Remuneration Classes

Remuneration. 1/poor 2/weak 3/dumb 4/unpopular. These are common classes of need which are addressed by respective forms of remuneration. I generally see people looking to fix 1, sometimes 4, sometimes 2.

Most of my own career is about fixing 3, with the next highest priority being to fix 2. I rarely feel 1 is problem because it's generally hedged by 2 and 3. The lowest priority for me is 4.

You can structure a persons needs, through early childhood development. That is a well known affair.

-

If I don't think of a problem, I don't look for a solution. So to encourage myself to exercise I have to make myself think, "oh, I am weak, I am weak, I must fix it". The thought rarely comes to me when I am not engaged in manual labour. Likewise unless I force myself to, I almost never think, "I am poor, I am poor, I must fix it". But just by evaluating every quarter-second of conscious data, I am acutely aware that what I am conscious of is not a complete representation of the world, and I seek to know more. This is typical of people raised in dangerous environments.

Mandates of Schools

Definitely not "to secure a child's future career", as some parents have been asking.

Ahah, sorry, that is not what schools are designed to do. If you want a secure career, you have to do a very detailed self-plan.

Public schools exist to deliver an aggregate population.

Private schools exist to deliver the minimum within a specific mandate for a price. The mandates vary, and many mandates are not clear in the heads of parents, so schools get away with murder.

Social CAPEX / OPEX : as a student

Why $4/day?

Sometimes I receive complaints from friends who want me to spend more, daily, on food and other entertainment. I totally understand - they prefer spending their time making more money, so it is reasonable to spend more.

I prefer not to spend my time making more money, so the difference between $4/day and $8/ is like 3-4 years of my life in the medium term. Years I am not interested in giving up for this or that friendship, lmao.

Meanwhile expenditures do go up to $30/day for the discovery and development of new friendships. The existing friends see this as a problem because I they feel that the CAPEX/OPEX mix doesn't benefit them. I totally agree. lol. The point of my bottom-line is to benefit me.

Quality Control for Grievance Processes

I sometimes spend a few hours counselling a friend who airs their grievances against me. I figured out how to limit the expense.

With regards to general grievances, I may try the following in the future :

- request 15 word summary ( requires structured thought prior to messaging )

- optional 150 word expansion

- expect to read in 1-2 minutes and conclude shortly after

- more time not encouraged ( if needed, recommend professional grievance counsellor )

Once again, the mapping of friendship to a special case of business, fully captures the value of the relationship. It is good to apply controls on quality.

Brief ontology of ethnocratic legislation in Malaysia

: ethnocracy is incumbent law

: speech about such law is protected

: dissent about such law is NOT protected

: dissenters therefore "thread the needle" to remain on the right side of the law, while dissenting

: likewise, law enforcement may take liberties in operations

: there is very limited data, on how this plays out, for obvious reasons

shame and its discontents

Perhaps a root of the problem, is that people are cultured into amplifying their predisposed states of shame about things. If instead we were to culture them into dampening their shame, so that over time we develop less shameful people, then perhaps it would be a triumph of psychical conditioning for the masses, which would enable them to focus their energies on more violent incursions upon their neighbours.

Motives and mandates

1. most people seek money first, to make themselves happy

2. many others seek to please someone else first, to make themselves happy

3. everyone else may be a minority of the population ( where I have always found myself )

Does this brief analysis hold water?

I guess the interesting point was the unstated corollary : 

3. Are interesting because they invest CAPEX/ spend OPEX in developing sources of happiness which are NEITHER (a) ways to make more money, NOR (b) ways to make others happier ( corollary : or to to make themselves more likeable to others )

Ethnocentric Aristocracy in Malaysia

Ethnocracy. Good word choice. Read it today, and it does indeed sum-up the constitutional style of Malaysia. 

Also recently reminded that Game of Thrones (TV) ends with Westeros adopting an aristocratic electoral monarchy, similar to Malaysia's. ( In Malaysia the aristocracy would be the first class of citizen, the Malay rulers. )

Glial? Compilations

Since 200x, I have taken periods from days to weeks to think of things, because it was not possible to learn those things faster. After working in the software industry, I have decided it is precise, effective, and appropriate, to explain this as "compiling". So right now, it is taking me a few weeks to compile the ability to analyse English grammar ... reading, writing, and loading the source code only took a few days. But now I am becoming the ability to execute it on the fly.

Effective Philanthropy at Scale

Maybe I take myself too seriously as a self-styled philanthropist ... but really I am not very serious. You see, it only takes about 10 seconds to make a huge impact in someone's life : you just usually won't know when that opportunity is available. So in order to maximise the impact that you have, per unit of energy, to apply a rule of laziness, you should always speak incisively, such as to have maximum effect when given small amounts of time. Advice should therefore be crushing or liberating. Sure, sometimes we are given the luxury of time to manipulate a needy person ... but one should not assume that is the case unless time is explicitly given.

Pivots : 2005, 2025?

I committed most of 2005-2025 to studying poor people. 

I am wondering if it is now a suitable time in life to focus on studying the rich.

Metaphysics of Intelligence

Funny rant I read yesterday, about a smart person not realising how dumb the average person is. ( Mathematician, said to have been unimpressed with AI progress, because IMO problems solved by AI celebrity were not deemed to be hard. )

"Smart" is a funny concept. This cuts to the root of the question about the metaphysics of intelligence. Everyone deems as smart, only the factors of products which they value.

- Folks who value things that can be bought with money, generally find financially wealthy people to be smart.

- Folks who value economy of thought, think shortcuts are smart.

- Folks who value spirituality and sentiment, think morality and emotional expressions are smart.

et cetera.

Hence, 

- A financier may not think an academician is smart, merely pedantic.

- A happy person may not think a capitalist is smart, merely greedy.

- A stoic may not think an artist is smart, merely impressionable.

Such is the folly of men.