/lit/ - Literature

>implying that hasnt always been the case

Lit isn't useful neither does it read

It's been that way for a while. Most of the studies that involve actual research and not saying "xyz is secretly gay, or is secretly a Nazi" are produced by companies. I have to read a lot of these for work, McKinsey, UPS, and CBRE together produce more valuable knowledge than Harvard or Stanford.

>>12187137
Henry Ford was made fun of for being dumb.

>>12188472
By whom? I doubt it was the general populace

>>12188595
The Jews?

>>12188595
>There was also no avoiding what Ford didn’t know. “They basically asked him, you might say, high school questions,” historian John Stadenmaier observes in the PBS documentary Henry Ford. “And he was revealed to be pathetically inarticulate and ill-informed. The stuff he didn’t know was amazing to people.”

>In one memorable exchange, Stevenson asked, “Do you know anything about the Revolution, Mr. Ford?”

>“Yes, sir,” Ford answered.

>“What revolution did you have in mind, Mr. Ford?”

>“In 1812,” Ford replied to murmurs of astonishment in the crowded courtroom.

>After the trial, the media pronounced its own unequivocal verdict on Ford’s performance. “Mr. Ford has been submitted to a severe examination of his intellectual qualities,” wrote the New York Times. “He has not received a pass.” “The man is a joke,” blasted the New York Post.

https://www.ozy.com/flashback/the-astonishing-ignorance-of-henry-ford/31368

>>12188882
Can I have a source for Thiel recommending these? I know he likes Girard.

Guess I have to read Taleb now, but much like Harari i get the feeling its going to be full of yellow press pop science?

Is it really anything else?

>>12187130
Read Spengler

>>12189612
I understood fuck all when I read Decline of the West. Being a math brainlet fucking sucks.

>>12187130
Until "academic" stops meaning "career failure who's lucked out and failed into higher salary instead of lower salary" then no one will care about the opinions of academics.

Why are Americans obsessed with this concept that rich people are somehow better than everyone else?

>>12187130
>Sage-Kings
>Philosopher-Kings
>Military-Emperors
>Religion-backed-Kings
>Alchemy-backed-Monarchs
>Science-backed-Institutional Figures
>Academic-backed-Organization Heads
>Public-backed-Corporate Overlords
It's a pretty linear progression when you look at it this way.

They are at the top of the present-day hierarchy of wealth, and perhaps competence. It takes a brainless oaf and lots of luck to reach a position like that, it takes immense resolve, an almost alien intelligence, and something not quite natural or materially measurable to retain the position.

Take Trump, for instance. Originally he was given daddy's money and used his father's reputation. Last I counted, he went bankrupt or severely into debt (more than half a billion at one point) four times, and did not rely on his father's reputation or friends to get himself back up and running. The man is a baboon, for sure, but he's neither incompetent nor an idiot.

Same for Richard Branson. The man is dyslexic, dropped out of grade school -- IIRC before 11th Grade -- and is *somehow* one of the most successful and respected men on the planet for his business acumen.

Doesn't mean we should roll over and obey by any means, but I'm certainly willing to listen to what someone thinks or says and give it consideration when they've done things I haven't. Same for academics, and housewives and street performers. Always something to learn when I let go of the ego's need to qualify others and validate the self.

>>12189696
> Forgetting the best combination; of monarchies and limited joint stock corporations.

>>12189615
>>12189615
Spengler argues that in our age, the winter of our civilization, we won't be longer able to produce true art and philosophy (Spengler considers math a form of art), they became a stupid game for bored intellectuals. Our creative energies must be redirected towards something else, concrete things like engineering, business, war, etc...
I suggest that you study math, because it amplifies the way you think.

>>12187130
Peter Thiel is literally girardfag

>>12189725

>>12189708
I don't even understand how numbers are real, it comes with 85 IQ.

>>12189733
>I don't even understand how numbers are real
nobody does

>>12189739
How are nukes possible if numbers are not real then

I feel like I'm missing half of my brain

>>12189742
how do nukes being real tells you anything about the reality of numbers?

>>12188657
>Revolution of 1812 during the Argentinian War of Independence
Ford was just flexing his knowledge to the simple minded American egocentrists.

>>12189733
Mathematic is an art and the meaning of numbers changes for each culture, and for each culture it changes depending on time.
Treat mathematic as an art and you'll learn it. Don't focus on finding the meaning of numbers, focus on practice.
Don't focus on the meaning of painting, focus on knowing how to paint.
Math is 80% practice, general intelligence only makes you learn faster

>>12189747
Someone counted and it resulted in explosion?

>>12189703
>Implying it wasn't left out because it's a conspiratorial flight of fancy
Captcha: Urma Gurdy

>>12189708
>Spengler
>No true art
>He died before lolis came into existence
Nigga missed out on Spring.

>>12189777
so what's math made of? matter creates biology, biology creates math, and math determines matter? so who rules in that relation and what does really exist?

>>12189797
but how are numbers exploding? singing poetry doesn't nuke nagashaki but when some dude puts together some numbers it means they go up in hellfire

>>12189800
some poetry may have started the series of actions lead to blowing chinks, how is that different?

>>12189809
man i dont get it my brains are full of fuck it hurts to be this stupid

>>12189800
>numbers are exploding

Haven't you skipped a few steps there buddy?

>>12189818
>>12189813

>>12189813
i'm not saying math is poetry or in the same category, just saying that it's very difficult to determine what math is by any materialist standards, and its usefulness doesn't really help in that matter

>>12189830
Math is the purest distillation of pattern recognition humans have come up with, besides magic.

And I'm willing to argue magic is higher-dimensional maths applied to lower dimensions for faster results; the same way you could take 20 years to train a kid to be an Olympian or you can take 20 seconds to sketch/write it out.

>>12189800
The same way a well made political discourse or a religion or a philosophy can lead to a genocide.
Don't try to understand math, is like trying to understand the Parthenon. You can't. Just do practice on math

>>12187130
Given the absolute fucking state of western academia, this is long overdue.

>>12189845
Algebra is a direct result of magical thought

>>12189848
Idk anon, unless scientists and academics the world over (China, next 20-60 years) learn to do both VC and their field of study, western over-specialization will be a worldwide trend here to stay. Can't say I'm fond of *only* the sciences or studies that have merits on the market being developed, but the only other way is for the eggheads to learn how to talk to people, how to politic, and how to be publicly likeable without triggering too many people by being opinionated.

Academia, as far as I understand it, is ego-driven. Business is market-driven. I will say, I'd be most concerned with those two becoming one and the same, above all else.

>>12189850
I was under the impression it was the various historical stages of alchemy, rather than magic, that lead to algebra.
Whereas magic produced geometry.

>>12189869
Geometry comes from the necessity of measuring things, at least euclidean geometry

>>12189847
my brain can't allow me to do that i just fucking freeze tilt

>>12189909
Are you black

>>12189916
white

>>12189901
I was under the impression Geometry came from older practices like geomancy, and the attempt to discern relations between various things physical and non-physical through applied symbolism and relativity. That measurement came secondary to belief and comprehension of the world.

>>12189708
>I suggest that you study math, because it amplifies the way you think.

>>12187130
>Is this temporary or the new normal?

To be quite honest, it's a new thing altogether. Several hundred years ago, people who were highly educated became so because they were going to become part of the bureaucratic machine and the price of education was justified in that manner, e.g you would become a respected member of the elite that runs the government.

These days however, education is so far divorced from actual material production that you have tens of thousands of women(for example) who graduate from universities with gender studies degrees or post-colonial studies or whatever and these people are increasingly burdening the state economically in order to justify their existence.

What we are essentially doing is educating an entire parasitical class of people who have zero relation to actual production and exist solely on taxable transferable wealth.

This state of material circumstances will not last forever, and these people will either revolt(and elect some kind of fascist dictator, such that they can have an economic position in the new state order), or they will accept their position as the new proletariat, working as drones for Starbucks or Amazon.

I find the latter highly unlikely.

>>12189964
>These days however, education is so far divorced from actual material production that you have tens of thousands of women(for example) who graduate from universities with gender studies degrees or post-colonial studies or whatever and these people are increasingly burdening the state economically in order to justify their existence.

Thiel believes higher education, for reasons you listed and for reasons related to financing that higher education and loan people have to take for it - is a bubble.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5NUv0nOQCU

He got the 2000 tech bubble right and 2008 housing bubble.

8 (eight) years ago he called this bubble for what it is, way before most of the people graduating right now had took even a cent in debt. It's not rocket science tho.
> take a college degree, any college degree. You will get any job you want if you have one of these

An advice that worked well when only the top 5% of the population had one, not when most people have one and retarded ones like gender studies and african studies.

https://techcrunch.com/2011/04/10/peter-thiel-were-in-a-bubble-and-its-not-the-internet-its-higher-education/

>>12189978
> Some people are contrarian for the sake of getting headlines or outsmarting the markets.
> For Thiel, it’s simply how he views the world. Of course a side benefit for the natural contrarian is it frequently leads to things like headlines and money.

> Consider the 2000 Nasdaq crash. Thiel was one of the few who saw in coming. There’s a famous story about PayPal’s March 2000 venture capital round. The offer was “only” at a $500 million-or-so valuation.
> Nearly everyone on the board and the management team balked, except Thiel who calmly told the room that this was a bubble at its peak, and the company needed to take every dime it could right now. That’s how close PayPal came to being dot com roadkill a la WebVan or Pets.com.

> And after the crash, Thiel insisted there hadn’t really been a crash: He argued the equity bubble had simply shifted onto the housing market.
> Thiel was so convinced of this thesis that until recently, he refused to buy property, despite his soaring personal net worth. And, again, he was right.

> So Friday, as I sat with Thiel in his San Francisco home that he finally owns, I was curious what he thinks of the current Web frenzy.
> Not surprisingly, another Internet bubble seemed the farthest thing from his mind. But, he argued, America is under the spell of a bubble of a very different kind. Is it an emerging markets bubble? You could argue that, Thiel says, but he also notes that with half of the world’s population surging to modernity, it’s hard to argue the emerging world is overvalued.

> Instead, for Thiel, the bubble that has taken the place of housing is the higher education bubble.
> “A true bubble is when something is overvalued and intensely believed,” he says.
> “Education may be the only thing people still believe in in the United States. To question education is really dangerous. It is the absolute taboo. It’s like telling the world there’s no Santa Claus.”

>>12189982

You do realize that there are about a thousand people predicting a bubble crash at every point in time, right? So, when eventually there is a crash...

No one has magic predictive powers over the market. Some people just get lucky.

>>12190003
He called 00 and 07 correctly so whatever. It's a good argument Thiel makes and I happen to agree.

>>12190010

Let's try some basic probability. If there are about 1 million "analysts" predicting entirely randomly, what is the probability that at least 1 makes 2 correct predictions?

protip: it's not a very small probability

>>12187130
Peter Thiel got rich from artificially inflated entrepreneurial profits thanks to government monopolies in the form of patents and regulations favouring his businesses like paypal. Only the government can keep capitalism alive today, Marx was 100% about the tendency of the rate of profit to fall if you understand his argument.

>>12188595
A lot of legit inventors in the 19th century were uneducated basically dumb fucks without any formal education because there was still a lot of low hanging fruit and you could do serious groundbreaking research without much costs but that's not true any more. "Entrepreneurs", as middle men, on the other hand have always been largly psychopathic monsters gaming the system.

>>12189869
>Academia, as far as I understand it, is ego-driven. Business is market-driven.
They're both institutions that are fundamentally outdated today. Academia is to theoretically detached from the real world and business by its nature is a blood sport aiming at curtailing production and maximizing prices for their owners. You should read Thorstein Veblen from over 100 years ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Business_Enterprise
Some excerpts:
>The outcome of this management of industrial affairs through pecuniary transactions, therefore, has been to dissociate the interests of those men who exercise the discretion from the interests of the community.... Broadly, this class of business men, in so far as they have no ulterior strategic ends to serve, have an interest in making the disturbances of the system large and frequent, since it is in the conjunctures of change that their gain emerges.... It is, as a business proposition, a matter of indifference to the man of large affairs whether the disturbances which his transactions set up in the industrial system help or hinder the system at large.
...
>The end of his endeavors is, not simply to effect an industrially advantageous consolidation, but to effect it under such circumstances of ownership as will give him control of large business forces or bring him the largest possible gain.
...
>The endeavor of all such enterprises that look to a permanent continuance of their business is to establish as much of a monopoly as may be.

>>12190065
Academia isn't detached from the real world at all. Academia just uses different language and different tactics to increase its revenue stream.

It's not a coincidence that most people who work permanently in academia are also the same people who vote for political parties that will increase the amount of wealth transfer from the general productive populace to the universities and administrations of the universities.

Every single person on the planet has economic interests, it doesn't matter if the person works in the government or in a private company.

>>12190083
Sure, in that every person prefers and sets aside (economics wider); but there is no 'free market' when academics teach other people to become academics and the ways of leeching off tax money which is coerced from people who actually produce income and wealth in the (free) market (economy narrower).

It's a giant bubble and scam that couldn't keep itself standing if it was not for government tax revenue.

>>12188472
I'm pretty sure Henry Ford didn't finish high school and instead went right into trades as a teenager. Is it really a surprise that he doesn't have the breadth of trivial knowledge that a prep-school and Ivy League educated faggot has?

Pro-tip: one of those guys was a self-made man who revolutionized the American economy, helping to bring the USA to hegemony status. the other was a pretentious, good-for-nothing leech. can you guess which one was which?

>>12190094
>It's a giant bubble and scam that couldn't keep itself standing if it was not for government tax revenue.

This is what I said, but it's not a bubble nor is it a scam. It's just normal every day economics.

If this shit is true for academics, then it's doubly true for the military and the police force.

And yet Thiel would never say the police or the military is an economic bubble because those people defend his property.

>>12190100
These are not exactly arguments. You do not 'disprove' the median or average possibility by showing how something outside its range happened.. people like Ford were exceptional.

>>12187130
Academics largely can't seem to move past Marxism or its descendants. Maybe it'll just be the new normal. Most of the progress to be made is in hard sciences (which are too hard for most academics in the humanities).

>>12190105
>It's just normal every day economics.
There's nothing 'normal every day economics' in having your entire existence be based on tax revenue from people who produced it, it literally is not capitalism, but more or less, socialism. Economics is exchange in the free market with division of labor and private property.

> If this shit is true for academics, then it's doubly true for the military and the police force.
True enough in the sense that they produce services off tax money. But for example U.S. military is more complex since it backs petrodollar functions (of providing goods and services) and police force guarantees free market security (ideally, obviously it can get abusive and crack down and overreach). Acadamia in the Ivy league sense doesn't add to either, for starters, because they breed socialists out of their ass for the longest time in U.S. and West Europe.

> And yet Thiel would never say the police or the military is an economic bubble because those people defend his property.
Ah, that's a point and argument for their existence in the normal capitalistic and libertarian sense. But to the extent they don't economize and audit, and to the extent they wouldn't exist without tax moneys, they're a bubble. Hell US DOD is the world's largest health insurance racket provided by governmetn that occasionally fights.

>>12190010
>He called 00 and 07 correctly so whatever.
Do you have a single fact to back that up?

>>12190117
>Academics largely can't seem to move past Marxism or its descendants
It might be this or it might be that non-marxists or anti-marxists are too busy going to trade or entrepreneur. To them simply going to academia to read about Jigga Boo Anal Anus Suns would be ridiculous waste of time and money.

>>12190107
>Carnegie
>Ford
>Edison
>Westinghouse
all came from similarly humble backgrounds, all revolutionized American industry. this non-exhaustive list came from 5 seconds of mental effort. I'm sure there are tons more from where that came from.

>>12190123
>It might be this or it might be that non-marxists or anti-marxists are too busy going to trade or entrepreneur.
Weren't a lot of the prominent Enlightenment philosophers non-academics? I think a lot of the Enlightenment output is a bit questionable but you don't really need to be an academic in philosophy to have influential output. Outside of philosophy proper, Marxism has basically become the new Scholasticism, in that it's more or less training priests/theologians of our contemporary religion, Progressivism. Except Scholasticism was actually good, sort of.

>>12190129
And there are lot more of those that finished trade school or college/uni and went to business.. it's just statistics.

>>12190135
This sounds familiar.

>>12190120
Yes. It's called "Thiel's investment choices and his reasoning behind them"

>>12190061
unlike most naysayers, Thiel has skin in the game to the tune of billions of dollars, and he's been consistently successful, so I trust that his actions mirror a series of rational decisions instead of knee-jerk contrarianism

>>12190120
DId you even read the greentexts. He sold just before the 00 crash. It's evident in his actions that his calls were right.

> Consider the 2000 Nasdaq crash. Thiel was one of the few who saw in coming. There’s a famous story about PayPal’s March 2000 venture capital round. The offer was “only” at a $500 million-or-so valuation.
> Nearly everyone on the board and the management team balked, except Thiel who calmly told the room that this was a bubble at its peak, and the company needed to take every dime it could right now. That’s how close PayPal came to being dot com roadkill a la WebVan or Pets.com.

> And after the crash, Thiel insisted there hadn’t really been a crash: He argued the equity bubble had simply shifted onto the housing market.

>>12190136
the real question is how many Ivy League fucks contributed to American industry instead of leeching off of it. that was the entire point.

>>12190139
>Thiel has skin in the game to the tune of billions of dollars, and he's been consistently successful, so I trust that his actions mirror a series of rational decisions instead of knee-jerk contrarianism
Nice.

>>12190139
>he rich so he smart
Why are Amerigoblins like this?

It will end by either by Life-worship, global death, or gulliotines.

>>12190138
Moldbug is one of the more significant/interesting thinkers of the 21st century so far imo, and he isn't an academic. Just recognizing that you can't actually limit State power with checks and balances, rule of law, and so on represents a significant advancement from the mix of Anglo-American liberalism and Marxism that we see in academia.

>>12187130
Venture capitalists and CEOs aren't intellectuals. As a rule they're aggressively anti-intellectual and have been for ages. There is a long and well-documented history of animosity between businessmen and intellectuals, the former feeling threatened by the latter and vice versa. In our benighted age the businessmen are the clear victors. Indeed, they've even convinced people like you that they're intellectuals.

>>12190150
Because capitalism of free economy with division of labor and private property is set of games and winning games is heavily correlated with intelligence, contra socialism which tries to erase game theory out of the equation, despite the fact that no multi agent game in a physical environment can ever reach post-scarcity.

Which just tells us that capitalism shares goods & services so effectively it tricks lower iQ people to think that post-scarcity is possible. And this is its effectiveness while central banks, governments slow it down.

>>12190083
I mean detached firstly in the sense most research being performed isn't aimed at societies most pressing concerns as most people might see them and secondly in the general sense of how the division of labour must naturally make highly specialized individuals who won't be concerned with anything beyond their own line of vision.

>>12190094
Your hypothesis of a "free market" is antiquated. All income distribution is a factor of domestic and global governmental policy. There doesn't exist any sharp line between subsidized or non-subsidized ventures any more. If you work for a startup or lockheed martin or walmart or directly for the government your pay is just as much a result of the government. This may be a very contentious statement but there's no reason to believe that profit exists before taxation today. Without government tax revenue private business would collapse as the rate of profit would collapse. The reality is the government and capitalists form a symbiotic relationship to exploit the proletariats surplus value.

>>12190118
Socialism is just the common ownership of the means of production. The intellectual products of academia are chosen bureaucratically for production and are most often private and capitalized upon. The military and academic sectors of all capitalist economies can be understood in terms of artificially inflating the rate of profit for the collective interests of private business by absorbing excess capacity in a class collaborative manner which prevents private struggle.

>>12190163
>he isn't an academic
He went to some university (Brown? I think) and got computer-sci papers I believe. Do not quote me on that though.
> Just recognizing that you can't actually limit State power with checks and balances, rule of law, and so on represents a significant advancement from the mix of Anglo-American liberalism and Marxism that we see in academia.
True and obvious, but it's also how Moldbug writes about it that makes him effective (carry over from reading older, non-21st century literature?). Him trying to create a program that would de-program progressivism out of person was a good run of blog writings that truly inspired me to read and think more, as sad as that might sound.
> pic. unrelated, Pobedonostsev.

>>12190172
>point out a concrete reasoning flaw
>goes off on a tangent about the latest mantras he got from after-school specials of youtube "intellectuals"
Why are underage ancapotards like this?

>>12190144
My bad. But desu he at best can only think and ride bubbles though.

>>12190203
im a day trader lamo

>>12190211
How do I get into day trading?

>>12190192
>It shows also that this extension - in great States - was inspired by secret aims to the centralisation of power, or led directly to dictatorship.
He already saw the main mechanic at work in the 1800s.

Interestingly, Pobedonostsev wrote that he thought the Catholic Church would eventually prevail in the US. It might, but probably not in the way he envisioned...

>>12190211
Not a shining example of intelligence and intellectualism

t.son of a day trader

>>12190211
>I'm a graph monkey pushing buttons in mt6
Was that supposed to somehow address the point of contention or impart authority into your non-existent arguments, brainlet?

>>12190139
>Thiel has skin in the game to the tune of billions of dollars
Peter Thiel got rich because of the American government. Paypal was always shit but it could exist thanks largly to government regulations on finance. Thiel has continuously worked with the government in many different ways:
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/22/how-peter-thiels-palantir-helped-the-nsa-spy-on-the-whole-world/

This isn't some kind of anomaly. Any analysis of business will lead you to understanding it's no longer viable if it ever was. Veblen proved this and we reached the tipping point long ago but a system of pseudo-profit and pseudo-private enterprise has been kept afloat for the elites to keep living large.

>>12190138
>ywn shitpost live during Drumpf election with Thiel and Moldbug

>>12190211
>he thinks this is impressive and/or a sign of intellectual prowess

>>12190234
> ywn read a new UR blogpost.

>>12190226
Corporations are always state creatures. In republics like the US, no one is really in charge, so they can buy out the state and engage in harmful behavior, in fact this is the whole point of democratic republics.

>Any analysis of business will lead you to understanding it's no longer viable if it ever was.
What...

>>12190145
Very good point

>>12190249
>Corporations are always state creatures
Corporations are prior to states. To say otherwise is practically cargo cultism and logically insane.
> We created tax regime and *poof* Amazon appeared!
> We enforced monopoly over land because it wasn't productive, and *poof* productivity appeared.
I guess I'm nitpicking autist but I have low IQ so bear with me.

>>12190145
>his idea of a "contributor" is a tycoon that does nothing but manage cashflows and lobby the government

>>12190264
No they aren't. Who provides the legal infrastructure, protection of property rights, securing of markets, basic research funding, seed capital (see: In-Q-Tel), etc.? protip: the state.

>I guess I'm nitpicking autist but I have low IQ so bear with me.
No, you're probably just confused due to your Marxism - many such cases!

>>12190272
resource allocation is necessary

>>12190272
B-but they're job creators. We need them to employ us otherwise we'll all perish.

>>12190264
>> We enforced monopoly over land because it wasn't productive, and *poof* productivity appeared.
Life-hating philistines get the bullet. The day will come to separate the weeds from the wheat.

>>12190286
jobs aren't created, jobs are discovered

>§2.56 — Although the world is probably not yet ready for the question of the price of Being, if it ever will be, its most fundamental ontological problems are bound to the fate of a digital currency system, nevertheless. The intrinsic abstraction of money is not obviously delimitable. To twist a Spinozistic formulation: We do not know what money can do. The process of monetary sophistication, which is by no means restricted to ‘financialization’ in its contemporary sense, automatically projects a convergence of money and intelligence as it tends to the monetization of general-purpose problem-solving (by subjecting it to the discipline of price-discovery). Crypto-digital currency inclines to the distributed production of a synthetic cognitive medium, attesting to the primordial complicity of Capital teleology with the production of artificial intelligence. Within the industrial social order (capitalism), markets manifestly – and consistently – drive the production of intelligent machines. Modernity demonstrates no stronger trend. (Theoretical expectation supports this proposition no less firmly than empirical evidence.****)

this has been your daily Uncle Nick

carry on as you were

>>12190311
fuck off, plato

>>12190264
>>12190287
Regardless of my hate for the death-worship and evil rhetoric, you are right, infidel. The state is a corporate entity, just look at the Merauke Integrated Food And Energy Estate(MIFEE) for example.

>>12190273
You don't create a legal infrastructure to minimize risk and randomness of uncontracted people and hope for economics to arrive, legal infra and insurance are a post-hoc solution to problems of uncontracted peoples or reducing risks people perceive.

I think to say otherwise ie. 'i create legal infra, now economics happen *poof*' is cargo cultism unless we go meta and start to talk about legal professions (which were really decentralized before nation-states)

Obviously *now* the system of formalizing such things as legal infra and protection of property rights are on state's back, but they're only so because there was something to coerce in the first place.

When we go back to pre-nation-state era of monarchies or colonial corporations, private property rights were stronger as can be seen from the simple fact you own a slave or had less of a tax burden or none at all.

>>12190324
Corporations don't tax, are based on private property and contracts.
States tax, are based on force and ignore pacta sunt servanda.
Just to name a few big differences.

>>12190318
>Crypto-digital currency inclines to the distributed production of a synthetic cognitive medium, attesting to the primordial complicity of Capital teleology with the production of artificial intelligence. Within the industrial social order (capitalism), markets manifestly – and consistently – drive the production of intelligent machines. Modernity demonstrates no stronger trend. (Theoretical expectation supports this proposition no less firmly than empirical evidence.****)

what

>>12187130
Acdemics and big business go hand in hand.
Read Langan's essays. It's all one big scam.

>>12190272
I love how simple people think business is, particularly, industry leading ones. Many big names have died or had to reinvent themselves to survive. This requires a vast amount of skill, especially when things start going wrong.

>>12190249
Yes corporations are granted the right to exist and are protected by the state because the corporate form of enterprise is empirically very productive and much more so than the classical individual proprietor form of enterprise which is why they were encouraged. America was one of the first nations, as a republic, to be at the vanguard of corporatizing their economy and radically enhance their standard of living and conquering foreign markets... but this business communities interests are not necessarily in the communities at large and reorganizing production on the basis of small private proprietorship hasn't occurred anywhere because profits would be obliterated. Velbens analysis is great here:

>The problem for the absentee owners, according to Veblen, was that the industrial machine was too productive and threatened to collapse prices (and thus profit), if left unchecked. As we have discussed, the modern corporation is itself an incorporation of credit, and was formed to strategically control the production process of ‘industry’. In other words, credit fell into use because the industrial system was too productive and needed to be curtailed. But how does credit play this role? Well, through incorporation, that is through ownership, a corporation comes to dominate a given fraction of the industrial process and can control this fraction within limits for profitable ends. A greater extension of credit however, allows the incorporation of absentee owners greater strategic leverage in their mission to accumulate profits through a vigilant curtailment of productive efficiency.
>First, it can use this credit offered by the Investment Banker to merge or acquire other companies with which it is competing. This allows the corporation to collect or take-over the income stream of an existing corporation while at the same time, creating no new capacity with the credit it has been extended by our friend the Investment Banker. It also gives the corporation greater strategic control over a given fraction of the industrial system. With greater control, the corporation is freer to undertake acts of sabotage by curtailing production and jacking the price of its wares.
>Second, the extension of credit can serve to inflate prices. What is crucial for Veblen here is that an extension of credit does not mean that it is linked to any ‘tangible asset’ (though it could be), and is therefore capable of extending, ad infinitum until something checks this inflation in a period of crisis. However, until this check arrives, prices are free to soar and the ‘proverbial’ bottom line of numerical units will be fattened.

>>12190372
It's even more insane when they create entire industries like Rockefeller did with oil.

>>12190347
Private property is based on state force, or the force of private military. The story is the same from Colombia to the sakha republic. Look at the on going genocide/ecocide in Merauke for a terrible example that has been on my mind.
Die death-worshiper. It's time for us to start living in the light of Life.

>>12190381
>Private property is based on state force, or the force of private military
Private ownership historically, logically, economically, socially precedes both state and private militias. Current Nation-States are very new invention (actually wrote 'intervention' first which I guess is correct way to think about it too).

>>12190377
You could've corporatized without being a republic. The long-run result of this was corporations basically devouring the country, because no one was in charge, and the Constitution is the main cause.

>>12190400
You could have lot smaller 'nation-states' with modern technology and replace states with corporations for fun.

>>12190396
Private property was invented in 18th century England with the enclosure of the commons, issued by the state. That along with the first joint-stock companies originating in 16th century Holland mark the beginnings of capitalism and corporations as we know them today. The mind of the death-worshiper has been leveled, grated, laid with concrete and sewn with bad seeds at the margins.

>>12190355
>Read Langan's essays.

can you name a few at least?

>>12190372
It is exceedingly simple. Only legitimate retards imagine entrepreneurship and management to be some arcane high science.

>>12190400
America was primarily a land of small farmers at the framing of the constitution, corporations weren't on the agenda because they weren't necessary for most economic operations and seen as an archaic feudal institution. Of course a republic isn't necessary but historically it was more of a slow drift towards a judicial revolution in the late 19th century that resulted in the corporatization of the economy.
The long term investment and large fixed-cost of carrying out railroad construction was the first to really demonstrate the old way of doing business wouldn't work any more. The corporation was a viable solution to the issues of large scale national industry without outright statism while protecting the interests of the elites. Dictatorship wasn't necessary and where it was attempted as with fascism it failed. Large industry requires certain institutional guarantees to be carried out successfully and a "dictatorship" like China can provide this but at the same time transforming the Chinese state. All I'm getting at is the idea you can carry out industry on an ideal competitive basis was falsified historically when the deflationary pressures created the modern order which actually exists.

>>12190401
You can't replace a state with a corporation. If you have corporations you have to have some sort of governing power above them granting them their rights and privileges. Compare American history to Europe with a lot of small states to see the benefits of balkanization "with modern technology". It's not necessarily a benefit and it drifts towards the creation of supranational institutions nonetheless so you should just start there and deal with the issues of international corporations.
The typical extreme libertarian idea is to abolish the corporation and just have fully liable property owners which raises the issue of restructuring the entire economy which no one really wants because most everyone has some vested stake in it as it stands. The issue is production is collective and not individual which problematizes most anti-authoritarian libertarian notions.

>>12190406
>Private property was invented in 18th century England with the enclosure of the commons, issued by the state.
This is one of the stupidest things you could possibly say... private property always existed but what happened in England was an example of the state role played in the creation of modern factor markets.

>>12189526
taleb definitely does not write as yellow page pop science, he has gift of communicating complex ideas simply and clearly as he puts mathematicc heavy stuff in dedicated papers. He hates pseuds.

>>12187130
No they haven't. Universities still have massive edge in that no matter how insignificant brainlet a single humanist professor individually is, she is in a position to brainwash hundreds even thousands of stuents who then in turn jealously guard universities because all their prestige and income depends on public opinion of universities. This is the Cathedral Theory in nutshell.

>>12191091
Bureaucracy does perpetuate itself but it can't by itself. Popular media was always much more relevant in shaping public opinon than educational institutions and I would say it's even more so today. I don't see how the humanities could even be that relevant when they have been in decline for a long time now, with STEM being much more popular, and it's not like most youtube celebrities or any other popular influencers have a degree in the fine arts. The prime benefactors of the current situation are corporations who are shifting the costs onto individuals to finance their own training and having guarantees on the abilities of anyone they employ before their hired.

>>12191069
can you tldr what the books are about, just one sentence rundown soni can decide between them

>>12191217
>Popular media was always much more relevant in shaping public opinon than educational institutions
Where do you think all those journalists with degrees got the ideas they then propagated?

>>12190217
You don't. You invest in an index fund

>>12191301
Journalism isn't exactly a form of popular media when most people just consume entertainment. Americans have always been anti-intellectual, your average American doesn't care for professors or the academic consensus on most issues. So it seems like a horrible explanation of hegemony by centering it there if it really exists. You're talking about what's just another commodity and there really does exist a lot more autonomy than you want to believe.

>>12190995
>This is one of the stupidest things you could possibly say... private property always existed but what happened in England was an example of the state role played in the creation of modern factor markets.
No faggot, you're wrong. You probably think private property and land ownership are the same thing like a good empty-minded death drone

>>12191376
True. I was using word "journalists with degree" very generously. More accurate description would be "media people with some degree". Not just people with degree in journalism, but all the people working in media.

>>12191484
It's easier to call it Cathedral (Moldbug's concept).

Is all knowledge really worth a shit? If you criticize certain subsets of academia does that really make you an anti-intellectual?

>>12191376
>Americans have always been anti-intellectual, your average American doesn't care for professors or the academic consensus on most issues.
So? Doesn't change the fact that those who went to universities and learned from those professors do care, and they are the ones who end up propagating ideas they learn, and "average American" sucks it all up via that intermediatery intelligentsia class over time. Think of professors as bishops and their students as priests.

>So it seems like a horrible explanation of hegemony by centering it there if it really exists.
It's observable. University comes up with concept of "white privilege", and curiously it ends up as main stream media talking point a few graduate classes later.

>You're talking about what's just another commodity and there really does exist a lot more autonomy than you want to believe.
Sure, but it's never in priests self-interest to devalue themselves by attacking hegemony they participate in or superstructure that spawned them.

It's a sleight of hand to associate 'intellect', 'wisdom' with academy in 2018. Just progressives maximizing status symbols to use against people without it.

The hottest shit I read in philosophy is sharted out in Wordpress blogs by neets with anime avatars.

>>12191534
Links?

>>12191526
Your problem seems to be more with intellectuals as such which is a problem of the division of labour. Waclaw Machajski said it much better than you ever could. Also the whole "white skin privilege" theory wasn't invented by academia it was first theorized by lumpenproletarian elements in the 1960s and later came into academia and was overtheorized.

>>12187130
Prominent to who? Get out of your internet filter-bubble.

>>12187130
Academia is just that shitty now.

>>12191706
nope, it came from bourgeois "white" kids at elite colleges who became professors after they got done playing revoluionary in the 60s, it absolutely did not come from the lumpenproletariat dont be absurd

>>12187130
Most academics are hacks, no skin in the game.

>>12191503
No. Not that there is anything wrong with being antiintellectual though.

>>12191335
I've already done that. It barely makes me anything.

>>12193897
most people are hacks

>>12187130

have parental assets + ignore labor laws + evade taxes = wow such venture much capitalism

>>12190065
What the fuck are you talking about? Paypal is a business that millions of people use every day that generates over 10 billion in revenue every year. The American government has basically zero regulations on the internet, yet dozens of American companies are generating billions and billions in revenue (and profit). So please explain how the government is keeping paypal and these companies afloat.

>>12189681
it's what capitalism does to your brain.

>>12189964
What third world shithole do you live in?

>>12190139
you're only right in market as long you're right. remember that, it doesn't take much for market makers to turn against someone like thiel and take his money.

>>12190352
yes, bitcoin is the skynet.

Taleb is so incoherent with himself, it's not even funny.

The Black Swan recommends to not do something high-risk-high-reward...like being an author. But the last book says to have skin in the game ... because reasons.

>>12195347
I haven't read Taleb's books. Would you recommend them? Could you write one line tl;dr of his books?

>>12195406
>one sentence
People are bad wrapping their head about chance and risk and here are some related factoids
It's better party knowledge and/or might give you an interest in the scientific treatments of the stuff behind the claims, but he also let's this spill into his personal ideology (which is a very masculine business one oriented one) and he's increasingly unsympathetic as a person imho

https://youtu.be/uv6KLbkvua8

>>12195443
>It's better party knowledge

Fucking knew it, dropped it. All I wanted was hard talk about probability . Guess Im stuck with wikipedia math pages.

>>12195487
Hard probability to what end?
I'm actually got a PhD in theoretical physics, also wrote trading bots and in my day-job am working on Bayesian updating for poses in augmented reality, so I may help out.

>>12195487
Hard probability to what end?
I actually got a PhD in statistical physics. Also wrote trading bots and in my day-job am working on Bayesian updating for poses in augmented reality - so I may help out.

>>12195521
>I'm actually got a PhD in theoretical physics, also wrote trading bots and in my day-job am working on Bayesian updating for poses in augmented reality, so I may help out.

Sounds interesting, definitely more than my NEET life.
I didn't have anything particular in mind, just nature of risk/probability/randomness on finance/economics.

Do you have Goodreads/blog?

>>12195347
Author is extremely low risk if it's side thing. Taleb is millionaire with fuck you money. So what if you sell just like 5 books, publisher carries risk.

Skin in the game means people who are not in position to personally suffer from their own bad decisions tend to make bad decisions. These things are not mutually exclusive.

Did you honestly pass your elementary school reading comprehension tests?

>>12195533
turned "I'm a" to "I got a", sorry for the edit.

Do you mean reading list or personal blog?

>>12195546
I meant like a personal blog, yeah.
I'm open for any recommendations on probability and finance/econ though.

>>12195537
I didn't read Skin in the Game, I just know talks from him about it. Of course the argument that people who build bridges should have some liability is sensible but his case for how oneself should act based on it didn't convince me. I had read Black Swan many years ago and I liked it but back then I also didn't envision the author to be a person who does or responds to twitter attacks - that made me turn away from the content.

>>12195552
Decision theory as a field sometimes resembles more engineering than set theory or geometry, because there's lots of model choice involved and the sense in which one school of thought (say Bayesian probability proponents) would attack another one is less straight than just choosing your algebraic axioms/theory.
Your entrance point to math will depend on your current level. If you don't need to fresh up on old stuff, some Springer combinatorics textbooks never hurt anyone. But people who didn't do math at university usually aren't motivated to do examples for longer than a few days. If you have a goal, start writing code.
I have a youtube channel but I post videos rarely and turned out to be more CS theory than math 101.
www.axiomsofchoice.org

>>12195606
Of course skin in the game principle didn't convince you because you are shitlib leftist! Forcing people to do bad policies you would never ever prescribe exclusively for yourself (such as: weapon ban only for leftists, higher taxes only for leftists, refugee support paid only by leftists) is what you do. It's your entire core of being to push bad decisions and their consequences on others. Personal responsibility is completely alien concept for you bunch.

>>12195651
>Forcing people to do bad policies you would never ever prescribe exclusively for yourself (such as: weapon ban only for leftists, higher taxes only for leftists, refugee support paid only by leftists) is what you do

Case in point: New England sending socialists to US Senate but electing Republican Governors.

>>12195651
All I'm saying is that I found his character to be exceedingly unsympathetic, try to discern that from your political affiliations and ideologies. I'm sure you're aware that jumping from
>I don't like people engaging in twitter fights
to
>I'm a leftist and have this stance on taxing and that stance on immigration
is quite the absurd projection.

>>12195656
>New England is 100% leftist
Based

>>12193694
The entire notion came out of the Black Panthers and other radical lumpen groups and then was adopted by elements in SDS and brought into academia that way.

>>12194653
I don't see how you can study the historical genesis of digital payment infrastructure and not see the role of governmental regulation in shaping the environment that exists today.

>>12189869
Sounds like a certain someone found out that a certain group of youwhos are a bit fickle. Better put some more money in your buffer-zone and diversify beyond some Tolstoy impressionaro; that'll get you laid, or keep you entertained in some middlebrow trenchwarfare future-funny way of some kind, you know. Avaiding all the otter annoyances, I know a good path, slick and worth a good payout in say ten years if I had a few pages of promises such as you.

>>12188595

The newspapers slandered him and he brought libel cases against them. They asked him a bunch of high school questions and he got pissed and told them that he has assembled a company where he can push a button and summon to his side a person who can answer any question he may have regarding the focus of most of his efforts.

It just goes show that newspapers hate on great men and try to bring them down in this case by saying sensational things a normal man can relate to (oh man I know when he revolutionary war was! I'm smarter than Henry Ford!) And so it goes the idea that luck and birth was what separated the common man from Henry Ford, which in turn justifies all of the government intervention and welfare they have planned

>>12195698
It's obvious you are deeply triggered shitlib leftist because you use twatter as 'fake because' to disregard everything that you know could possibly trigger you in order to appear inparticular open-minded smarty that you are about as much as Pope is buddhist.

Money is more powerful than knowledge.

>>12196906
no, you have confusion there, for all intents and purposes money behaves like AI (austrian school), this is where Nick Land goes crazy.

>>12189681
Rich people usually are better? Or at least the ones who are rich over time and produce children who are also rich.
To be rich you have to be driven and creative; you also have to be integrated at many levels of societyThese are rare qualities which when put together have created just about every invention in human history. Now you could argue that those are not things a society should aim for and come up with a bunch of good reasons why not t. Kaczynski but I'd rather live now then 20k years ago. Or 150y ago. Or 50.

>rich faggot following academic fads
don't care

>>12197423
Thiel goes against academic fads.

>>12198206
girard is an academic fad