture (using some individuals) can program you. Programming you from the outside is very very very hard and complicated. But I think it can be done by highly evolved static meme knowledge.]]>
Sat, 28 Sep 2019 16:37:05 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13638 http://curi.us/comments/show/13638
curi Submit Podcast Questions
*Open Society* is a pretty good book. Popper doesn't pretend to be a free trader or capitalist economist (as e.g. Hayek did). He's not into limited, small government and also doesn't pretend to be. Popper is left of center and knows it – he expresses some sympathy with socialism in his autobiography – and nevertheless has lots of good criticisms of Marx. They' not complete but they're worth saying. (This is from memory. I haven't read OSE recently.)

IME, it's induction and related issues which I have found Objectivists bring up and complain about regarding Popper.]]>
Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:52:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13637 http://curi.us/comments/show/13637
curi Open Discussion (2019)
Yes intuition is automated knowledge. And I just talked about this topic in my new podcast:

https://curi.us/podcast/sense-of-life-learning-and-practice]]>
Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:45:26 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13636 http://curi.us/comments/show/13636
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:07:56 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13635 http://curi.us/comments/show/13635 Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:02:06 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13634 http://curi.us/comments/show/13634 curi Open Discussion (2019)
20% of ppl over 5, 50% of ppl over 10, 80% of ppl over 15, 95% of ppl over 20, and 99% of ppl over 25 are horribly dishonest and will never recover.]]>
Sat, 28 Sep 2019 10:48:42 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13633 http://curi.us/comments/show/13633
Anonymous TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation Sat, 28 Sep 2019 10:42:33 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13632 http://curi.us/comments/show/13632 Kate TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation Sat, 28 Sep 2019 04:52:24 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13631 http://curi.us/comments/show/13631 Alisa Open Discussion (2019)
> Your counter example is wrong. First, you changed the wording significantly. The original argument claims that if the result of a process has bias, the process has bias. Your example doesn't deal with processes.

True. I think what happened is this: I quoted some text by Coppola, and then, without saying what I was doing, I responded to something I thought the text suggested rather than to the text itself. That was a mistake.

The idea I was responding to was something like this: if Google search results seem biased, there must be a bias in Google Search.

The quoted text by Coppola is true. Calling it false was another mistake.

> Second, the process that produces fewer blacks and women in tech is in fact biased. That doesn't, however, imply that tech companies are biased because the process includes parenting, schools and more.

I agree. Upon reflection, what I actually object to is not the quoted text by Coppola, but arguments that assign blame to part of a process without adequately considering the whole process. That is why I object to the idea that the under-representation of some groups in tech indicates that tech hiring and workplace environments are biased against those groups.]]>
Fri, 27 Sep 2019 23:37:14 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13630 http://curi.us/comments/show/13630
Anonymous Open Discussion (2019) Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:08:02 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13629 http://curi.us/comments/show/13629 Anonymous TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:06:37 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13628 http://curi.us/comments/show/13628 curi What To Read
The books have some flaws but are readable. I find most books pretty much unreadable.

They are the fantasy or adventure in space type of sci-fi, not the scientific type of sci fi. They aren't intellectual. They involve war, violence, spying, rulers and politics.

Miles is clever *and* lucky. He solves some problems by being clever or using skill or planning ahead or whatever, which I like. He solves some problems by getting lucky. The luck is not a rare thing. He gets lucky in big ways multiple times per book. He would have died many times without great luck. He has a ton of plot armor. It's kinda like the TV shows where main characters can run through a bunch of gun fire – every 4th episode – and never get hit. There are lots of unrealistic things about the books, but I mostly don't mind, but I dislike how much stuff is designed to make everything turn out great for main characters, especially Miles. His luck isn't just with threats but also opportunities. Lots of his adventures just fall into his lap. In *The Warrior's Apprentice* Miles actually showed a ton of initiative to begin his adventure, but in *The Vor Game* and *Cetaganda* the adventures more just happen to him and are some of the most important things going on for his whole race or for the whole group of planets that are close enough to ever be mentioned in the books, and he often jumps straight to the top and interacts with some of the most powerful and prestigious people that exist. (Miles is the son of someone very important but that status is not nearly enough to meet and deal with some of the people he does, which only happens due to lucky adventures.)]]>
Fri, 27 Sep 2019 11:05:54 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13627 http://curi.us/comments/show/13627
Kate TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation
> You have given no argument that life (the earlier concept) is denied.

To see how life (the earlier concept) is denied, consider an example, e.g. altruism.

First, maybe consider this, though. VoS:

> Let me stress this. The first question is not: What particular code of values should man accept? The first question is: Does man need values at all—and why? Is the concept of value, of “good or evil” an arbitrary human invention, unrelated to, underived from and unsupported by any facts of reality—or is it based on a metaphysical fact, on an unalterable condition of man’s existence?

My understanding is that Oism holds that the concept of value, of “good or evil” is not an arbitrary human invention. It is based on a metaphysical fact. We aren’t in a situation where ppl or moral codes can just drop the context (which includes the concept of “life”) and declare that something is a value to them or good for them and have it be so.

But altruism tries to do this. Altruism says that it's good to self-sacrifice. How can altruism call self-sacrifice a “value” or "something good” when these concepts are only possible because the concept of “life” made them possible? (As for how the concept of “life” made them possible, see “The Objectivist Ethics”.)

VoS:

> It is only the concept of ‘Life’ that makes the concept of ‘Value’ possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil.”

I’m in the process of understanding this better, but the way I see it is that altruism is *stealing* the concepts of “value” and “good” and is applying them to something (i.e. self-sacrifice) that involves sacrificing values and diminishing your life(!). So, altruism is “using a concept while denying the validity of its genetic roots, i.e., of an earlier concept(s) on which it logically depends.” ( http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/stolen_concept,_fallacy_of.html )

> You appear to be arbitrarily equating using something outside the context of X with denying X, like you can't tell the difference between those two things.

I’m unclear on your comment. I don’t know if this clarifies anything, but as for “outside of the context of X”, I had in mind something like dropping the context of X. And the context of X shouldn’t be dropped because the context includes a concept (life) which these other concepts (W, Y, and Z; good, bad, and value) are logically dependent on.

And when you drop the context in the way that altruism does by calling self-sacrifice “something good” or “a value”, you *do deny* the role of the earlier concept “life” that “good” and “value” are logically dependent on.

Again, claiming A and B are good for you doesn’t make it so. Things are good for you *if they actually advance your life*. If you drop this context (which takes life into account), then you *are* denying the role of the concept of life.]]>
Fri, 27 Sep 2019 09:50:07 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13626 http://curi.us/comments/show/13626
N Open Discussion (2019)
*Return of the Primitive*, ch 5:
> If you observe that ever since Hume and Kant (mainly Kant, because Hume was merely the Bertrand Russell of his time) ...]]>
Fri, 27 Sep 2019 09:37:49 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13625 http://curi.us/comments/show/13625
Anonymous Social Rules Fri, 27 Sep 2019 02:11:23 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13624 http://curi.us/comments/show/13624 Anonymous Social Rules Fri, 27 Sep 2019 00:11:06 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13623 http://curi.us/comments/show/13623 Anonymous Social Rules red is too scary for me to handle. it gives me strong bodily stress and nightmares. it's hard to look people in the eyes even in photographs or cartoons.]]> Thu, 26 Sep 2019 23:58:49 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13622 http://curi.us/comments/show/13622 Anonymous Social Rules Thu, 26 Sep 2019 23:54:03 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13621 http://curi.us/comments/show/13621 Anonymous Social Rules how does this work with autistic girls? normal relationship stuff isn't interesting and meeting normal social expectations is difficult or impossible. brain generates too many 'delusions'.]]> Thu, 26 Sep 2019 23:47:39 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13620 http://curi.us/comments/show/13620 Anonymous Social Rules Thu, 26 Sep 2019 23:41:47 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13619 http://curi.us/comments/show/13619 Anonymous Social Rules Thu, 26 Sep 2019 23:33:28 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13618 http://curi.us/comments/show/13618 kieren Rationally Resolving Conflicts of Ideas Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:32:02 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13617 http://curi.us/comments/show/13617 Anonymous TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation Thu, 26 Sep 2019 10:17:45 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13616 http://curi.us/comments/show/13616 Anonymous TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation
It's like the difference between forgetting to take something into account vs. saying that thing is false.]]>
Thu, 26 Sep 2019 10:14:41 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13615 http://curi.us/comments/show/13615
Dagny Open Discussion (2019)
And your incorrect counter example is your only argument that it's a fallacy.

And even if your counter example were correct, a counter example makes something *incorrect* or *wrong*, it doesn't make it a fallacy. Fallacy has a stronger meaning than that.]]>
Thu, 26 Sep 2019 09:38:15 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13614 http://curi.us/comments/show/13614
Kate TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/stolen_concept,_fallacy_of.html

> The “stolen concept” fallacy, first identified by Ayn Rand, is the fallacy of using a concept while denying the validity of its genetic roots, i.e., of an earlier concept(s) on which it logically depends.

The concept of "life" is what gave rise to the need for concepts such as "good", "bad", and "value". Without living things existing, there'd be no need for these other concepts to exist. There'd be no need for morality.

So, using these other concepts outside of the context of life or while dropping the context of life is an example of using a concept while denying the validity of an earlier concept ("life" in this case) on which it logically depends. You are stealing the concept.

For example, altruism has stolen the concepts of "good" and "bad". Altruism uses those concepts while denying the earlier concept of "life" that those concepts depend on.

Consider: To be good means to act in service of one thing and one thing only: one’s life. Any deviation from this is, **by definition**, not good.

Someone wrote something like this on HBL. I like it. I added the emphasis.]]>
Thu, 26 Sep 2019 09:38:14 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13613 http://curi.us/comments/show/13613
Alisa Open Discussion (2019)
> “If you see a resulting end product that seems to encode a bias of one sort or another, there must have been that bias in the process that produced that end result” - Google whistleblower Greg Coppola

No, that's a fallacy. Coppola's argument is false for the same reason as the argument that tech companies must be biased against some group merely because the proportion of that group in tech is less than the proportion of that group in the general population.]]>
Thu, 26 Sep 2019 07:23:54 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13612 http://curi.us/comments/show/13612
curi FI Posting Tips
Debating you about something, or answering your questions, when you don't have knowledge to offer that will help me *and* you aren't debating or asking or learning rationally, is not of value to me.

If I think your methodology is irrational and you think it's rational, we could discuss that. That's a topic I'm especially interested in, so discussion of it can be a value to me even if the quality is low. I would like more people to actually try to specify what discussion methodology they advocate, and answer questions about it (like whether it's original to them or well known, and if it's well known has it already been written down in a high quality way somewhere?), and analyze how certain discussion statements do or don't fit particular methodologies.]]>
Wed, 25 Sep 2019 15:48:47 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13611 http://curi.us/comments/show/13611
curi FI Posting Tips
So a good format for talking is *two section posts*, one section where the new person gets info about some topic of interest to them, and one section related to rational methodology – asking about their goals, bringing up methodology problems, etc.]]>
Wed, 25 Sep 2019 13:03:55 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13610 http://curi.us/comments/show/13610
Alisa Explaining Infinite Sets, Measures, and Mappings for Quantum Physics >
> It said calculus was a prerequisite.

Link? Calculus is not a prerequisite for understanding or working formally with infinite sets. However, calculus might be a prerequisite for *other* stuff in that course.]]>
Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:26:22 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13609 http://curi.us/comments/show/13609
Requirements For Philosophy Discussions curi FI Posting Tips
1) Time, attention, effort, and willingness to **both** read and discuss.

2) Fluent in English. To get into detailed discussions and textual analysis, you need to be much better at English than most people. You can improve at English over time and may or may not specifically study English at some point. If you’re starting below fluent then you should study English.

3) Broad curiosity and interest in ideas, truth and reason. If you’re only interested in one or two narrows areas, it won’t work, because ideas outside of your interests will be relevant and important.

4) At least **one** of the following 3 things (The more the better. I don’t know how to effectively work with people with none of these.):

- Honesty
- Skill/knowledge/smarts
- Social compliance, deference, respect (voluntarily and happily, not begrudgingly). Being impressed by me/FI, seeing value there, wanting to give it a chance.

Issue (4) can also be viewed as a matter of degrees. Score each of the 3 traits from 0-100. The number is the percentile in the population of English speakers with internet access, Western values, and a little bit of interest in ideas. E.g. a 20 means you’re better than 20% of people at that trait, and a 90 means being better than 90% of people at it. Sum the 3 scores. Under 150 is bad, 200 is OK, 250+ is good. The distribution of the scores does matter too. E.g. a 100 in honesty and a 0 in the other scores could actually work well, while a 33 in each trait is really bad. It’s partly that honesty is the most important trait of the three, but it’s more that having a high score in one trait is better than three mediocre scores. Being good at one of the three traits gives me something to work with and use as resource/tool.]]>
Wed, 25 Sep 2019 12:25:56 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13608 http://curi.us/comments/show/13608
Standards of success Anonymous Open Discussion (2019)
> “Well, why did they come to you—to us, for such an unlikely assignment as oil pumping?”

> “Because it is a problem of great technological difficulty, requiring the services of the best scientific talent available. You see, it is a matter of reconstructing the special method of oil extraction that Wyatt had employed. His equipment is still there, though in a dreadful condition; some of his processes are known, but somehow there is no full record of the complete operation or the basic principle involved. That is what we have to rediscover.”

> “And how is it going?”

> “The progress is most gratifying. We have just been granted a new and larger appropriation. Mr. Wesley Mouch is pleased with our work. So are Mr. Balch of the Emergency Commission, Mr. Anderson of Crucial Supplies and Mr. Pettibone of Consumers’ Protection. I do not see what more could be expected of us. The project is fully successful.”

> “Have you produced any oil?”

> “No, but we have succeeded in forcing a flow from one of the wells, to the extent of six and a half gallons.]]>
Wed, 25 Sep 2019 11:56:37 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13607 http://curi.us/comments/show/13607
Anonymous TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation Wed, 25 Sep 2019 11:08:36 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13606 http://curi.us/comments/show/13606 N TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation
https://www.reddit.com/r/IntellectualDarkWeb/comments/cq0ex8/scholarly_criticism_jordan_petersons_sloppy_cite/f0oiygv/

> (TWOP) probably too indoctrinated in the cult of Rand to see how bizarre your responses are.

> (TWOP) You keep saying I present conclusions without explanations yet every one of my posts had explanations and examples. Focusing on your cult leader Temple and how he behaves exactly as Rand did, and how her philosophy would dictate he should. (and as you're behaving now - assuming infallibility)

> (TWOP) You keep linking me garbage about Rand trying to Gish Gallop and have not countered a single one of my claims.

> (TWOP) You're irrational, as was your grand leader Rand, and is your current cult leader Temple.

> (TWOP) You could test your reality. Find something you disagree with your dear leader and bring it up to him, assuming you even dare, it won't be a productive exchange.]]>
Wed, 25 Sep 2019 10:12:56 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13605 http://curi.us/comments/show/13605
Frisco Open Discussion (2019)
> [Magnus Carlsen] has even managed to optimize ... sitting... Carlsen claims that many chess players crane their necks too far forward... The Norwegian rests his lower back against the chair so it retains a natural curve, his knees slightly apart at the edge of the seat, feet firmly on the ground, and leans forward at about a 75-degree angle. In this position, which he arrived at through reading studies and trial and error, he's not too far forward to lose alertness and not too far back to use extra energy.]]>
Wed, 25 Sep 2019 07:03:25 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13604 http://curi.us/comments/show/13604
Kate TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation
It felt like a side question that popped up, and I had other stuff I wanted to think about. Ok, if that's the case, I shouldn't have asked it of others. I could have posted my message without that question. And then later when I had more mental energy available, I could have looked into it properly if I wanted to.]]>
Wed, 25 Sep 2019 05:25:06 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13603 http://curi.us/comments/show/13603
N TheWorldOfParmenides Reddit Conversation
TWOP's latest response and my final reply to TWOP on this subject follows below.

Thanks, Kate, for good contributions.

https://www.reddit.com/r/IntellectualDarkWeb/comments/cq0ex8/scholarly_criticism_jordan_petersons_sloppy_cite/f0oiygv/

>> (TWOP) I never dropped Rand. You seem confused. I told you already, Rand is a crypto-infallibilist as are her followers. No matter how many quotes you give me of Rand saying she's a fallibilist will it be otherwise. Think about it, I could say 1000 times that I am not a socialist. But if through my actions I support and push socialist agendas, I am a crypto-socialist.

> (N) Again: you present your conclusions without explanations and quotes. This (presenting conclusions without explanations) is flawed discussion methodology. Why should anyone accept your unexplained conclusions?

> (N) "Rand is a pretender", you say. Why? No answer.
> (N) "Rand is a crypto-infallibilist", you say. Why? No answer.

> (N) By answer I mean substantive arguments; not by an appeal to authority (e.g. "I say so", "X philosopher says so").

>> (TWOP) What do you think my example of one her followers was supposed to signify?

> (N) I wonder why you evade using Rand as an example. It was, after all, Rand that you were flaming, for no apparent reason.

>> (TWOP) Why do you think the behavior - X person has a bad idea thus X person is bad is important to point out?

>> (TWOP) What do you think the implication there is? What does it mean to be a bad if you have a bad idea? What does being good here mean then? A good person has no bad ideas? I ask again, why is this important to point out?

> (N) You wrote that you "could consider a more careful revisit [of Rand]". That was a good idea. You are dropping context. You are trying to argue Rand's concept of moral judgement without understanding it. As I was once told: one needs to understand the concepts before arguing them.

> (N) Useful links to start with:
> (N) http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/evil.html
> (N) http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/moral_judgment.html
> (N) http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/justice.html

> (N) As for Rand's view on Hayek, and more on moral judgement, here is a link with quotes from Rand's letters regarding Hayek:
http://clubtroppo.com.au/2006/12/30/hayek-shrugged/

>> (TWOP) Let me give you a hint, it is the epitome of anti-fallibalism.

>> (TWOP) If you can't keep up with this simple exchange I see no further reason to continue it.

> (N) You seem confused on Rand and unwilling to learn. Hence, I agree with your conclusion, there is no reason to continue.]]>
Tue, 24 Sep 2019 23:28:35 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13602 http://curi.us/comments/show/13602
I am a self-programming program Alisa Alisa Discussion
- the way I look at this screen and see text
- the way I hear sounds as speech
- the things I notice in a situation, such other cars while driving
- my emotions
- the way I speak and walk

I can re-program myself. Even my most habitual actions and my deepest emotions can be changed [1]. Not with code, like with a computer, but by *learning*.

A good program has a clean design. Everything works together, and every part makes sense. Maybe this is why Francisco could "always name the purpose of his every random moment".

I don't remember how I began. Maybe it wasn't until I got older that I programmed a memory system that was accessible with my current retrieval methods. I suppose, though, that I must have started out as a rather small self-programming program. Using my creativity, I began to program myself. And over time, I added the layers and layers of programming that make up the me of today.

[1] Elliot Temple wrote about how to change emotions in [fallibleideas.com/emotions](https://fallibleideas.com/emotions).]]>
Tue, 24 Sep 2019 21:10:56 +0000 http://curi.us/comments/show/13601 http://curi.us/comments/show/13601