Types of Programmers

phenomenologically = "Let me talk to you about the experience called Flow."

epistemologically = has 50 books entitled "A Beginner's Guide For Dummies Unleashed In 30 Days". Actually even two of those abominations probably counts.

philologically = asshole knows 50 programming languages and makes sure you know it. The number of languages you know is like the length of your dick. How long is yours?

physiologically = knows the insides of the system inside and out, including all the exploits to break it. Just in case he ever gets fired. Doctors make the best murderers, don't you know?

anthropologically = knows the glorious history of not just computing standards but the standards organizations and other cultural artifacts of the computer industry.

ontologically = objects!! Of which Java has none.

The Meaning of Ties

Ties ... why does anyone wrap a noose around their neck ready to be strangled? And why do idiot conformists follow this absurd code of behavior? How did this idiotic standard even come about?

Well, when you think about it, ties are just non-evil nooses. Or a knot, like the fucking Celtic knot of supposed mystical significance which idiots tattoo on their bodies.

BUT, Gaians love leashes. And collars. And chains, including slave chains, which they consider nice fashion statements. And ribbons (which explains the ridiculous magical girl animes), ropes, nets, webs, interwebs.

Ties of friendship, ties of family, ties of blood. Anything which connects people. Anything which constrains people. They fucking love that shit.

And so we have ties symbols of Gaian conformity. But not just that, ties are supposedly the only remnant of individuality in the man's business suit. And that remnant of individuality ... is a hangman's noose around your neck.

That's a nice symbolic meaning there: individuality is dangerous and likely to kill you. Something which Gaians fervently believe, else why would they be so self-effacing and invisible? Why would they worship invisibility as a superpower?

It's not to go anywhere you want nor to do anything you want, because invisibility is a crappy power for that. No, it's simply so you can huddle down, curl up into a fetal position, and have your enemies never find you as you close your eyes to the world.

Also, Japanese have these absurd pornos where men are wearing white or black bodysuits and the women pretend the men are invisible as they're being molested or raped. Male self-effacement is a big recurring theme in Jap pornos, as well as rape of women. And Japan is a Gaian society.

So back to ties ... they're a reminder to every craven Gaian (which is all of them, no matter how many muscles or medals they sport) to self-efface their own personality lest someone else do it for them.

I've always loathed ties, and I loathe Gaians. Give me a Freak wearing BDSM gear openly down the street any day of the fucking weak. At least a spiked dog collar is unlikely to strangle you.

Manners, Politeness, Chivalry And Grace Are Despicable

First of all, what are they about? They're all about weakness. How to be weak, when you have to deal with people you hate, loathe, despise, scorn and feel utter contempt for, and can't do anything about. When you hate people but can't kill them, can't slap them, can't cut up their faces, and can't even walk away but must grin and bear it.

Now, civility I respect. Civility allows you to stare at someone frostily and stonily, to tell them clearly (if they aren't mindless) that you loathe their guts and would glady kill them, but you won't because you can't. Same for professionalism which allows you to glare at someone hatefully but still do your job (and keep your job) serving them (unfortunately).

But manners? Manners are the arbitrary rules your momma taught you. Why do you follow them? Because your momma said so. Manners are the rules you follow because you LIKE being weak. Because you're mentally stuck in your childhood, infancy and adolescence. Because you're a neurotic basketcase. Manners are arbitrary, petty and don't make sense, so are despicable.

Now, manners are petty and stupid and completely arbitrary. and politeness is about sucking up and sycophancy just in case whoever you're dealing with is bigger and meaner than you and might take offense and squash you like a bug. But grace? That's about being physically weak.

Instead of making strong deliberate movements, you make weak movements that absolutely optimize and minimize effort as if you were diseased. Yeah, that sends a wonderful image! It's incomprehensible to me that this is popular! Gracefulness is egregiously despicable. And the horrifying thing is that it is NOT in fact MOST despicable.

What is most despicable? Chivalry and gentlemanliness! But first, what are they, for those few people who are mercifully ignorant of them?

Stereotypically, a gentleman would lay his coat on the muddy street so a lady wouldn't step on the mud. rather than walking around it or carrying her. WTF? And also he would walk on the side nearest the road so that if anyone died it would be him because men are expendable, always. And this is with ANY woman, even the vilest bitchiest queen of bitches. Because women are "ladies".

Chivalry is not merely cherishing archaicisms like fedora-tipping and miladying everywhere you go. Arbitrary contemptible ossified crap from bygone ages. Chivalry is about being DESTROYED. It's about being WEAK and deciding to be destroyed. Your coat gets destroyed, your life gets destroyed too since you duel for petty "honor". The question which chivalry answers is when and where should your life be destroyed.

Savoir-vivre is about living well. Chivalry and gentlemanliness are about "dying well". The only difference is the chivalrous man runs towards danger while the gentleman runs away from it. And that's why it's worse than manners and worse than politeness. Fucktarded neckbeards can keep their chivalry because anyone with a brain can tell it's cringeworthy.

Yes, chivalry dovetails into martyrdom and castration and self-sacrifice, all of which are utterly vile and loathsome, and really should be capital crimes. No error here, martyrs should be prevented from martyring themselves then killed for attempting it. But chivalry has a particular loathsome stench to it made all the more repugnant by people being blind to it.

Porn Exploits Women

Let's be specific here. Porn doesn't exploit any particular women. It doesn't exploit the particular women who make porn and get paid ludicrous amounts of money for it. No, porn exploits women in general, as feminists so rightly point out.

What porn does is it makes it so men are able to jerk off without resorting to dating women at all. This has lots of consequences, such as the fact that rape is disappearing because a rapist can read some rape porn rather than go to the trouble (and danger) of actually raping anyone. It also has the consequence of reducing the market value of women on the dating market.

But it especially has the consequence that ugly fat man-hating dykes can no longer get men. And losing out on any kind of advantage whatsoever (social, monetary, on and on) is being "exploited" as far as narcissists are concerned. Therefore porn models exploit women, as feminists so rightly point out, feminists being overwhelmingly narcissists and narcissist-lovers.

Porn means that men win, women who are into porn win, women who would have been raped win (except for the narcissists since they love victimhood), and porn models win. It also means women in general slightly lose and narcissist women lose big. Obviously this deserves a big hue and cry.

The Internet's Fascist New World Order

They call themselves "moderators" but you'd have to be an idiot to believe they have any resemblance to moderators in religious or political debate groups. Of course, being being retarded idiots, most people actually take the name "moderator" seriously. Most people disgustingly RESPECT moderators.

In real life, moderators don't go around with guns and a license to kill spraying bullets at anyone they don't like the way cops and Nazis do. In real life, moderators' actions aren't invisible to the participants the way Stasi's are. In real life, moderators can't execute "power plays" to kick out other moderators and "usurp power".

In real life, moderators don't go around with magic gags that can erase everything you've ever said. In real life, moderators don't go around complaining about how the (few) people who hate them are whiners, enemies of the state, and the disgruntled few who are astroturfing anyways.

Real life moderators of discussion groups have ZERO connection with internet "moderators" of internet forums. You might as well be trying to compare a warm breeze in the middle of winter to the very fires of Hell.

It just proves how condemnable, contemptible, and downright Evil the bulk of humanity is that when faced with the raw vileness of "moderators" that they shrug their shoulders and say ... "well, unmoderated forums are crap anyways" as if fascism and right-libertarianism were the only political ideologies and the only forms of social control around.

Internet participants EXPECT Evil. It's just a question of whether it's right-libertarian slavery and omnipresent death or fascist servitude and homicide everywhere. 6 eggs on one hand or half a dozen ovoids on the other. And why do they expect Evil? Because programmers are overwhelmingly Evil and/or worthless retarded morons.

Ward Cunningham created his "noble experiment in totalitarian communism" which failed utterly once it scaled up about two to three orders of magnitude (I'm being generous). And what did he resort to when it failed? FASCISM! Because of course there's no middle ground, and certainly there's no alternative. Utmost marxism and fascism (and psychopathy) are the ONLY alternatives on offer.

Because of course, the Internet is NEW and it's not like the THREE MILLENIA of human political history have anything to teach anyone at all!! No, rather than start with democracy or shoot beyond it for anarcho-communism, we need to go BACK to fascism or FEUDALISM or murderous infanticidal tribalism!

And of course, the fact that these worthless retarded cretins are resurrecting dead and buried ideologies from political history doesn't imply that political history is RELEVANT to the Internet! No, we'll bake our cake, sell it, and then we'll use it as collateral to get a bank loan! Where have I heard that one before?

Fuck, I despise people who can't do logic. They should all burn in Hell! If you're going to do politics fucking do it right. And if you're not then you'd better stand out of the way of people who CAN do politics, and bend over to get the ass-rape you deserve!

Why Charities Are Pathetic

charity means you're so hopeless it's obvious to everyone

benefactor means you've so much potential that it's obvious to someone

Now if only Yudkowsky's patron weren't so fucking idiotic and deluded and cut that Narcissist asshole's purse-strings!

I'm pretty satisfied with this short and elegant proof that displaces pages and pages of arguments and facts. Especially since I don't have the link to that ancient article about how Northern charities were displacing Southern governments and keeping money flowing from the South to the North while keeping control firmly in the North despite decolonization.

Against Meditation

Some retarded Gaian morons go on about how much they like meditation and how it works for them. Being incapable of logic, and thinking in terms of magic, they "think" (if their mental processes can even be construed as thinking) that "it works for us, and it has a biological effect on our human bodies, others have human bodies, therefore it must work for others" which of course is pure magic.

The REASON meditation works for Gaians is because they LIKE IT and it RELAXES them. Why? Because among their most basic values they have continuation, staying and restraint. So sitting there like a lump makes them feel great. Whereas for 90% of people, it just makes them feel like a fucking idiot! And for over 10% of the 90%, the thought of "emptying your mind" feels like DEATH!

But never mind that, EVERYONE must LOVE sitting there like a fucking lump! Despite the fact that people in general have far less averse reactions towards massages than meditation (applicability 70-100% vs 10%), no that's not proof of anything. The fact that people like massages better than meditation isn't disproof of how awesome meditation is according to Gaians who like meditation. The fact that church is just as applicable as meditation to the general population also says nothing.

According to these yoyos, if you dislike meditation then it's evidence you're an inferior person who "won't try new things" and you should just try it anyways, the same way as you should try slitting your wrists or snorting cocaine on the word of a drug addict. According to them, you should MODIFY your likes and dislikes in order to like meditation and BE MORE LIKE THEM. Because EVERYONE should be a Gaian!

I firmly believe that Gaians' retarded antics are why the word "justifiable" exists in "justifiable homicide". They should be killed until they learn their lesson. That being: to not even try to fuck with anyone else. Those disrespectful smarmy sons of whores. Speaking of whores, even those have greater applicability (30-70%) than meditation.

But don't waste your breath trying to convince them. Like I said, magical thinkers. You might as well be talking to a wall. Only having their lives threatened will ever convince them, because that is what they cherish above all things.

On Titles and the Trappings of Power

having a title is not meaningless. True, having a title doesn't make you different, but people calling you by that title absolutely makes you different in other peoples eyes

Only if your Presence tops out at Passive and your only source of power is what society will tolerate.

Do you believe that Hugo Chavez Friaz cared what people called him? How about Mustafa Kemal? Or Napoleon Bonaparte? Or Alexander the Invincible?

These men HAD titles. It didn't matter what they were CALLED. It didn't matter whether people called them by their titles. Their titles were ... objective facts of reality and utterly inseparable from them.

Men get called King and Prince and Majesty. But very few men are Majestic. And those that are, they don't get called King or Prince or Majesty. Because it's beneath them. It would be saying that their title is something conferred on them by others. Rather than something that's part of them, merely recognized by others.

Power, REAL power, is not the kind that's conferred by society, that's conferred by calling you Sir or Mister or King. It's the kind you can create yourself by your very being. It's the kind that can never be separated from you. The kind that is forever a part of you, inextricably bound up in who you are.

You don't know what power is and you don't know what titles are for. You believe that power is social position. So, so wrong. You believe that titles are conferred on people, that they must be constantly and continuously supported and tolerated by society. So, so wrong.

Everything you understand of titles and power is the meaningless trappings of people who pathetically ape real titles and power. It's a Cargo Cult of power. You believe that by having the trappings of power, you will actually have power. (smh)

On Reddit and other Discussion Communities

I just realized why I despise reddit and grew desperate to have an excuse to leave it the first time around. Because it's pathetic in a very specific way. Because it's intrinsically Passive. Because it's a forum for useless navel-gazers who do nothing but watch the world go by.

Even Fanfiction.net isn't so pathetic. Whether the authors there are good or evil, whether they're pathetically pandering to their audience or they're writing for themselves or writing to make a point. At least the authors there aren't Passive. They're doing something.

And do you know what's the most infuriating and despicable thing about those useless wastes of skin? In their opinions, THEY believe that asking serious and trenchant political or philosophical questions is useless navel gazing.

Because THEY all think that chit chatting with like-minded others and maintaining community standards and keeping everything ticking and being liked by others and being self-satisfied and patting each other on the back ... they think this has VALUE. It's despicable and repulsive.

So I'm free. I'm free of that despicable community. That and any other one. I can come into it as I please. I can waste some time on it if I'm bored. And then ... I can leave. Because I realize WHY I despise it. It's not some vague feeling. It's intrinsically inimical to everything I hold dear. I would nuke reddit and exterminate all redditors if I could and feel like I'm doing the world a favour.

Discussion Communities and all their participants can die for all I care. In fact, it would please me if they do.

On Conspiracy Theorists and Anti-Conspiracy Theorists

It never, ever pays to be subtle so I'll be blunt.

Neither side cares a whit about the truth or about facts or about what is or is not manipulation of facts or the truth. They are merely factions in the process of factional fighting.

Both sides are mindless herds engaged in grazing their intellectual territories and defending them against any other encroaching herd. Or other type of ungulate.

Both sides think their type of ungulate is the only kind that exist. The cows decry the sheep as insane cows. The sheep decry the cows as mindless sheep.

This factional war isn't about truth or fact or principle. It's about fucking TERRITORY. Territory which sustains their pathetic fragile emotions.

And the proof that they are pathetic and emotionally fragile? Neither side can get up the spine to actually commit a personal character assassination. They are both spineless and gormless.

The questions that should be running through your mind are:

• are you spineless and gormless?
• are you pathetic and fragile?
• why are you aligning with either side?
• why are you taking the factional fight seriously?

Superman Is Evil

There is a tiny minuscule difference between stability and stasis on the one hand, and holding and restraint on the other hand. The smallness of that difference is what makes Gaians the most Evil-seeming of all the non-Evil personality types. Gaians will tolerate lies and slavery, something that NONE of the other non-Evil personality types would EVER do. In fact, Gaians will *allow themselves to be slaves*, something which is utterly revolting. Uncle Tom? He was a Gaian!

Nonetheless, there IS an actual difference between the most primitive and brain-damaged of Right-Wing Authoritarians ... correction, SECOND-most primitive and brain-damaged since Malcolm X and other racial supremacists belonged to the MOST brain-damaged. As I was saying, there IS an actual difference between the kind of brain-fucked RWA who worships stability and stasis and a Gaian. That difference is more than enough to put Superman firmly on the wrong side of the line between Evil and non-Evil. Although it does explain why so many Gaians run shoulder to shoulder with RWAs in the environmental crowd.

As I said, the difference is small, tiny and minuscule. But right off the bat it makes itself felt. An RWA who seeks stability will right away become a dependent, a codependent, a mollycoddler, a mama's boy, a milksop, a weakling. Like Spike the fucking vampire. Spike who EATS HUMANS FOR FOOD. Meanwhile, a Gaian who values holding keeps like a rock in a stream. They're faithful, a personal servant, a manservant, a valet. Like Alfred the SAS trained Butler and faithful family retainer.

Don't think there's that much difference? Think you I'm just using pejoratives in the former and neutral terms in the latter? I'm not because once their COMMITMENT turns on, the milksop is going to be blindly loyal, uncaring and unseeing of any Evil performed by their mama. Their mama beats them? Oh no problem. Their mama eats human flesh? Oh no problem. Their mama sacrificed a passing stranger to the Devil to bring about the Apocalypse? DON'T DISS MOMMA!

Meanwhile, the faithful manservant becomes a bodyguard when you turn his commitment on. They'll willingly sacrifice their life for their employer. But if their employer starts becoming reckless and threatening to end the world or even merely threatening the continuation of their operations ... them's the walking papers, oh and did I forget to mention that your enemy has gunmen coming for you, sir ... right about now? And that I called them in? But you won't have to worry about them because they'll find a dead body. Goodbye sir. BANG.

Next level up is gold digger / harpy. Neither of which describe Superman, but they both describe his little girlfriend, don't they? "Oh Clark, why can't you be like Superman?" "Oh superman, my pussy gets wet because of you. I want to marry you and have your children and most of all get the status and enemy-proofness that comes from being your little bitch." She's a sick, sick bitch and most of all, EVIL. A few levels up we have the fact Superman's a fucking aristocrat (Kryptonian) who's bought into all that aristocratic crap about helping those of lesser breeding (Humans) to ensure social stability.

Parenthetically, you'd think I'm cheating. After all, women can be reliably counted on to be Evil. They are statistically speaking more Evil than men. And less creative too. Not least because they're actively encouraged to be and their brains are hardwired for it from a young age. But that doesn't explain why Lois Lane is SPECIFICALLY a gold digger / harpy rather than a self-aggrandizing bitch, or a vain sex slave, or any of the different brands of psychopath. Or even a different brand of RWA. No, the Superman story makes an almost straight line from left to right across RWA with one minor crossover in polarity at vigilante.

Going on, the differences from Gaian only widen as you go up levels. A Gaian would never EVER choose to work in the echo chambers of America the way that Clark fucking Kent does! He CHOSE to work at Evil Inc. And thinks his Evil controlling employer is "quirky". And doesn't retch at the crap he has to spew at every publication. Why? Because Clark Kent is the Good Immigrant and the Good Immigrant in Fascistic America is a naked power-worshiper! So he is. Fuck, at the surprisingly high level where RWAs are power-worshipers, Gaians are white knights selflessly supporting strangers.

A real hero will sacrifice his life for a stranger. Superman never does that! He "risks" his life for strangers, except he doesn't haha because he's the invincible stalin. Man of steel you know. Where a real hero walks into danger in order to save the lives of perfect strangers, Superman spends a few hours a day carefully polishing his Legend and making notches in his belt to keep score. And when Superman's life is ACTUALLY at risk, it's because someone is gunning for him SPECIFICALLY or someone would raze down the entire planet and wipe out his hometown. And Superman's reputation with it.

Wanting to keep YOUR possessions and YOUR friends and YOUR memories and YOUR neuroses safe is the mark of Evil. It is the mark of a total and utter lack of principles. Even Raistlin fucking Majere, the GOD OF EVIL himself, was capable of "kindness" to those who reminded him of himself and triggered his neurotic memories of his own childhood, threatening to destabilize his mind. Something that only a pathetic moron would mistake for genuine kindness! Raistlin never "went Evil", he WAS Evil all along! He just dialed his Evil all the way up to 11 by becoming a Legend.

Superman is a pathetic mockery of Truth and Justice. But he's spot-on about the American Way of power-worship and atavistic self-aggrandizement. And speaking of the American Way, 'irresestible' is a mark of godhood ... of an EVIL narcissistic god. Allah is irresistible, and wasn't America irresistible to immigrants? Yes, yes it was. Going on, is it really a surprise that in these Fascistic times, a fascist like Superman (and all journalists are fascists as they seek to regiment your beliefs) got put on the big screen in a harder, dirtier, grungier, "cooler", Eviler, more nakedly fascistic way?

Gods Exist

Plural. And this can be proved easily as a fact, not as a metaphor, so long as you examine the defining attributes of a real god.

What Gods Aren't

Some moronic retarded inbred idiots believe that gods are beings who are worshiped but counter-examples to this ridiculous claim are legion. They start with Odin All-Father who went around in the guise of an elderly male stranger.

Did Odin give up his godhood when he put on a poor traveler's cloak? Did he stop being a god because he enjoyed knowing the truth of things and knew that his followers lied to his face? Did King Gustavus Adolphus II of Sweden cease being king just because he traveled around incognito among his followers?!

What about Cronus Baby-Eater? Did he cease being a god just because nobody worshiped him anymore? Did his demotion to king and lawgiver of Latium mean he wasn't a god anymore? You'd have a hard time selling this to an Englishman since Charles the Prince of Wales is also Duke of Cornwall and Earl of Chester.

It is NARCISSISTIC to believe that HUMAN worship is what matters to a GOD! It is Narcissistic to believe that gods even WANT worship, that they must be JUST LIKE THE NARCISSIST! And while it's certainly true that many gods are narcissistic attention-seeking fucks, it is equally true that many aren't.

Other inbred morons in academe believe that gods are anthropomorphizations of the forces of nature. After all, you've got the sky god, the earth god, the fertility god, the volcano god, seems to make sense, doesn't it? Except that JESUS doesn't fit. What is he a force of nature OF? He ISN'T! And neither is his father Jehovah II the Creator. As opposed to Jehovah I the High Lord aka The Evil Deceptive Slaver.

What Gods Are

What are the attributes of a real god? It's omnipotent, omnipresent, and holds sway beyond the mere level of every person's actions but into their very thoughts or bodies. Something that disqualifies Jesus by the way and is why he was never a god. Although it does qualify his father Jehovah II the Clueless and his predecessor Jehovah I the Gutless. Nonetheless, Jesus is CLOSE to being a god and so we can learn a lot about godhood from what he is.

What is Jesus? He is the anthropomorphization of the omnipotent and omnipresent force of HUMAN CULTURE. An omnipotent and omnipresent force that suddenly became a lot more benevolent and much less harsh when Christianity came to dominate and suddenly infanticide was no longer quite so common.

Jesus wants you to live = Human culture wants you to live. Jesus absolved you of Original Sin = Human culture absolves you of the pain and death accompanying labour. Jesus exists everywhere and at all times = Human culture exists everywhere and at all times. Jesus loves you = Human culture loves you. Through Jesus you can find Life = through Culture you can find life. Enough.

Gods are not mere incarnations of the forces of nature. And gods need not be wrathful. The Blind Idiot God Azathoth of Lovecraft's is the incarnation of his cosmic indifferentism. And Jehovah II the Creator is too clueless about what he's about to even be incarnate, let alone wrathful.

Modern Gods

Anyone who knows anything at all about Judaism knows it's omnipresent and omnipotent, ruling with an iron fist all Jews' actions and thoughts themselves. It is most definitely a god. An Evil Right-Wing Authoritarian one that cherishes stasis, tribalism, orthodoxy, xenophobia and traditionalism. The atheist Jews that sought to escape the embrace of that Evil controlling god were the original Dreammakers, heralds of another Evil Psychopathic god called Hollywood, the godly incarnation of all deception.

But as we've seen, not all gods are Evil. Although all tribal gods are psychopathic which is why they were all exterminated except for Judaism the Controller and liar. So how about that America the Hegemon, ruler of the entire world? Omnipresent, check. Omnipotent, check. Dying or dead, check. It's almost entirely given way to America the High Lord, RWA Evil. It used to be the Persians only ACCUSED America the Hegemon of being The High Lord because THEY THEMSELVES were Evil and RWA. No longer.

I could go on. The European nations have semi-consciously given birth to a god, The Equalizer as direct counter to The Hegemon. And thank goodness, or I suppose Neutrality, they did so now there's still a non-Evil god active in the world even after The Hegemon succumbed to the fascist's corruptino. The Chinese are really banking on their own god The Uplifter. It just shows their desperation that they're worshiping a Clueless god like Christians do and that it's a cabal of Evil RWA engineers that created this god! Maybe they cottoned on that their traditional Evil gods weren't doing it for them.

Communism the Hegemon is dead. RWA Evil corruption had enough of a hold in both Hegemons that they tried to preempt each other rather than cooperating. Preemption is an intrinsically RWA concept. The RWA corruptors failed to get the two Hegemons to destroy the world between them (although JFK was all for taking down the entire world with his suicidal self) but it succeeded in first killing the weaker Hegemon god and now corrupting the more powerful.

There are other gods. Human history is replete with them. But as we've seen from history, gods can die. So I'm not going to be naming any of the gods being born nor their numbers, or distribution or disposition. My point is made, gods PLURAL exist. Gods PLURAL are real. And Jehovah II the clueless Creator is very unimpressive amongst them. And Jesus doesn't even rate. And you can cease worshiping the gods you pathetic worthless sycophants because only the Evil gods care!

Multiple Personalities Disorder of BTVS Characters

The thing about knowing how the human mind is put together is that you begin to spot when a character isn't "complex" but rather has a logically impossible personality. Something that can only be resolved by multiple personalities disorder, if at all.

Take Xander Harris in BTVS. He's a white knight and a genuine hero. That makes him a Gaian of reasonably high Presence. Logically, he should have the lower Presence levels of Gaian. In particular, he should be a grey man who fits in with any situation without ever standing out, like Clark Kent. And he should be a survivor willing to cut the throat of anyone, anyone at all, in order to LIVE!

Instead, he's the exact OPPOSITE of a grey man and a survivor. But that at least can be explained by him being a blatant fucking hypocrite. A person who has ideals and principles and imposes those ideals and principles on OTHERS but NEVER ON HIMSELF. Yes, that works as an explanation, the scum sucking son of a bitch!

But no such explanation is possible for Willow who in the very first episode is a hacker (psychopath!). She goes on to becoming a traitor (psychopath) and is ever amoral (psychopath) and reckless (psychopath). And she's quite the eager little cultist (psychopath). And that's WITHOUT looking at what she does hopped up on "dark magic". She's not schizoid either but a straight out psychopath.

Problem is, she's also loyal overall (not a sociopath of any kind) and she is very, very much obedient to authority figures (right-wing authoritarian or moralist) and an eager little drone (moralist) and yes man (moralist) and adjutant / teacher's assistant (right-wing authoritarian). And there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that can make those personality types fit together.

In fact, those personality types can't fit together IN THE SAME ROOM. The moment you have knives available anywhere in that room, one of them will try to stab the other. And if there aren't any knives, they'll make a shiv. The weaker (mentally) the characters, the longer it will take for their minds to turn to thoughts of killing the other. But it will happen, inevitably.

You might as well ask Batman (right-wing authoritarian) to get along with the freaking Joker (psychopath). Oh except you wouldn't because the idea is totally fucking ridiculous! Similarly, put them in the same room ... as kids with undeveloped personalities, and you'd still expect sparks to fly.

So when an author writes 'shy little Willow' as a gutless backstabbing psychopath uncaring of anyone's feelings who wants to enslave, mind control and humiliate her "best friend" Buffy Summers, they're not exactly breathing fresh air into the character. They're just writing her far more consistently than the psychopath Joss Whedon ever managed to. And picking her dominant personality to boot.

And giving that egotistical selfish heartless narcissistic little bitch Buffy Summers exactly what she deserves. Because if there were any justice in the world then psychopaths would all be killed and narcissists would all be sold as sex slaves. It's not just what the Good people of the world want ... it's what the Evil people want too!

And not just because Evil people hate other Evil people, although they do. They really, really do. But because psychopaths don't care about consequences even to themselves, so they DON'T CARE if they go to prison or end up dead for doing something. They CAN'T CARE because not caring about consequences is WHAT MAKES THEM PSYCHOPATHS. And what makes them dangerous too.

Meanwhile, narcissists actually WANT to be sex slaves. They FANTASIZE about it. Who the fuck do you think writes all those semi-exhibitionistic pro-humiliation self-abasing sex slave stories? That's right, their authors are narcissists. And they are so not because they necessarily want to be the center of the universe, but because they firmly believe that *A* person ought to be the center of the universe.

Meanwhile, right-wing authoritarians are perfectly fine with homo sapiens getting slaughtered like cattle or other homo sapiens being sold as slaves, sexual or otherwise. It's a time honoured tradition!! 99% of human societies throughout 99% of human history had slavery and genocide. Even to this day, we STILL have slavery and genocide out in black Africa. What could possibly be wrong with something so NORMAL!?

Note that right-wing authoritarians are perfectly fine with killing each other so long as it's done across ethnic or national lines. Really, killing Evil people isn't a problem for ANY Evil person. Though preferably, it's other Evil people that are going to die if they get their way. Evil people will put their lives on the line to kill other Evil people.

The only people who want Evil people to be treated like human beings (and psychopaths AREN'T human beings, they're mindless animals who've accidentally mastered the trick of human speech, and I can prove this!) is Neutrals. Because being neither Evil nor categorical mortal enemies of Evil (render Evil unto Evil!), they don't have an instinctive grasp of what Evil *IS*.

Finally, when you've shown that the world could be improved by targeted mass killings and enslavement, this constitutes powerful evidence that the world is as fucked up as it can possibly get. Something I've known to be true for a long time now.

Marital Decline Will Reverse Itself Within 50 Years

There's two ways to predict the future. The first is to really understand the present and the second is to make the future happen. Let's start with the first.

Why is marriage declining? To understand it, you need to know two facts. First, CHILDLESS marriages are breaking up. Marriages with children aren't breaking up so much, at least until the children are grown.

Second, poverty is going down and wealth is going up. Which means people have more opportunities and more freedom. And with this comes mental freedom. One of the four indicators of mental development has gone up.

It used to be that all people cared about, literally all they cared about, and all they could AFFORD to care about, was their family and their workplace. And NOTHING ELSE.

Nowadays, people can afford a great deal more principle. Even maids and servants are perfectly comfortable changing employers. They're no longer operating on the Subcomponent level, but on the Submissive level.

Where before, a maid or servant was a part of their master's household FOR LIFE, nowadays they're not part of the household period, and are just hired for the duration. They'll be the maid or servant of someone completely different in 3 or 7 years' time.

When you put those two facts together, the fact that people are having fewer children, that children STILL matter, and that people are growing mentally ... you come to the conclusion that marriages are breaking up because people have more principles now and simply *can't stand* each other.

Why should a Communist tolerate a Nazi? They would have in the past. Nowadays, it's not that the proportion of communists and nazis has gone down at all. If anything, it's gone up. Rather, they can nowadays afford to hate each other's guts, and they've grown enough to WANT to hate each other's guts.

So how will society develop? How will marriage develop in the future? It's pretty fucking obvious. People will adjust by pre-filtering their spouses looking for people they can stand rather than relying strictly on looks and sexual attraction. And doing this will entirely reverse the decline of marriage.

The only point that requires my expert judgement to address is the time horizon this will occur on. And in my expert judgement, I give it 50 years.

Finally, how do I know that marriage won't dissolve or mutate into something unrecognizable? Easy. Because human brains will always, ALWAYS operate on the PairBond level in conjunction with any other levels they operate on. Because EVEN AI will operate on the PairBond level. Because the PairBond level is one of the 11 meta-levels that can be formally and rigorously defined using OOSA. And while this is more than enough to anyone who's seen the math, there is the separate fact that mathematics doesn't allow stable solutions to the man-woman-dog matching problem. In other words, because math says so!

Why Japanese Grovel Before Judges

First, a description of the phenomenon. Someone commits a crime or misdemeanor, let's say for example they steal a bike to get home while they're drunk. In Japan, that crime will actually be investigated and solved by community policing. So the law-breaker will be dragged to the police station and there they will grovel and promise to never ever do it again. So the police get him to sign a confession and a promise he'll never do it again, he may or may not go before the judge, and then he's let off the hook completely. No sentence, no conditional sentence, no probation, just off the hook.

WHY? Are the judges and/or police naive or stupid? Far, far from it. The law-breaker has been sentenced to rehabilitation, the groveling WAS the rehabilitation, and so the sentence didn't even need to be issued before it was served and done with. And why do Japanese law officers consider groveling to be rehabilitation? And why do they consider it to be EFFECTIVE? Well, it's because Japanese are all submissives and are TAUGHT to be submissives. It's what their society targets with childrearing mode 4 as its ideal citizens.

So on the one hand, an act of abject submission indicates that the cultural indoctrination took and took well. Thus, it's not necessary (and may backfire) to treat this ideal citizen badly for a tiny little failing. Forgive and forget is better. And on the OTHER hand, they know damn well that greater than 99.5% of their citizens are submissives or passives (submissive not to individuals but to the overall will of society) so the rehabilitation is going to be successful in 995 cases out of 1000!

Japanese society isn't merely childrearing mode 4. It doesn't just target Submissive Lawful Evil in practice, it actually expects its citizens to be Submissive Lawful Neutral. Which is unrealistic but it's what it expects. That is what it ASPIRES for its citizens, that they not be Evil despite childrearing that reinforces it. In Anglo-American countries, the expectation is reversed. Society expects people to be Evil, considers Evil to be desirable even, but expects them to not be Submissive.

In both cases, you've got Sincere Backwardsness. Like George Lucas sincerely pushing the idea of monarchism in Star Wars. Or JRR Tolkien sincerely pushing anti-Industrialism. Or Robert Heinlein sincerely pushing Fascism. The difference is just that the backwardsness pushed by Anglo-American societies is EVIL whereas in Japan it's SUBMISSION.

Why Nuclear Bombs Bring Peace To A World Of Slaves

In Social Implications of Technology I talk about how expensive technologies are tools for the rich and cheap technologies are tools for the poor. And as technologies fall in price from infinity to expensive then society regresses, then as they fall further in price to cheap then society progresses. I alluded to killing technologies but I never made a complete analysis of it.

Military technology seems to follow the same rules as all other technology. When it goes from infinite to expensive, it makes conflicts bigger (the tommy gun was two year's wages) and when it goes from expensive to cheap (the nuclear bomb) then war suddenly becomes too scary to engage in. We don't want poor people killing rich people after all, do we? Poor people killing each other only at the direction of rich people, now that's fine.

A nuclear sub with one or two dozen missiles each with a dozen warheads costs about a billion. If we assume it kills 100 million people then that's 10$ per life extinguished. An AK47 at 100-1000$ will kill how many? Hmm. But we don't have to guess. We can simply look up How Much A Nuclear Bomb Costs. So actually, nuclear weapons are pretty damn cost effective. They're cheaper than bullets assuming that you successfully kill one person per bullet!

Scary isn't it? How after you factor out emotion / childrearing mode, and pure raw techno-economics, there's pretty much absolutely nothing to human will. And you know, when you think about it, THIS MAKES SENSE! Because 99% of the human population are slaves, either submissive (90%) or passive (9%). They are such slaves that they seriously consider aggressive people to have high willpower! How fucking revolting and pathetic!

So yeah, in a world completely dominated by slaves, the ONLY thing that matters to human history is raw emotion (which coordinates the masses of slaves in language primitive enough to unite them) and the economics of the technology they have available to them. And that's it.

Don't Force Evil People To Work: Save Jobs For Non-Evil People

Imagine a world where there's 25% unemployment and all of them are Evil because Evil people have been identified and are blacklisted. Can you imagine an "anti-discrimination for Evil people" legislative package? It would be a tough sell! It might put schizophrenics in perspective as potential employees.

More importantly, imagine what this would do to people's perception of having a job. Having a job means you're a non-evil person and it doesn't even matter how much you're paid. Oh you're a janitor? That's nice, at least you're not evil! I believe people would devalue currency and that the job itself would count as a marker of social position, a political marker effectively. Who CARES if people on welfare are paid just as much as you for doing precisely nothing? They don't have a job!

Of course, if jobs become purely voluntary and aren't paid much if anything, then all those shitty coercive things about jobs (competition, payment, dictatorship, guaranteed jobs, working with assholes) will all have to wither and be swept away. Hell, in that situation, it wouldn't even matter if paid employment collapsed and disappeared. People would still have jobs as a social activity, as something to do. They would merely be volunteer-jobs with no Evil people allowed.

Tying jobs to income and to deservingness (merit based solely on past deeds and actions) is the most corrosive and ludicrous thing imaginable. Let Evil people have an income so they're out of the way and don't cause trouble, regardless of whether or not they deserve anything. And keep the jobs for non-evil people!

Trying to force Evil people to be Good caused the collapse of the Soviet Union. Why should we be trying to force them to work? Or to do anything at all? WE DO NOT NEED EVIL PEOPLE. This isn't the fucking middle ages. All we need is to get them out of the way! Cut them a check and be done with them.
And if that isn't enough then remember that deservingness is an Evil notion propagated by Evil people. Once Evil people are all sidelined away from jobs, nobody who has a job will care whether or not jobless people "deserve" an income.

And while Good people firmly believe all Evil people should die, most of the population isn't Good. If Evil people get to live then they should have an income whether they deserve it or not, just to get them the fuck out of the way. That's what we NEED, to get them the fuck out of the way!

It's not a coincidence that giving homeless people a paid apartment and groceries is the cheapest way to deal with them by far. It's just a manifestation of the fact that Evil people always fuck things over. Toying with Evil is a stupid idea, no matter whether you call it 'fairness' or 'rehabilitation' or 'proper procedure'.

There are many societies on Earth that can't afford to just sideline Evil people. In fact, there are many societies that are so primitive they're actually overrun with Evil people! Africa comes to mind. But even America with a hefty quarter of its population being Evil can afford to sideline Evil people. And it can't afford NOT to. We can all see what a total fucking wreck actually encouraging Evil (narcissism) was for the USA.

Totalitarian Communism Works Great!

Many people believe the problem with communism or socialism (especially the Soviet kind) is to "motivate people".

Well, not really. The biggest problem was distribution and logistics. Marxist use-value theory made no allowance for the gain in value achieved by transportation and trading. Capitalist theory of course has the exact reverse problem.

You say that collectivization disincentivized people? I retort that can't possibly have been a problem because competition ALSO disincentivizes people.

And furthermore, that Semco SA which is one of the most successful companies in the world, uses a totalitarian communist model. One that's even MORE totalitarian than Marxism. Toyota which is essentially fascist in nature, has many elements of communism too.

The big problem with the Bolshevik's version of communism, and there is no way you can possibly know that, is the coercive nature of it. And that came about not because people were forced to work or any such nonsense but because everyone was included.

You see, the big problem wasn't that everyone was guaranteed food, shelter, clothing, and a smattering of luxury items. The big problem was that everyone was guaranteed a job. Which is something YOU are trying to replicate when you imagine a Utopia.

You see jobs as bad things because the filthy capitalists have dehumanized them and tied them to money. Because they've been made compulsory and externally motivated. You idiot!

Haven't you ever heard the parable of the old man who stopped a gang of kids from hurling insults at him by first rewarding them for insulting him with money, and then reducing the amount of money from one day to the next?

Real motivation can only ever be internal. You tie jobs to money? Then you've automatically demotivated everyone. You guarantee jobs to everyone? Then you've ALSO automatically demotivated everyone!

Meaningful jobs, things to DO, are GOOD things. People fucking CRAVE them. That doesn't mean it's your fucking job to provide them! Let people fucking MAKE their own jobs!

The only thing more retarded than providing jobs to people is to provide them AND ruin them. The capitalists do this because they are fucking EVIL. The communists did this because they were GOOD. They did it out of good intentions and not knowing how human psychology works.

The problem with forced collectivization wasn't collectivization, it was with the 'forced' part of the equation. People do AWESOME work when they collectivize. When they feel part of a team, of something greater. Now you force them to work with people they despise? You just ruined their job!

If you think about it, you'll know it's true because people create coops and unions all the fucking time. But the clearest example was in the middle ages when an English king heard that the yeomanry were collectivized to deal with the law. They organized together in groups to vouch for each other you see.

Well, the king thought that was a fine idea! But what about those people whom nobody would vouch for? Let's force other people to vouch for them! And very rapidly, what had been a totally spontaneous self-organization was utterly destroyed when it turned from voluntary to compulsory.

The Bolsheviks tried to force good intentions on evil people. That's why they failed. Because evil people simply refused to do good or be good, and people came to hate being in their proximity.

You want a communist system that works? You don't have to kill evil people. You don't even have to starve them. You simply have to not cater to them.

Semco SA does that. It's totalitarian, it's communist, it's also purely voluntary. You don't want to work with a particular team? You don't have to. They don't want to work with you? They don't have to either!

Power-Hunger Is Great

... so long as it's not from Evil people.

Power hunger is directly proportional to dissatisfaction with life. Or something like that. And since I consider this world Hell, I love it when people have their eyes wide open and see the world for the shithole it is. Power-hungry people who want to change this shithole for the better are my kind of people.

There is nothing evil about Power, it's a simple necessity to get nearly anything you want out of life. It's not like fame or freedom, which ARE evil. Fame being intrinsically evil and freedom being sought by apathetic people who are content letting others suffer. And money? Money IS power!

It's too bad that power is mostly sought by Evil assholes who want power for its own sake. Not to DO anything with it but merely to enjoy its possession. That too is evil because it deprives Good people of power. It deprives Good people of the ability to do Good things.

So power is great. The things that ordinary people say are better or less controversial than power? THOSE are the evil things. And like all great things, Evil people want to coopt and steal it.

I suppose it's like Heroism and Courage, which are also bad and evil, and all too frequently coopted by Evil people and Evil societies. So there's a lot of precedent.

Neurodiversity: Why Eco-Zealots Should All Be Killed

Eco-zealots talk a lot about "biodiversity" like it's something wonderful. All those wonderful diseases and parasites that kill human beings, yeah! Well, let's talk about neurodiversity for a moment.

Culture Is More Complex

There are fewer than 100,000 genes in the human genome. There are 800,000 words in the English language. There are a mere 3 billion base pairs in the human genome. There are over 100 billion neurons in the human brain, each with an average of 7000 synapses, for a total of 700 trillion synapses.

(You believed DNA coded for your personality? Well, it's clear from the evidence that isn't the case. For those rare people who have distinctive personalities, the personality came about as the result of random chance. For the vast majority who don't, their personality was injected into their brains by those around them.)

Oh but you're going to say that human genes recombine to form a vastly greater number of proteins? Funny that, but concepts recombine to form ideas and English words combine and recombine into English sentences. The proteins combine into organelles, cells, organs and bodies. The sentences combine into calculations, instructions, artifacts, industrial processes and economies.

(Concepts are not "memes" by the way and ideas aren't digital! So-called "memetics" has nothing intelligent or meaningful to say about ideas, culture or society, that wasn't said better earlier. In fact, the central premise of "memetics", that all ideas have intrinsic value to the brains that hold them, that the brain doesn't treat conceptualization and valuation independently let alone completely separately ... this premise is FALSE and a LIE!)

Culture Is More Rapid

Cultural evolution is vastly more rapid (and powerful!) than mere biological evolution. After all, biological evolution can't give rise to an entirely new species in a single generation. Cultural evolution has given rise to an entirely new society in a single generation! Not just once but repeatedly, over and over and over again.

Think of the de-Nazification of Germany, think of the Chinese Revolution, the Cultural Revolution, the rise of Marxist Communism, the French Revolution, Quebec's Quiet Revolution. The Renaissance, the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution, the Sexual Revolution, the computer revolution, the railroad age, the telecomm age, the information age, the rise of robotics, the rise of genomics!

Culture Is More Powerful

Now let's talk power for a minute. How many bacteria live out in open space? None, zero, zilch, nothing. And yet there is a thriving colony of satellites operating out in space right now. How many life forms tunnel through solid rock? None! And yet Tunnel Boring Machines routinely do, right now. How many life forms span a single kilometer in length? None! Not even Pando comes close! Yet transoceanic fiber optic cables routinely span thousands of kilometers!

How many species divert raging rivers? None! Yet we routinely build hydroelectric dams. How many years did it take all life on Earth to alter the composition of its atmosphere? Two billion. How many years did it take culture to do it? We still have a thousand years to go before the 10,000 mark is reached, and that's from the very genesis of culture, not even the birth of the Industrial Age.

How much mass has the biosphere? 600 billion tonnes of carbon after 3 to 4 billion years. And that is all it will EVER amount to. How much mass has the technosphere? 5 billion tonnes of steel and cement being added to it just last year. And we've barely even started! Culture levels mountains and drains seas, literally. Biology ... just fucking sits there like a cadaver, completely inanimate.

Culture Is Vastly More Valuable

Getting back to the point, it is clear to anyone that is not completely brainless and/or lost in mindless hatred for humanity, that a single human life is more precious than en entire species of cute furry little creatures. One starving street urchin in Rio de Janeiro is worth ... pandas. If it were a choice between that street kid's life and the extinction of a species, any species, I wouldn't hesitate to go for extinction. And I wouldn't stop to poll how other people FEEL, I would just fucking do it.

There are an estimated 9 million species on the Earth. So ALL of the Earth's biodiversity is worth little more than the human population of Papua New Guinea. And I fucking despise those infanticidal cannibalistic savages! Eco-zealots are complaining how humanity is causing mass extinctions? How thousands of species are dying every minute? Well it's a total lie, but even if it were true, I would only have this to say: GOOD!

You say that biodiversity is important to the survival of humanity? That "it's all about habitability"? That "sustainability" (stagnation) is enviable? LIES! Mono-cultured grains, orchards and plantations are fully capable of feeding humanity, which as per the proofs above is ALL that matters. And very soon, thanks to our technological evolution!, we won't even need those as we'll be eating vat meat or synthesized protein. Culture will make it so we won't need nature within a thousand years, whereas if it were left up to nature, we would all be extinct within the next hundred thousand years.

The human population of the Earth is 7 billion. Its worth, neglecting for the moment that some of those humans' lives are worth a billion times others', is completely unchanged by the extinction of homo sapiens as a biological species. If the entire human population suddenly became AIs and homo sapiens became extinct, the value lost by homo sapiens' extinction would be recouped after all of 6 seconds, during which 2 babies would be born and 3 people would die.

Eco-Zealots Are Worth Less Than Nothing

But as I said, not all human lives are equal in value. If eco-zealots believe that their own lives are worth LESS than a biological species' continued existence, I am quite willing to oblige them. In fact, I would go even further and say that they are worthless and all ought to die. After all, since an entire species' genome is numerically worth less than one hundred-thousandth of a single human brain, it follows that an eco-zealot's life (equal to a species' only) is worth only one hundred thousandth of an ordinary human life.

And that's not all! Because THEIR lives are inimical to the continued prosperity of the human species. because THEY want "nature" to thrive at the expense of human lives, it follows then that eco-zealots ought to be treated like any other human virus inimical to human life, and eradicated from the face of the Earth with extreme prejudice. Let me be blunt: every single last eco-zealots ought to be shot in the head and killed. Because the filthy hateful words spewing out of their mouths constitute hate crimes deserving of capital punishment!

So-called "environmentalists" and "climate researchers" are literally as valuable to humanity as HIV and should be treated the same way. With prophylactics and plenty of serious research aimed at creating a vaccine against them. Eradication wouldn't be amiss either.