351300+ entries in 0.098s
mircea_popescu: you perceive a distinction between this meta-modelling and your mommy ? what would it be ?
mircea_popescu: greenspan_fan what does "better" mean ? your mommy would approve ?
mircea_popescu: your process is not going to be perfect, and the representation that it is makes no sense.
mircea_popescu: and who maybe doesn't even - horror of horrors - speak your language.
mircea_popescu: should you find yourself alone with a cunt that's not properly bred according to the customs of your class
mircea_popescu: you excused this untenable presumption on the grounds that your high expectations of yourself would otherwise paralyze you,
mircea_popescu: Untermyer: Is not commercial credit based primarily upon money or property?
mircea_popescu: but these are all of the nature of the x% you realise.
mircea_popescu: and further a cognate of quite catholic notions of divinity.
mircea_popescu: which is a cognate of both why regulation can't resolve market problems and why "self enforcing contracts" are nonsense.
mircea_popescu: so yeah, the summa of this thing is that hard rational positions melt away under examination.
mircea_popescu: you'll look back and go... well i guess the prediction came through. now what ?
mircea_popescu: sure greenspan_fan you can think whatever you wish. but that doesn't resolve your decidability dilemma.
mircea_popescu: and similarly as you can't here, you generally can't anywhere else.
mircea_popescu: this is in fact a perfect embodiment of your problem for your convenience :
mircea_popescu: well why wouldn't it be ? maybe it was. maybe i can read the future in uvulas.
mircea_popescu: "What of it? People who don’t know MtGox won’t buy this story as long as you provide zero evidence to back it up, that’s what of it."
mircea_popescu: "I’m sure a lot of people would like free icecream, too. And free coffee, even to the degree of queing for an hour to get it. And whatever else. So what of it ?"
mircea_popescu: "Any actual evidence that they have this magic “unlimited selftrading account”? I’m sure a lot of people would like to see it if it does indeed exist.."
mircea_popescu: but in any sort of scientific sense i made no prediction. people even today object to this approach
mircea_popescu: and if i had, we wouldn't know if the disclosure was complete,
mircea_popescu: which had been published months and months ago, but nevertheless.
mircea_popescu: @twobitidiot honestly believes he's a sort of snowden, having leaked important mtgox shit
mircea_popescu: as far as a sufficiently entrenched glbse "investor" idiot is concerned, i just got lucky
mircea_popescu: this doesn't change the fact that all the other subgroups of the subgroup each had their own pipe dreams
mircea_popescu: some subgroup of the subgroup will impose that and in so doing it'll become history
mircea_popescu: sure, a group will be described by a power law. and in that group a subgroup will pretend identification with the power law's peak.
mircea_popescu: "if my calculations are correct, her knees ought to be parting right about now"
mircea_popescu: you still don't have that sort of privileged relationship with reality that'd allow you to turn an is into a should.
mircea_popescu: this'd be more of the berkely approach. who said i don't try ?
mircea_popescu: you mean "it's impossible to act while maintaining the pomp of my pretense". surely, it is.
mircea_popescu: you then proceed to flatter yourself in supposing you can identify the elements in that power law
mircea_popescu: sure, you may model a power law, which will be correct
mircea_popescu: all i'm saying is that you don't really have the priviledged relationship to it you readily grant yourself.
mircea_popescu: you could probably have portia de rossi meet jesus if you strain a little.
mircea_popescu: any nonsense can meet in your head, that doesn't matter all that much.
mircea_popescu: there's no retrospective causality, retrospectively speaking all you have are explanations.
mircea_popescu: is the equivocation between causes and reasons. causality only exists in prospect.
mircea_popescu: right. the foremost fallacy bred into children by a slappy introduction of the scientific method
mircea_popescu: she will fuck you for a cause, whatever it may be, even if it is drunkedness or desperation.
mircea_popescu: she maybe fucked you because she was drunk, or because she was getting desperate, or for any reason.