domain:anarchonomicon.substack.com
JarJarJedi
24m ago
I told exactly nothing about my preferred strategy, so you should not feel bad about not getting anything right about it. The reason I didn't is because I don't need it already, and hadn't needed for a long time, and the only person it is useful for is me. So telling about it is kinda useless, except for bragging - but I even have nothing to brag about, I just got lucky once. Best I could do is some very generic pointers that may help somebody else who is like me in many aspects to find where to look for their strategy. Yes, I know it's disappointing - the 1-2-3-4 guaranteed works advice looks much better and inspires much more confidence. It's just that over my lifetime, I've had such advice, and I've had to deal with the consequences of it failing, and it's not pleasant. If I can make somebody's potential landing softer - my work is done. If your plan works and I end up looking stupid - no problem, I'' be fine with that too.
I’m kind of obsessed with those points on human nature (though I get obsessed with new ideas on a weekly basis). I’m actually less interested in the economics, though that is interesting too. What really caught my attention was an extrapolation of his “methodological dualism” (Mises’ belief that the scientific metaphor is inappropriate for the social sciences), the idea of deductive reasoning as related to classical humanism, the liberal arts, etc. It’s one of the reasons why I’m getting interested in Spinoza as well.
As for the value of books, all I can say is that nothing else in my life has made such reliable and profound personal changes in me than books. Artistic works (including stories) are always an irreplacable whirlwind of feelings, and videos are very useful for finding new directions, but some things only come out in the written word, longform, as difficult as it can be to keep going.
Njordsier
33m ago
I had a strong prior on exactly this before the assassination of Shinzo Abe, but now I'm not so sure.
100ProofTollBooth
34m ago
For somebody like me, it probably wouldn't.
From what you said it seems to me that you do not understand how people that are very different from you work.
Could've gone other way, you never know.
No, that was pure luck in my opinion.
But sometimes the best way to the goal is not rushing at that direction headlong, but instead walk some roads not taken.
Continue to amble along amiably, meandering through life, wishing providence smiles on you. Is this an accurate representation of your preferred strategy?
johnfabian
39m ago
He's really fat. Easily obese.
JarJarJedi
45m ago
This. Isn't. Talking. To. People.
For you, it isn't. For some others, it is. And that's why I found it necessary to add to your advice - because from what you said it seems to me that you do not understand how people that are very different from you work, and seem to view the way they work as some ridiculous performance bordering on stupidity.
OP is literally asking for ways to get better at dating
True. But sometimes the best way to the goal is not rushing at that direction headlong, but instead walk some roads not taken. Lifting weights is not dating. Expanding your horizons is not dating. Both may - not guaranteed, but may - lead to better dating.
What was the first thing for which you used your face hole to send sonic vibrations to her?
Not telling you that. It's a funny story, but embarrassing enough for me that I won't tell it in public. Fortunately, my (future at that point) wife shares my weird sense of humor and she found what happened hilarious, and it kinda warmed her up to me more (and she knew, from prior communication, that I am not actually a doofus I made myself look as at the moment). Could've gone other way, you never know.
All good self-improvement advice is a variant of "you're going to have to do things that aren't comfortable, but then things will improve for you."
Very broadly, this is true. However, thing being uncomfortable doesn't mean a) you can actually do it and b) it will effectively lead to the goal. For somebody like me, it probably wouldn't. Heck, I even started lifting weights only after I got married. I guess my point here is it's not easy, but it's possible if you persist and don't give up if one way doesn't work but try another instead.
I will await your reply wherein you tell me "Well it must've worked! - I'm married!"
No, that was pure luck in my opinion. Or God's providence, if you're inclined that way.
ace
47m ago
I admit I had not heard of Abdulrahman al-Awlaki before.
Two U.S. officials said the intended target of the Oct. 14 airstrike was Ibrahim al-Banna, an Egyptian who was a senior operative in Yemen’s al-Qaeda affiliate.
One administration official described the younger Awlaki as a bystander, in the wrong place at the wrong time. “The U.S. government did not know that Mr. Awlaki’s son was there” before the order to launch the missile was given, the official said.
Is that actually the best example you can come up with? I think it proves my point.
yellowgreenred
50m ago
America’s weak point is clearly potential civic disunity which could result in balkanization along racial, religious, or cultural lines.
This isn't clear to me at all. The major racial fault line in the US continues to be black versus everyone else but there's no realistic white or black nationalist movement in the country. The place one would think such a movement would start - the south - is less racially segregated than the north and if you've been to smaller towns, you'll see whites and blacks get along fine. I wouldn't be surprised if the black-white interracial marriage rate is higher in the south.
Religious and cultural disunity is more realistic, but it won't be along racial lines, and it'll just be an extension of what we see in Texas: conservative Hispanics, whites, and (increasingly) Asians voting Republican.
OliveTapenade
51m ago
I guess just using myself as an ancdote, that explanation has not helped me. Pick up? Huh? Getting yards?
You throw the ball forward and if you can do that without the other team interfering, you get to move the starting line forward ten yards, and then repeat?
I remember finding it helpful to hear that American football is basically a turn-based strategy, unlike soccer or my native AFL, which are real-time strategy, so to speak. American football is a stop-start game, divided into clear, turn-like 'plays'. Maybe I should look up an explainer video with some diagrams of the game in play?
OracleOutlook
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
56m ago
Pay a professional photographer to take and edit your photos, pay a "copywriter" on fiver to write your bio. That should handle 75% of it.
DuplexFields
Ask me how the FairTax proposal works. All four Political Compass quadrants should love it.
58m ago
It starts slow, like the original Heston film, and builds its pieces one by one. It earns every bit of spectacle through steady worldbuilding, and is character-driven from start to end. Even the seemingly random twists are explained in retrospect if you pay attention.
The core of the story is heavily intellectual, and I really shouldn’t give any spoilers because the story is a delight when seen through the main character’s eyes, but they’re readily available if you go looking.
I think I’ll go see it again, in a bigger-screen theater.
Sorry, "pick up" is slang for "to gain", "to acquire".
Yes, American football is essentially a hybrid turn-based/real-time game where each turn is a burst of real-time activity,.
In each turn, one team is on offense and starts with the ball. It is trying to either get the ball into the other team's endzone for 7 points or kick the ball through the other team's uprights for 3 points. The other team is on defense and is trying to stop that. If either the team on offense scores points or the team on defense manages to grab the ball away from the offense, the team on offense "loses possession" and then has to be the team on defense, and the other team that was on defense before becomes the team on offense.
A given team's offense and defense are usually made up of completely different players, but this is not enforced by the rules. It's just that in practice, no player is good enough at both offensive and defensive skills and has enough endurance to be worth playing both on offense and on defense.
The team on offense can throw the ball or run the ball as much as it wants, but with the extremely important caveat that it can only throw the ball forward once at most in any given turn ("play"). It can throw the ball backward as much as it wants, though teams almost never do this because statistically it is usually a bad idea.
When a team goes on offense, it generally starts at the part of the field where the other team lost possession when it was on offense. The team on offense then has four turns ("down"s) to move the ball, by throwing or running, at least ten yards closer to the other team's endzone than where it started. Each time it tries to move the ball, no matter what happens, then the next time it tries to move the ball, it starts at wherever the ball was stopped the last time it tried to move the ball. So let's say on the first down, the team on offense manages to move the ball 3 yards forward. Then on its second down, it starts 3 yards closer to that imaginary 10-yard line that it has to cross, the line that is 10 yards forward from where it first started on offense.
If the team on offense manages to move the ball past 10 yards from where it started on offense in those 4 turns ("down"s) it has, it then gets another 4 turns to move the ball 10 yards further from wherever the ball was last stopped. And if in those next chances it moves the ball more than 10 yards, then it gets yet another 4 turns... and so on... as long as the team on offense keeps managing to pick up 10 yards in 4 turns, it always gets 4 more turns, and in this way it can "march down the field" as they say and eventually get in the defending team's endzone. But if at any point the team on offense uses up 4 turns and fails to move the ball 10 yards forward in total between all the 4 turns, it gives us possession to the other team and then the other team goes on offense starting from where the offensive team had the ball.
At any point in a 4-turn cycle, the team on offense has the option of kicking the ball far towards the other team's endzone, hoping to run in the direction of the other team's endzone and stop whoever on the defending team catches the ball. Once the other team catches the ball, they become the team on offense. So the only reason for the team on offense to do this is if they feel that there is very little chance that they would be able to get 4 more downs by moving the ball past 10 yards and so it would be better to make sure that the team on defense gets the ball (and thus becomes the team on offense) close to their own endzone rather than at the place where the two teams are currently facing each other.
This is a lot of words but it can all start to make sense pretty quickly once one watches a game.
More options
Context Copy link