Yesterday, I made the claim that I 'live and breathe capitalism', so I wanted to check myself to see how true this is. Given the following qualifications, I think it's actually true:
.
1. Capitalism is an abstract term, which cannot be usefully deployed in serious conversations without qualification.
.
2. Capitalism doesn't work without equality - if players don't believe that the field is even, then they will try to break the game.
.
3. This means that Capitalism requires a centralised State. A State simply refers to a federal government by any other name. Even if it includes anarcho-syndical traits, there needs to be a clearing house for global issues, regardless of what size of universe you try and implement this in. Any complaints that Capitalism and State are intertwined simply miss the point that this is part of the definition of Capitalism. So now to reduce ambiguity we shall just refer to it as State Capitalism (sic).
.
4. Every implementation of State Capitalism needs to include an agency of the state, whose responsibility to the public is to curate, update, and propagate a clear definition of Equality. Mechanisms for civic interaction with such an agency must exist.
.
5. State Sanctioned Dissent should be routinely funded, and facilitated under an explicit protocol, which should of course be subject to itself. Dissent should be routine, and the first step in an algorithm for Continuous Improvement. One expects a basic pattern of (5a.) [ Dissent -> Survey -> Definition of Research Methodology -> Methodical Research ] -> (5b.) [ Action Plan -> Budget Approval -> Operationalisation -> Reporting ], where 5a and 5b run concurrently in decoupled loops.
.
Tbc.
2020-01-11 at 8:28 pm
Study: Phenomenology of Neurotransmitter Dynamics
First post for 2020!
I've been working on the one business for the past four to five years - and it has been quite intense. Many of its projects have involved pioneering work for the organisation, while juggling operational responsibilities. Sometimes the stress is quite high: under great-ish pressure to deliver results on limited resources, in a solo sub-role within the organisation, I can fuck-up several times in a few months, crash, and then I have to try and repair myself, using only myself, while still running the business in general. This happened in small instances over the arc from 2015 to 2019, but 2019 involved a few compound setbacks during a period of my own ill health, and that was a major downer.
I spent a good part of 2019 fixing myself up, and here's some significant progress in my personal resource management. In earlier years, I'd pretty much got a good grasp of how to work tactically on second-to-minute time frames, and also on month-to-year time frames. But my weakness, as it turns out, has been working on the hourly-to-daily cadences - generally I'd been running those by intuition, but under catastrophic failure conditions, intuition doesn't work very well. So as usual, I've been looking for the relevant first-principles to address. Here's what I've found.
The science behind how neurotransmitters affect our instincts is, at this point in time, somewhat modelled. We don't know exactly how things work, but we have a rough idea. Two or three classes of molecules make up the majority of our motivations under the hood. Whether you believe that your actions are determined more by society or by yourself, the definition of 'what you want' literally boils down to 'what you want to do, now' at any point in time. So I've drafted a small set of reminders for myself, that a bot will read to me on an hourly basis, which means I should actually hear this at least a handful of time a day - hopefully enough to make it useful.
Here's an early draft:
Footnote 1. I still believe in the program of making work my top priority, and to fit all other items in life in subservience to it. A week has 168 hours. I allocate about 70 hours on average for sleep, leaving 98 hours for business, life support, and any projects which enable me to do better work for my business, including various recreational and personal development activities. I come from a culture where people work fast, burn out, and die young. Competition is stiff, and any edge that can be acquired should be fully exercised. (Some might say, FWIW, I live and breathe capitalism.)
Footnote 2. A brief throwback. I've been running my career autonomously for the past 19 years. The first two to three years were spent partly studying human consciousness resulting in a model that allows for the practical destructuring of experience. Then I spent a two to three more years initiating myself in commerce, and after that spent a decade or so on a very broad program in pursuit of multiple targets. For the second-to-minute periods, I've now got almost two decades of practice in analytical phenomenology. For the month-to-year periods, I've executed a few multi-year arcs between 2001 and 2019, and I'm still working on one now.
Footnote 3. I really hate doing human life support. I find eating and sleeping incredibly tedious, and I generally wish I didn't have to. But that's the nature of meat, and so this is supposed to help me manage that better.
I've been working on the one business for the past four to five years - and it has been quite intense. Many of its projects have involved pioneering work for the organisation, while juggling operational responsibilities. Sometimes the stress is quite high: under great-ish pressure to deliver results on limited resources, in a solo sub-role within the organisation, I can fuck-up several times in a few months, crash, and then I have to try and repair myself, using only myself, while still running the business in general. This happened in small instances over the arc from 2015 to 2019, but 2019 involved a few compound setbacks during a period of my own ill health, and that was a major downer.
I spent a good part of 2019 fixing myself up, and here's some significant progress in my personal resource management. In earlier years, I'd pretty much got a good grasp of how to work tactically on second-to-minute time frames, and also on month-to-year time frames. But my weakness, as it turns out, has been working on the hourly-to-daily cadences - generally I'd been running those by intuition, but under catastrophic failure conditions, intuition doesn't work very well. So as usual, I've been looking for the relevant first-principles to address. Here's what I've found.
The science behind how neurotransmitters affect our instincts is, at this point in time, somewhat modelled. We don't know exactly how things work, but we have a rough idea. Two or three classes of molecules make up the majority of our motivations under the hood. Whether you believe that your actions are determined more by society or by yourself, the definition of 'what you want' literally boils down to 'what you want to do, now' at any point in time. So I've drafted a small set of reminders for myself, that a bot will read to me on an hourly basis, which means I should actually hear this at least a handful of time a day - hopefully enough to make it useful.
Here's an early draft:
And a coded version:
- serotonin check
- deficiency indicated by stress
- to top-up
- fill the gut with fibre, and attempt aerobic exercise
- excess indicated by nausea, reduced libido, confusion
- to cut
- reduce all afferent stimuli, including food
- dopamine check
- deficiency indicated by boredom
- to top-up
- ingest protein, attempt anaerobic exercise, and sensory meridian response
- excess indicated by mania
- to cut
- take a break; zero all sensory imaginations
- norepinephrine check: monitor by proxy, via caffeine intake and effects
- supplement check
- b12 may increase neurotransmitter synthesis
- fish oil may increase neurotransmitter synthesis
- creatine may reduce or inhibit neurotransmitter synthesis or activity
#!/bin/bash
echo "/home/jerng/physical.sh"
espeak "serotonin check" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s250
espeak "deficiency indicated by stress" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s300
espeak "to top-up" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s400
espeak "fill the gut with fibre, and attempt aerobic exercise" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s250
espeak "excess indicated by nausea, reduced libido, confusion" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s250
espeak "to cut" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s250
espeak "reduce all afferent stimuli, including food" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s250
espeak "dopamine check" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s250
espeak "deficiency indicated by boredom" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s300
espeak "to top-up" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s400
espeak "ingest protein, attempt anaerobic exercise, and sensory meridian response" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s300
espeak "excess indicated by mania" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s200
espeak "to cut" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s250
espeak "take a break; zero all sensory imaginations" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s250
espeak "nor-epinephrine check: monitor by proxy, via caffeine intake and effects" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s200
espeak "supplement check" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s250
espeak "b12 may increase neurotransmitter synthesis" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s300
espeak "fish oil may increase neurotransmitter synthesis" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s300
espeak "creatine may reduce or inhibit neurotransmitter synthesis or activity" -g10 -k20 -p80 -s300
sleep 3600
./physical.sh
Footnote 1. I still believe in the program of making work my top priority, and to fit all other items in life in subservience to it. A week has 168 hours. I allocate about 70 hours on average for sleep, leaving 98 hours for business, life support, and any projects which enable me to do better work for my business, including various recreational and personal development activities. I come from a culture where people work fast, burn out, and die young. Competition is stiff, and any edge that can be acquired should be fully exercised. (Some might say, FWIW, I live and breathe capitalism.)
Footnote 2. A brief throwback. I've been running my career autonomously for the past 19 years. The first two to three years were spent partly studying human consciousness resulting in a model that allows for the practical destructuring of experience. Then I spent a two to three more years initiating myself in commerce, and after that spent a decade or so on a very broad program in pursuit of multiple targets. For the second-to-minute periods, I've now got almost two decades of practice in analytical phenomenology. For the month-to-year periods, I've executed a few multi-year arcs between 2001 and 2019, and I'm still working on one now.
Footnote 3. I really hate doing human life support. I find eating and sleeping incredibly tedious, and I generally wish I didn't have to. But that's the nature of meat, and so this is supposed to help me manage that better.
2020-01-10 at 8:27 pm
Reflection: Tedium & Surprise in Development
Observing children grow up can be quite tedious. Most of the time, nothing unexpected happens... well-charted developmental milestones are hit in physique, psyche, immunity, economy, etc. and things go pretty much as they are supposed to. The defining moments of the child's individuality, however are much more delightful to see - sometimes it is trauma, sometimes it is ecstacy, but whatever those pivots are, they define the individual's personality by locking specific trajectories into its memory. For example, you may discover that the organism fears social castigation only after its first encounter with the same, and so the organism reacts by becoming a mute. That's literally what happened to a brand I have been managing... yes, brands are indeed a variety of people. I was just reminded of this today, as I told the story to some old friends from school.
.
Furtheronto, it reminds me of some rudimentary troll training I had with these chaps back in the day. Our English teacher in 1997, Mrs. Nunis, used to make us keep journals. 'Write anything, the contents will be confidential, but you have to write something every day, or you will be punished.' Well then ma'am, I thought, if it's words you want, let me have at ye... I think it was only the second week by when she walked into class asking what what was wrong with me...
.
Furtheronto, it reminds me of some rudimentary troll training I had with these chaps back in the day. Our English teacher in 1997, Mrs. Nunis, used to make us keep journals. 'Write anything, the contents will be confidential, but you have to write something every day, or you will be punished.' Well then ma'am, I thought, if it's words you want, let me have at ye... I think it was only the second week by when she walked into class asking what what was wrong with me...
2020-01-08 at 8:24 pm
Models: Love & Social Relations - as a game
Recent discussion points, on modelling colloquial notions of love and social relations in terms of a formal game:
.
A. People need to learn how to be comfortable with being (and becoming) evil. The alternative is that they often end up being afraid to cause harm to others while pursuing their own self-interest.
.
B. The reproductive instincts of people include both, the meaty substrates, and the proliferation of ideas. (Arguably the latter is a device to serve the former, but I'll ignore that for the purposes of this note.) Therefore in kin selection we see teams of people competing to establish their ideologies as the dominant mode of society: some believe in elevating empathy, others in trampling upon it, and so on and so forth.
.
C. Love is defined in at least two mutually exclusive definitions. One team believes that love is fundamentally selfless, and the other that love is fundamentally grounded in self-interest. These are competing ideologies, and their discussion among most folk invokes much entertainment value. Many don't bother to discuss their beliefs, preferring an obstinate or simply minimal way of orienting themselves vis-a-vis the subject.
.
D1. In love and reproductive preferences, one practical pattern is the notion that one person can only love one other person at a time - as self-sacrifice is more practical under operational risk assumptions that there is a 1-to-1 mapping between oneself (to be sacrificed) and their most significant other (the benefactor of the former sacrifice). Of course, this is coherent with the first ideology of love, in the paragraph above.
.
D2. Another practical pattern is the notion that one need not stop loving any A which one loves, when one begins to love B, implying that over time, if one is industrious, one's loves increase over time. This is coherent with the second ideology of love, in the paragraph above. Again, these two sets of practices are mutually exclusive, and expecting someone to cross teams implies requiring them to change their fundamental protocol of social priorities.
.
D3. None of this implies that either party is emotionally handicapped or disabled in any specific fashion, as it is often the case, for example, that (a) one may have no feelings for a partner, yet devote one's life to them for the purpose of fulfilling a concept, or (b) one may have feelings for a partner, but deny them one's self-sacrifice, as one has higher strategic priorities for one's time.
.
A. People need to learn how to be comfortable with being (and becoming) evil. The alternative is that they often end up being afraid to cause harm to others while pursuing their own self-interest.
.
B. The reproductive instincts of people include both, the meaty substrates, and the proliferation of ideas. (Arguably the latter is a device to serve the former, but I'll ignore that for the purposes of this note.) Therefore in kin selection we see teams of people competing to establish their ideologies as the dominant mode of society: some believe in elevating empathy, others in trampling upon it, and so on and so forth.
.
C. Love is defined in at least two mutually exclusive definitions. One team believes that love is fundamentally selfless, and the other that love is fundamentally grounded in self-interest. These are competing ideologies, and their discussion among most folk invokes much entertainment value. Many don't bother to discuss their beliefs, preferring an obstinate or simply minimal way of orienting themselves vis-a-vis the subject.
.
D1. In love and reproductive preferences, one practical pattern is the notion that one person can only love one other person at a time - as self-sacrifice is more practical under operational risk assumptions that there is a 1-to-1 mapping between oneself (to be sacrificed) and their most significant other (the benefactor of the former sacrifice). Of course, this is coherent with the first ideology of love, in the paragraph above.
.
D2. Another practical pattern is the notion that one need not stop loving any A which one loves, when one begins to love B, implying that over time, if one is industrious, one's loves increase over time. This is coherent with the second ideology of love, in the paragraph above. Again, these two sets of practices are mutually exclusive, and expecting someone to cross teams implies requiring them to change their fundamental protocol of social priorities.
.
D3. None of this implies that either party is emotionally handicapped or disabled in any specific fashion, as it is often the case, for example, that (a) one may have no feelings for a partner, yet devote one's life to them for the purpose of fulfilling a concept, or (b) one may have feelings for a partner, but deny them one's self-sacrifice, as one has higher strategic priorities for one's time.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)