Thursday, March 28, 2024

Frame is Deviance

 If two frames clash, at least one of the holders is lying. Put another way, you always ought to surrender to the frame of Reality. Lets you get along easily with anyone else who surrenders their frame to Reality. 

 

 There will be perhaps a clash of values, but these, too, are part of Reality's frame. 

 E.g. if I want you to keep reading and you want to stop reading, we both agree that you want to stop reading and I want you to keep reading. In this case, unless you're my slave, you should stop reading. Someone other than me owns you, and thus what goes is what someone other than me says. 

 

 Postmodernism: someone who wishes to supplant Reality's frame with their own (Satanism) can't tell the difference between a Reality-thinker and an opposing postmodernist. All is power or whatever. (As per usual, Fascist newspeak. Postmodernism is pre-scientific paleolithic behaviour.) They cannot cooperate. For them, there is only conquest and submission. Once the liar embraces lies, they are exiled from physical Reality, and must cling to social reality. It can be all they see and know. Due to thinking this way, the correct choice, in their case, is submission.

Climatology is Lysenkoism

 Whether you call it Communist, Fascist, or Despotic, these countries always have a Communist form of science, which has either been completely politicized and rendered pure superstition, or was deliberately spawned by politicians precisely for supertitious purposes. In the case of America, it's climatology. This can be seen when it distorts all forms of geology and botany with the spurious and ludicrous idea of "carbon sinks," as if this is a remotely significant factor. 

 Lysenkoist science manages to be even less useful than reading ox entrails. Even having failed Alchemists around is a better choice.

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

I've Been Racist'd Against the Han

 https://www.unz.com/aanglin/lululemon-founder-condemns-gross-fat-black-people-in-companys-ads/#comment-6357435

 See how the Han literally can't view a colour designation as a simple designation of physical colour. It always has to be about social one-upmanship: either white or yellow has to be a "better" colour. And the Proud Han insists on being the one up. (Because he always feels too poor to afford a single loss. Magnanimity = death. See also: Jews. Further: Thomas Malthus, Gregory Clark.)
 Consider what happens if you get two Han in a room.
 This is why China must have a powerful authoritarian government. The Han can't get anything done without someone violently forcing them to stop wasting time on petty games. Without it, in their natural state, they really are too poor. They compete to worship mangoes the hardest, rather than doing anything productive, if nobody stands over them with a whip.

 So at e.g. Wuhan Virology Lab, the Han compete to see who can flout the rules the hardest. Until someone accidentally releases a virus, because it turns out the Boreans set up those rules for a reason other than [to gain face at the biologists' expense].
 The Han love defrauding each other, because the fraudster gains face. Admitting you were defrauded is indeed shameful, after all. (Unfortunately, growth requires first admitting to deficit.) They hate being held to standards, because getting caught loses you face. Failing to be defrauded is honourable, and face is zero sum. The Han don't acknowledge fine craftmanship for its own sake, to the credit of the craftsman, so unlike in Europe you can't gain face by being meticulous and trustworthy. They only care insofar as owning it themselves can gain them face. Result: wonderful facades with nothing behind them.

 They're really good at things which are all facade. Pure appearance. Music and painting, for example. Artistic smoke flows. The reason Moscow's subway is less a sub and more a beautiful metro is likely due to their Oriental admixture.
Contrast: treasure fleets. Lots of appearance of wealth, no wealth generation to sustain the appearance, thus not sustained.

 Because the Han only care about face, they always have to have someone gaining face at their expense by standing with a whip looking over their shoulder, or they immediately death spiral.
All races are Proudly, Satanically self-destructive. Treachery competitions. This is how it works for the Han.


 Han come to English places but, monkey habits. They can't escape the expectation of excessive deference

 https://twitter.com/fitnessfeelingz/status/1745150413865697700
"In the most extreme case, the plane was literally running out of fuel. The co-pilot noticed, but would not directly state the problem, out of a fear of dishonoring the pilot, even knowing everyone could die (which they did)"

https://twitter.com/TrollingLegend2/status/1745336836812091575
"Korean have many different ways to talk to people of different age and job level, the language enforce a culture of respect and not defy your superiors and elders, this means even if a superior or elder is wrong, you can't just point it out bluntly."

 They go absolutely nuts, full ninja chimpout, if you defy this social norm. Incapable of assimilation or respecting local mores.

 Notably English is only pretending to be non-hierarchical, and the pretense regularly goes too far. Position is still there, it's merely conferred subtly, for plausible deniability (which isn't that plausible, but they pretend). The critical problem is that criticizing a superior costs face - it shouldn't, that's Satanic. The English shouldn't have to pretend the superior isn't superior to get around this rule. 



 America seems especially Chinese for a nominally European country, and getting ever more so. I find this makes sense given the nature of Democracy.

Why America Doesn't Do Rail

 The fact GM gotta get paid is only secondary. Primarily it's because the Germans did rail. Women are obsessed with appearances and guilt by association, and rail has been tainted. Every American is a woman, and railways are ""Fascist.""


 It turns out blimps are de-facto banned by the FAA. You need a license and they refuse to give one. This is only secondarily ass-covering, it's primarily because Germany did it first. How are you supposed to prove american "exceptionalism" when someone else has a good idea? As every narcissist knows, only the main character can have ideas.

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

Does Anyone on the Internet Do Anything?

 "Irony poisoning" is cope and distraction. Very nearly everyone on the internet is too scared of looking lame to do anything, and the 3-4 exceptions are doing things that can be done alone (Kaze Emanuar) or under other extreme edge-case conditions. Irony is the result, not the cause.

 Extreme High School Civilization.
 Not a coincidence that my major example is working (very hard) on a game for teenagers.

 Naively I would think they would at least get good at banter. Instead, none of them know improv. It's uniformly bitter, resentful, and contrary to the irony posture, taken too seriously. Now I'm wiser, I realize that upadana for looking cool will destroy, first, their coolness. How could it be any other way. 


 It's important to remember that since the Eternal September, the internet has been CIA territory. The social norms are spook-bureaucrat norms. Trolls are normal CIA employees doing their normal day-to-day, it's just that the CIA doesn't need to pay most of them. They only need to pay a few here and there and the rest will unconsciously recognize their superior, their paragon, and go all monkey-see monkey-do.


 If you do something real, the trolls will criticize you for it, if it is not absolutely perfect. They are trolls, after all; they'll sort of try even if it is perfect. You are also CIA, so you feel the trolls are significant ingroup representatives, as indeed they are. 

 Also, it can't be perfect, because the CIA is evil. Perfect evil looks awful, and perfect good looks anti-CIA. Faux pas either way. 

 Certainly it doesn't help that nobody wants to clean their room. You can't throw up a doodle for your mom and her friends. It always has to be trying to conquer the world (violently, if possible). Egalitarianism, narcissism: it has to appeal to everyone. You have to shove it in everyone's face to prove it. For some reason, this norm is not conducive to joyful exploration or enthusiastic skill-building. What a coincidence. 

 You can't just play around in photoshop (or paint.exe) and post it.

 

 If you do something real, then the criticism will matter. It will apply to you. Narcissism: if you do something fake, then you were just faking anyway. "I was just pretending to be retarded." You could do something for real whenever you wanted, right? 

 If you like something, it tells the CIA trolls exactly what to attack. "Ah, this is how we harm you." Yet, nobody thinks to isolate themselves from the CIA trolls, they only think to hide their liking of anything. 

 Even if something genuinely likable was created, nobody would acknowledge it. 
 To do Moldbug's 'art scene' properly, you have to absolutely destroy any political relevance, by isolating it completely. Nobody outside the scene ought even know it exists. The way the Amish are (almost) unheard-of.


 Plato's Despotic Man: no courage. Substitute fake risks for real risks, to hide your own cowardice from yourself. 


 Generally, I think netizens are correct. They cannot afford to talk about their real ideas. They cannot afford to do a science, and expose their ideas openly, and allow them to be refuted. They simply don't have the strength of character to withstand the process. Their friendships are fragile, they would shatter at the slightest jostling, and they don't have the stocks to survive a search for new ones. 


 I can show any number of quality videos that were made either by a sole auteur or a small team. There's no need to go to Hollywood for your TV.
 But this suggest it was never necessary to go to Hollywood. It was always possible to found and sustain a competitor. They just choose not to. And likewise for all other media. All other product, even toasters. Supply? Supply? The problem is always demand. 

 

 Nevertheless, I do miss the world where the internet could bring together those who were interested in sincere creation. Even though that world was always an illusion. Where are those who wanted to create beauty for beauty's sake? Rather than trying to carefully, cynically craft a 'message' for an 'audience,' naturally so as to aim for the largest possible audience.
 Surely there must be one, somewhere, right? Who likes things because they're likable, not due to how liking it makes them look to their twitter followers?
 Surely?

Twitter as Stupidity Exposure Vector

 With nitter down, I'm cut off from twitter, and it's dramatically reduced my stupidity exposure. 

 Took some weeks to notice a difference, but there was a phase change. I do enjoy following world news for various reasons, but now I know the difference, it's not enough to put up with all the stupidity. 

 I don't care what your congresscritter said. Nobody cares. Nobody needs to care. He's plain stupid, and thinking about what he said makes you stupid too. 

 If dunking on the stupidity reduced stupidity it would be worthwhile, but of course stupidity is a very renewable resource. Abundant, you might say. If the tyrannized were capable of forming communities, you could make a stupidity-free community, but of course they can't.

 I'm trying to think of a reason why hermitage is not the right answer, but coming up blank.

Monday, March 25, 2024

Guillotine Test for New Technology in General

 You don't need double-blind clinical trials to detect the effect of a guillotine. You don't really need a placebo group for penicillin. Caffeine's effect isn't some subtle long-term tweak. If you need a high-powered study to detect the effect, the medical intervention is almost certainly not worthwhile. NNT < NNH, whoops.

 Likewise, if you have a new tool, such as autoCAD or robot car assemblers, you don't need sophisticated accounting to determine if it's useful. Just try it for a few minutes. You can safely decide based on a single test drive. Either it passes the guillotine test, or it doesn't. Here, grey is black: if you're not sure, that means you are sure and the answer is no.

 It is very hard to convince me that CAD and similar programs don't cost more in labour than they save. It's not inherent; if you got a rich video game studio to make a CAD program it would probably be amazing. However, they got idiots to make the CAD programs instead, so... This was correct, as they were marketed for idiots and for use by idiots. Wasting time and being painful was in demand, thus what was supplied. 

 The rule of thumb I've heard is 2 years amortization. Any industrial intervention, even stuff like better windows, has to pay for itself within 2 years. If it's going to take longer, you will one way or another lose money on it. I suspect domestic or consumer investments work pretty much the same way. 

 That is, if something is going to 'revolutionize' a sector, you don't need sophisticated marketing copy to tell you this. You can just try it, and that is easily a sufficiently sophisticated test.

 If nothing else, you save all the hassle of constantly chasing trends and growing pains and retraining costs. If something pays back in 2.5 years...and then you need to pick up something else that pays back in 2.5 years....you never get to the point where you're in the black. Meanwhile the ignorant dumbass who just kept on keepin on has edged you out, and will until his industrial implants reach beater age. (Which admittedly they will, because he's an ignorant dumbass.)

Imagine Sodomy was Censored

 Imagine the vast apparatus of the American censorship-industrial complex was turned upon sodomy. Anyone mentioning sodomy was immediately deplatformed and unpersoned. Anyone caught committing sodomy was whisked off to solitary confinement or Guantanamo. The words scrubbed from dictionaries and search engines. Any porn site with so much as the word 'anal' immediately blocked and physically raided. 

 Sodomy would be known only to specialists, such as some select secret-agent-type sexual dysfunction doctors, who would 'cure' the afflicted and swear them to silence. Or else. Specialists, such as and those who had the unfortunately corrupting but necessary job of containing unrepentant sodomites. You wouldn't be able to blackmail anyone with sodomy, because you would get got for knowing what to accuse them of without a license.

 Normies would be wholly ignorant of it. If you tried to describe butt sex to them, they would likely just change the subject. It would be worse than talking about a flat earth.

 Do you think that might have a positive effect on rates of sexual degeneracy? 

 Imagine diddling a kid got you disappeared. Unpersoned. "No such individual is known to us." Think this might limit the spread of trauma-induced homosexuality? 


 Scrub the words from, in particular, the Bible. Revenge is Sour. If your society needs a specific injunction against this sexual perversion, it is already too late. The injunction will raise the incidence, not lower it, because it will be a known thing to try.