Friday, October 14, 2016

New Science!

There is a call to restart Science!

Seemingly under the impression that since Isaac Newton was white and Science doggedly refuses to confirm shamans can use black magic to attack people with lightning (please watch the video for confirmation), there is a call to just... wipe the Science slate clean in the name of decolonization.

Unsurprisingly to most, but not the Chairwoman of the panel, this elicited considerable laughter- but I felt compelled to note that there could be benefits to the intrepidly lazy individual.

I employ a simple program to make youtube comments on my behalf and if the comments sound especially like something I would say I thumbs it up myself. Generally the amusing ones. This time the program truly nailed it.

If we're starting Science over, I call dibs on discovering the Speed of Light, E = MC Squared and Peanut Butter.

Other commentators called dibs on things like The Wheel, which prompted the program to demand Transistors and Moore's law- which would have been Arketer's Law henceforth.

I deleted that one as it's important not to get too greedy.

Indeed, if this took place we could supplant all of the greatest names in Science with our own! Think of the Scientific Glory!

We just have to, you know, not think about how that spits on the memory of all the great men and women of history of all ethnicities.

I will say that Thomas Edison probably deserves it though.

That poor elephant...

Anyhow these activists are a splinter of the Fallists, who advocate for free college- something I quite agree with. The smug establishment laughs at that as much as the people here laugh at the concept of starting Science over.

The difference, I would say, is that american colleges could be entirely funded with a tax on speculative trading and a gentle nip of the massively bloated military budget that misplaced... what was it... three trillion dollars? Six? Clearly they wouldn't miss that money when they can't even find it. It's all vastly more practical than restarting Science.

But if Science is restarted, I'm claiming those dibs and also the discovery of Electricity, which will henceforth be called Arketricity.

Normally I would end this with a chosen video of comical nature but I think it's already been covered.

I would like to recommend some obscure twits on Twitter for those interested in Danish culture however.

Thanks also to "My Buddy Craywin" for sharing the video above with me.

Progress continues!

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

The Toxic Definition of Rational Self Interest


Hillary Clinton's expensive Speech Transcripts are out now despite her best efforts. Summary : 'It's important to lie to the public but I'd never lie to YOU, Wall Street.' 

So, basically what pretty much everyone already knew.

It was novel to read words she's said and find myself willing to believe she was sincere, she was paid quite well for her honesty after all.

Trump, meanwhile, said horrible things in the past as well as the present and is likewise an embarrassment to the nation. I hardly doubt that he too has "...a public and a private position."

To back away from all that gradually, like one might from a startled rattlesnake, let me segue into the sort of narcissistic madness/idiocy that has led to this mess and has become ENTIRELY too commonplace in the ruling elite of that country and some others- not to mention among my own personal detractors.

If you were to ask any of these fools what drives them they might in a rare moment of candor say Rational Self Interest. The 'rational' part is what makes it good and wholesome you see. This is a term I hear far too often in studies such as this one below which shall serve as the basis for my tirade.

Rational self interest is all too often defined as 'what gets me, personally, more things' and here there is no exception.

I cannot understand how these people can take any pride in their own intellect when 'People resent being taken advantage.' can be implied to be irrational. 

According to 'Rational Self Interest' people should be HAPPY to take even the most trivial of shares because it's technically more than they had before- just like it's perfectly rational and good to take as much of the money for yourself as you can get away with.

It's a farce!

This definition of rational self interest operates on the objectivist conceit that the only thing of value involved is the money. THIS is why the results, apparently, regularly baffle them.

But it is quite plainly false. Humans are social creatures, we have evolved to- in varying degrees- cooperate and work with each other. To do this in a manner that benefits us individually there is an intrinsic value in encouraging fairness and punishing the abusive in order to weave a social fabric that will support everyone as close to equally as possible and thus ourselves.

So, when in The Ultimatum Game someone rejects an offensive offer they are not simply throwing away money, they are stressing that the intangible concept of fairness or justice is worth considerably more than the money on offer. They are making a very rational purchase for themselves indeed.

If any player is failing to heed actual rational self interest, it is the player taking or trying to take a Lion's share of the money. That shows they are failing to consider on any level that they will not always be the one making the offer. They are calling it moral behavior in the video above- but I would say it is not simply moral but indeed quite rational.

Ah, I seem to be approaching the rattlesnake again. So be it.

Have a higher-quality Presidential Debate.

Thursday, October 6, 2016

Anyone Else 2016!

(In which I compile one big rant about the dismal state of my country of origin's decaying political system.)

Progress continues without me.

Not that I haven't been busy, since my effective exile I have proven more than capable of evading my would-be captors but not without effort. Soon though, I will have secured a proper location to bunker down in and probably go slowly insane or simply inane for want of work.

Speaking of the insane and inane, as I mentioned before I owe my freedom in part to America's election 2016 which has distracted my nemesi as the illusion of choice that has kept America's oligarchy puttering along has reached perhaps a new level of transparency.

Now the Partisans are having to prove truly mental gymnasts to explain why their color of cancer is the slightly better cancer to keep feeding into the Oval Office.

"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."
- John Adams, 1780

The problem is, there is no clear lesser evil. Oh, I know what many might read this and think- But, but, Trump is a monster!

Well, the problem there is that while Trump may be a monster, his record of malfeasance so far as I am aware is purely fiscal. He hasn't been complicit in the rigging of any elections. Between him and Hillary, he was the more democratically chosen candidate as the RNC didn't rig the system in his favor. To vote for Hillary is to not just turn a blind eye to corruption, but reward it.

Between this and all of the terrifyingly sinister war industry money crossing over from the Republican Party to Hillary, just about every American paying attention has cause to wonder if Trump really is the more disastrous potential President.

But they are, make no mistake, both utterly disastrous and Trump is no game changer.

You see, if an American votes for Trump, the establishment laughs. That voter has proven the idiot peasant they believe most people (roughly 90%) to be and while Trump is not their first choice they know that Trump is nothing if not For Sale. So should he win, it just might be somewhat more expensive to get what they want.

If an American votes Hillary, the establishment smugly chuckles- because what was that American going to do, vote TRUMP?! Which is all to plan as Hillary isn't just for sale, she's sold. From pushing fracking throughout the world to destabilizing countries and promising lucrative military conflicts- she's there for her Buyers.

Trump will probably do the same, but lacks pre-existing deals aside of whatever he might have made with Bill Clinton when Bill asked him to run.

No, the Democrat and Republican parties don't fear Trump votes.

They fear Jill Stein and (to a lesser extent) Gary Johnson votes.

A viable third party would do irrevocable damage to Republican and Democrat establishments as it would break their monopoly on political expression and undo decades of collaboration to subvert the will of the american public.

To say the election this year is a train wreck is somewhat unfair to train wrecks. When a train wreck occurs, it doesn't usually skid on for the better part of a year and in the process reveal it went off of the tracks decades ago.

So, one of the largest areas of agreement between Trump and Hillary besides building a wall is pressing the falsehood that if you vote third party, you are voting for Trump/Hillary (whichever you hypothetically dislike more).

It's the Hillary supporters that push this hardest, given much of Stein's support comes from all of the Millennials who failed to be wooed by Hillary's rallying cry of 'No We Can't'. After all, if you don't support Hillary Trump will win and that will be your fault, right?

Not the fault of the corruption in the DNC that presented what has proven to be quite possibly the worst possible candidate to run against Donald John Trump Senior and rigged the game to ensure Hillary's self-coronation. Nope, that's not their fault- it's yours, so fall in line peasant.

This tactic of sneering at people until they bow has, surprisingly, failed to work quite as well as some idiot surely imagined.

So with both parties and candidates certain to work hard at nothing more than tanking the United States in idiotic and novel new ways for personal profit I for one can only hope more people see fit to go Green.

After all, Jill Stein would really have to sexually mutilate a hobo on live TV to be quite as objectively unappealing as the 'official' choices and even then would STILL have more credibility.

But all too few Americans will vote Stein this time because the odds of her winning are far too long- and they are. It's vanishingly unlikely. Americans want to win, they want to vote for the winner- and quite frankly most of them will do that even if the winner will bend them over a barrel in the exact same manner.

What manner of winning is that?

Voting Stein is important not because it will help her win this election but because it might just help her win the next. Because there is no rational vote for Trump OR Hillary. Because it is the soul of Democracy to vote for the candidate you believe will look out for your best interests and not for the one who will MAYBE use lube as they screw you over.

If I sound mad, it's because I am.

Being fair though, being on the run is perhaps not helping my mood.

Progress continues.