265600+ entries in 0.085s
mircea_popescu: in no case anything like "an immense horde of absolutely nil idiots expect everyone to believe the world exists to serve them"
mircea_popescu: and if you make a business, you didn't make that business. and really the political problems of the us are whether black dudes pee correctly and how someone drew a cartoon character's tits.
mircea_popescu: "I think you make an excellent point, but all these cases are examples of guys who got a seat on a rocket and were pretty ruthless about who else got to ride."
mircea_popescu: it takes astute practical thinkers like the buffett of the 70s and turns them into "i believe in america and carbon tax credits!" sort of al gore marionette.
mircea_popescu: it takes a graham as he was in the 80s and produces the barely cognizant empty shell that will make junior-high level errors in his ill thought out essays.
mircea_popescu: jesus the sort of brainrot. see kids, i have another reason to crack down on socialism, and an additional argument to use when I do : socialism makes you stupid.
mircea_popescu: so wait, the "gilded age financiers" DIDNT create the railroad monopolies ?
mircea_popescu: ahahaha this is the lulziest bit of the entire senile-graham wankfest.
mircea_popescu: "[3] Peter Thiel would point out that successful founders still get rich from controlling monopolies, just monopolies they create rather than ones they capture. And while this is largely true, it means a big change in the sort of person who wins."
mircea_popescu: because socialism always moves on to the cheaper alternative, this being the true definition of progress. "where your dad had crystal glasses and imported liqueurs, you now get asphalt under the elements and a half-dung joint"
mircea_popescu: <ben_vulpes> i'm sure it was a good time for all involved. joints, flasks, conversation that all agreed on important topics... << notice what the cocktail party of the 70s has turned into.
mircea_popescu: the only thing here is that the opinions of the idjits don't actually count tho.
mircea_popescu: undata> hell to most of the people alive, that's the rational position to take >> quite.
mircea_popescu: there's a few jurisdictions scattered around counting a few hundred million souls that are trying an experiment on the topic currently
mircea_popescu: well, it's settled law to this day pretty much everywhere.
mircea_popescu: societies where husbands own the wife are always in a dire shortage of men
mircea_popescu: it makes the "abortion is moral" debate what it belongs being : a moot question.
mircea_popescu: <decimation> undata: abortion is a complex issue that ends up being used as a wedge on both sides << abortion is only "complex" because it is undefined. the actualy issue is, who owns the woman. if the husband owns the wife "abortion" is no problem. if the wife owns the husband, idem. nonsensical "middle of the road" dualities that can't stand, where the wife is really a husband all by herself, except not really are ne
mircea_popescu: predicted doom can always be satisfactorily claimed to have come true, which is why it's been a favourite sport all along
mircea_popescu: <decimation> there's a point to this (the idea that the losing party claims 'philosophic victory'). but there's a long tradition of 'old republicans' predicting doom which more-or-less came true << same for the left.
mircea_popescu: and for that matter : in the 70s ? dude totally the voter agreed "philosophically" with the progressives.
mircea_popescu: so you know, either the redheaded or the brunette is busy squealing, while the other's sitting in a corner thinking of jesus and sin.
mircea_popescu: because an election still is an advance auction of stolen goods.
mircea_popescu: the losers are "principled" and the winners are distributing largesse out of the public goods.
mircea_popescu: this, incidentally, underpins all winner-loser scenarios on the broader timescale in all politcal systems to date.
mircea_popescu: "Tom Reagan: I am awake. Tad: Your eyes are shut. Tom Reagan: Who you gonna believe?"
mircea_popescu: if obama comes to power and gives a bunch of tax money to a bunch of cronies, the democratic activists will see justice being done, and the republicans corruption.
mircea_popescu: the one (or the other) sees true love. the other (or the one) sees just sheer stupidity on his part and the nefariousness of that one (or the other) witch.
mircea_popescu: looky at a simile : two hot 17 yos : a redhead with perky tits, a brunette with butt to die for.
mircea_popescu: so it's one of those, "maybe, depends where you aim to take it"
mircea_popescu: see, it's a summary, for sure, and it has what to stand on, but it's not necessarily the case that its footing will support any ulterior conclusion.
mircea_popescu: well... you know that saying that, "given an artefact and a situation, the artefact will either work or it won't" ?
mircea_popescu: there is nothing besides the fact of one's own existence.
mircea_popescu: and besides, very deeply human thing, someone on his knees in a church or behind a tree or somehting, "please, i can't take this"
mircea_popescu: that figure is always the same figure, not like psychology is now going to fucking progress or something.
mircea_popescu: yea, wat then ? god'll think you'r somewhere between offensively stupid and hysterically funny.
mircea_popescu: to be unidirectional it has to manifest some subset of properties of invisibility, somehow.
mircea_popescu: in the simplest form : "don't call us, we'll call you"
mircea_popescu: decimation everything everywhere is ruled by the ruthless. that's why the simple were promised the kingdom of heaven
mircea_popescu: basically, it'll build a great 1700s india, this niceness.
mircea_popescu: well, it's difficult to circumscribe it, seeing how it's a word with no definition enacted by usage of a tribe that's not particularly thinking-inclined. but i would say "niceness" mostly denotes a sort of bovine passivity.
mircea_popescu: i get why it'd be nice for ruthlesness to carry the connotations meanness properly does. however, something being nice doesn't really do anything. if only it did, then the nice people'd be like mages, calling forth reality out of their fucking song.
mircea_popescu: a total fucking misnomer, by the way, what they mean is "ruthless". mean denotes something else, it's a sort of spiritual cheapness.
mircea_popescu: indeed : in order for the "only nice people" mantra to be "supported" after a fashion, one needs to be not only completely ignorant of the classics, but not even realise that the fucking central subject both in their writings and in their own, stated estimation, was "how to rule people", and this is in no small part a consideration of what they call "mean".
mircea_popescu: anyway, looking at it from the other angle, "check out what incredible cultural gymnastics the socialists need to justify and defend their ludicrous dogmas"
mircea_popescu: "come see paul graham read aramaic at the bottom of his start-up hat, and then translate it with the herpimm and the derpimm, two magical entrepreneurial stones from ancient egypt."