We’re like humanity’s spartans. I literally feel less fear than is rational for my own survival, because it’s optimal for the group that I should be ready to be overwhelmed by rage or whatever and attack the lion and get killed so others can survive.

I spoke with a female marine once — someone who could kill me no problem — and she told me the fear she felt before training was still there. Conversely despite knowing from experience that I am useless in a fight, I feel cocky and self assured. Or, if I stay on top of the cockiness, I simply don’t feel afraid.

I don’t mean it’s not there. I’ve been terrified. But I’ve got a confidence that just slowly steadily increases in the absence of recent evidence, that somehow I’m invincible.

Anyway, I say it’s like spartans because this reminds me of some kind of drug cocktail you could inject into a solider to just make them not give a fuck.

I’m not complaining mind you. I’ve got no problem with having less fear. But mostly because I live in a super safe environment, so it doesn’t hurt me to have less fear.

Just replying to my own shit to add here:

I think the Nazis were the first instance of this kind of behavior that got caught on video. Just like the Vietnam war was the first war US citizenry saw on TV, I think the Third Reich and whatever the term is for the whole campaign of land grab invasions, and the Holocaust, is a pattern that’s been going on for thousands of years, and it’s the first time the whole world was witness to it.

For the majority of history a king or emperor or whoever could march out armies, destroy, use a ton of his own internal political enemies as slaves and work them to death, then just murder the rest of them … and cover it up almost effortlessly by telling the town criers to announce whatever horseshit they want the farmers to believe.

We know historically this happens. But the Holocaust is the first of the pogroms that everybody around the world saw, and in the greater set of genocides. It was the first time (I think?) that absolute mass atrocity on civilians was televised.

But it’s not a unique event is the key thing. It’s the most well-known example of the eruption of evil into the world, but it’s a recurring part of humanity to do this kind of thing.

I don’t know honestly. Isn’t that one of the castes in India? No that’s “untouchables”.

Where is that word used?

Still is, according to legend

I’ve been to Medieval Times I know exactly what it means. Is say we bring back eating big drumsticks in public.

Fucking castles, duh

I think acquiring money can be an addiction, in the sense that it’s a behavior that allows escape (it’s a simple goal that’s easy to define, allowing a person to stop looking around and just go forward). Just like video games provide an orienting direction, hence provide dopamine, hence can be addicting, money can do the same thing.

Because money is a number, it’s inherently gamified. You can just set “more money” as the objective and you never have to change it and it’s always a direction to go that can produce dopamine.

Now, if it’s not the best, most meaningful direction. the dopamine flow decreases but doesn’t stop. Just like the video games getting boring, or your brain adapting to the cigarettes or cocaine. You still get a little jolt of dopamine, but not as much as before, so it’s this tired, boring life.

The thing is, there’s a lot of uncertainty and withdrawal and relearning you have to go through to get away from the repetitive small-hit dopamine cycle and into the more organic, less repetitive, large-hit dopamine cycle of … being a real person doing valuable things.

So yeah. Money as addiction. Source of small dopamine hits, that are easier to obtain and more familiar and hence comfortable, than the messy and uncertain process of seeking dopamine through real-world accomplishment.

ALSO, there’s the problem of how markets work. When a person is relative low in the market structure, their only way of getting profit is to really produce a lot of value. The higher a person gets in that structure, ie the more they advance financially, the less value they’re adding. The ultimate asymptote they approach is when they have sufficient money to live on the interest, and it’s totally automatic, and their contribution to economic value is zero.

This means that as a person follows the path (one of many paths) from worker to entrepreneur to pretty bourgeoise to elite, they steadily lose the natural, organic meaning that comes from actually providing value to others.

The person who used to love and be sustained by the smiles and appreciation of their coffee customers, probably isn’t getting much juice out of sitting there looking at spreadsheets of their 5000-coffee-shop empire.

But along the way, they’ve already switched their dopamine source to be from a combination of value provided and money received, to be just the money.

Which is like sitting there lighting up a cigarette to stave off the discomfort for another hour, or to prevent having to think about something that makes you anxious or uncertain. Just light up a smoke: dopamine.

Just like me with this damn website. Addicted. Small dopamine hits, comfortable stand-in for actual meaning.

Well I’m sorry it sounds fake. Stories about my life often do because I have a weird combinaron of characteristics that lead to weird situations, leading to a density of adventures that most people find simply unbelievable.

Also, if it’s fake there’s definitely something wrong with the lesson. Nobody should be making shit up to teach lessons. Lessons need to come from the truth.

Are you gay, or a woman? I’m pretty good at relaxing, and wouldn’t mind having an industrious partner.

I just want to add that a substantial social safety net doesn’t have to be a loss of freedom. You can keep it broad and level and market activity can happen above it while still processing information.

As a libertarians, I often argue with other libertarians about this. To me, being a libertarian is about making liberty the highest value to be sought by governmental design. A reduction of risk for everyone across the board increases liberty. It leaves people free to engage with others as they see fit and to seek profit wherever they will.

That calm thing you’re talking about is huge. One of the prerequisites of anything that can be called freedom is the ability to think clearly, and science has shown that the more stress and uncertainty a person is under chronically, they less clearly they can think. Freedom means being able to do what you choose, and people can’t really choose if they’re sleep deprived, full of adrenalin and cortisol. Like, the psychological literature calls that “ego depletion”, and with good reason. A person whose willpower budget is always drained, and therefore can’t control themselves, is not a free person.

Never underestimate the ability of a few good policies to increase individual liberty. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.

I learned earlier today that paywalls are inversely associated with scams happening.

That tells me that scamming is one of the least profitable economic activities.

Jesus saying that did not mean that it is unethical to be rich. The reason it’s hard for a rich man to enter heaven is the rich man can afford endless distractions from facing the hard problem of his own suffering.

Poor people are more likely to encounter circumstances that they cannot survive without adapting. The ultimate adaptation to difficulty is when you find bliss in the struggle. You enter the kingdom of heaven after transcending ordeals.

Rich people don’t transcend ordeals they just sidestep them.

Basically rich people don’t have a cross. Well, they can have one, but it comes harder. They live cushy lives that don’t require entering heaven just to survive.

Same reason Gautama had to go be a monk before he could be attain enlightenment. You basically don’t take the problem of suffering seriously enough to solve it, unless your suffering is great. A rich person’s suffering is the leaky roof that never collapses. A poor person’s suffering is a collapsed roof, which forces action on learning how to build a new, perfect roof.

If I were President, and I were meeting with an enemy face to face, and they saluted me, I’d salute them back.

I have not served in any military and am not aware of the official meaning of a salute.

But I have had enemies and if I were meeting with one of my enemies and they saluted me, I would salute them.

This is just based on my gut feel of the gesture’s meaning from watching movies. My gut feel is it’s a combination of:

• This handshake indicates we’re both listening intently and ready to talk
• I see you. We are the same despite our ranks, because we’ve both put ourselves here, and because we’re both equally susceptible to bullets.

I could be wrong, and I’m asking for correction if I am, but based on that I’d salute an enemy soldier if he was standing there ready to meet with me.

Thing is though, with a politician it’s different. I don’t know if Trump’s ever been shot at. Probably not. So the “hello, spiritual brother” thing that can apply to any other soldier even enemy is less there with a politician.

I don’t know. Just saying it seems natural to me to salute an enemy. Like “this sucks, maybe we can end it today” feeling to it for me. Framing the war as a problem they’re facing together.

It’s the hat that did it.

1. Not even in the top ten list of choices I make leading to not enough money
2. Perhaps on the shortest timescale, but increasing the market for food reduces prices long term
3. Refutes my original claim without argument, so I disagree unless you’ve got more to back this up.

Don’t be too proud of this technological terror you’ve created. The ability to compose haiku is insignificant next to the power of a nice hug.

Yeah I’ve run into this a bit. People say it “doesn’t understand” things, but when I ask for a definition of “understand” I usually just get downvotes.

That is basically the best use of LLMs.

A few of the most useful conversations I’ve had with ChatGPT:

Once or twice a week

Literally none of them. I go back to visit my old blast from the past games and boy do they suck.

Except Left4Dead 2