332200+ entries in 0.12s
mircea_popescu: "I found myself conversing with a young criminal lawyer who will soon be marrying into the same family that I did last summer. I think this makes us laws-in-laws."
mircea_popescu: artifexd actually the controlling example is... anduck himself has a total negaitve
mircea_popescu: sadly this has to start by my translating three older romanian articles, but c'est la vie.
mircea_popescu: mkay, so i'm writing a seminal, major and epic work called "a complete theory of economics".
mircea_popescu: so numbers are your standard of objectivity, but then when i ask you <mircea_popescu> are you using "subjectivity" merely to note the fact that the numeric method does not apply ? you say no.
mircea_popescu: while outside of his reach it may well be, his master's just another guy.
mircea_popescu: you seem to be roughly in the position of the slave who says his master's will is divine in nature, because it's outside of his reach.
mircea_popescu: but you need a judgement call for the tape measure to exist in the first place.
mircea_popescu: god help us if our opinions of these subjectives do not agree.
mircea_popescu: your "done corectly" is there precisely because you too know this :
mircea_popescu: <bounce> an objective measure? a metre, standard the world over. < 1 ; <bounce> whether I take a tape measure to $derp or you do it, when done correctly we both will conclude the guy's length to be $whatever. < 2
mircea_popescu: both of these "objectively" examples you provide strictly adhere to your definition of subjectivity,
mircea_popescu: this is more akin to you using inches and me using cm.
mircea_popescu: are you using "subjectivity" merely to note the fact that the numeric method does not apply ?
mircea_popescu: if he looked to do what he felt like it could have been subjective, as a proxy for aesthetic i guess.
mircea_popescu: so inasmuch as good is done, this is optimal not subjective.
mircea_popescu: if it's the kneejerk "not usg diddled" then might as well discard it.
mircea_popescu: bounce im not sure you have a usable definition of subjective in mind.
mircea_popescu: two hours ago i said i suspect i'm weeks away from a major breakthrough in economics.
mircea_popescu: understanding rather than esteem. the people you've dealt with are marks you may be recognised by.
mircea_popescu: god'd like to. but tis impossible, inasmuch as the devil is human, and god is not that good.
mircea_popescu: if god actually knew every thought of the devil, he'd have not been surprised.
mircea_popescu: the criteria is good wot relations, not "knowing their every thought"
mircea_popescu: nobody requires to know his every move or thought in any sense.
mircea_popescu: because someone somewhere in a bureaucracy figured it's a good idea to fucking industrialise research.
mircea_popescu: "Now academics learn to take a paper or a class of papers, imitate the style, the organization; copy the phraseology, discuss the historical literature and find some wrinkle on the problem that makes it look like a contribution. This is what tends to be published, and this is what seems to be "original". And these works never survive the author."
mircea_popescu: conversely, misplaced shards of personhood ruin anonimity. such as w/e, silk road guy.
mircea_popescu: bounce actually, misplaced shards of anonimity ruin personhood. which is why i keep having to ask derps posing as ceos here "who's we".
mircea_popescu: there's no serious consideration of an oil-alcohol mixture being "storng enough", as you won't drink vodka-canoia oil cocktails
mircea_popescu: now, this does not reduce to "liquor being strong ENOUGH"
mircea_popescu: conversely, good cogicity, just like good personhood, relies on not being a sphere. at all.
mircea_popescu: good anonimity, just like good sphericity, relies on not being a cog. at all.
mircea_popescu: let's try a different tack. you know what a cog is. you also know what a sphere is.
mircea_popescu: yardstick is a matter of measuring, and thus relegated to quantitative discussions. we're discussing qualitative matters here.
mircea_popescu: bounce fun fact... that yielded romanian prosop, which means... towel.
mircea_popescu: davout everythint that matters is only what COULD BE HAD knowledge of.
mircea_popescu: perhaps an excusable approximation in some narrow cases, but wrong in principle.
mircea_popescu: speaking of "different" derps is like speaking of photons as billiard balls.
mircea_popescu: because the undistinguishable can't ever matter, by definition.
mircea_popescu: which reduces to "someone who could, in principle, matter"
mircea_popescu: bounce it merely means "someone who can be distinguished from the others"
mircea_popescu: so yes, animals they can be. people however, they can not be, unless recognised.
mircea_popescu: you can be bios, but you can not be zoon unrecognised.
mircea_popescu: davout your ability to distinguish derps is however central to their ability to exist.
mircea_popescu: "A 43-year-old programmer who helped set in motion a class-action lawsuit against the companies and became one of its five class representatives will not be present in the San Jose courtroom. He was shot and killed by the police last December."
mircea_popescu: after it becomes transparent to you, it already broke that anonimity.
mircea_popescu: unless and untill this becomes transpared to you it is immaterial.
mircea_popescu: but what happens inside the pet rock is uninteresting in this discussion.
mircea_popescu: to personalize they need to de-jehova-witnessize for you, before you.