Zero Tolerance Policies for Violence

We all know "zero tolerance for violence" policies in schools don't work. Or do we? Those policies are conceived and implemented by Gaians, who are pacifists. They believe that everyone is like they themselves since there aren't any personality types. Therefore no-violence policies must work axiomatically.

They also serve several useful purposes! Not only are they enforcing pacifism but they are also enforcing conformity and conformity to arbitrary bullshit rules that must be obeyed. To Gaians, these are pluses. There are no possible downsides to any of this. Even the unavoidable corruption that comes from necessarily avoiding the bullshit rules to "grease the wheels" is just rot and rot is life!

Gaians love mushroom management (keep them in the dark and feed them shit) precisely because mushrooms are so tasty wonderful. After all, everything alive is wonderful. Including houseflies, mosquitoes and piranhas. Nothing capable of fucking and breeding (ie, sexual reproduction) could possibly be bad for a Gaian.

What everyone considers intolerable idiotic vomit-worthy SHIT of zero tolerance policies is to Gaians ... ecologically-sensitive fertilizer. Shit = fertilizer. And fertilizer is wonderful!

So ... zero tolerance policies = pacifism + shit. And what could be wrong with either pacifism OR shit? Especially in the USA where pacifism is worshiped and sacred and held up as some kind of an "ideal" even though it's really an anti-ideal.

Finally, it's important to consider that Gaians have no souls. Even psychopaths have souls, dark Evil demonic souls. Gaians obsess about soul food and soul music for the same reason vampires obsess about blood, they need it but don't have any.

The French do Politics ... in Song

English speaking culture has its moments as far as politics in song goes. There's Bob Dylan's one song which is kind of an outlier where he plainly says, 'you right-wing authoritarian and narcissist warmonging scum, I want to watch you die and I'll see your dead bodies'. Then you've got Leonard Cohen who isn't that impressive but hopeful. Then of course there's Cat Stevens enjoining and inviting everyone to peace. Then there's 4 Non Blondes' What's Going On, questioning the world. And of course John Lenon's Imagine which is just "picture this".

The problem is that this pales in comparison to French songs. Bob Dylan's "I'll watch" is the high note of his political work whereas Patrick Bruel's "I will DO" is pretty much par for the course where he's concerned. See the difference? I'll watch passively while your life runs out, vs I will fucking DO something. Even if it's just screaming himself hoarse about the horrors of the world, it's not enjoining, it's not inviting, it's not asking, it's not begging, it is DOING. And that's a low mark for Bruel.

Another really big difference is that in France, it's okay to be viciously against corrupt priestly do nothings. Also known as Gaian "environmentally-aware" pacifists in the USA. In North America ... it isn't. In the USA, because of Vietnam and the pathetic free love backwash from France's May 1968, do-nothing pacifist Gaians are considered sacred. You can't scorn them, mock them or diss them. In France ... well they had a whole revolution where "the last king was strangled with the guts of the last priest". They don't fucking like priests over there, especially not corrupt priests who care only about the status quo.

Even when the Gaians in question aren't filthy corrupt priests but just your scummy parents expecting you to walk in their footsteps to maintain the do-nothing status quo of tokenistic self-concerned "peace". In France, that's enough to say a giant fuck you accompanied by thousands of audience members in a giant sing along. In the USA, they're sacred. In France, FUCK. YOU.

They told me: don't ask yourself too many questions
You know little guy, it's life that answers you
What's the use of wanting to know everything?
Look up and see what you can see

They told me: You have to listen to your father
Mine didn't say anything when he split
My mom told me: You're too little to understand
And I grew up with a place to take up

Who's got the right, who's got the right,
who's got the right to do this
To a child who really believes
what grown ups tell him

We spend our life saying thank you
Thank you to whom, to what?
To make rain fall and the sun shine
For children to whom we lie

They told me that men are all the same
There's many gods, but only a single Sun
Yes but, the Sun shines or burns
You die of thirst or else you drink bubbly

To you too I'm sure they told you plenty
Some nice stories, yeah right ... just bullshit!
So now here we find ourselves on the road
with our fears, our anxieties and our doubts 

Who's got the right? Who's got the right?
Who's got the right to do this to children,
who really believe, what grown ups tell them.

French politics is a whole notch above American politics because it's active instead of being Passive. But it's up ANOTHER notch due to who exactly does the politics. In France ... everyone. In the USA, most of the "anti-warmonger and anti-pacifist" crowd have gotten completely alienated from politics due to the warmongers' dominance and the pacifists' seal of approval to the status quo.

Those last two may seem like strange allies if you're an idiot until even idiots realize that "you can have your war so long as you don't involve me" is what "pacifists" are all about. Pacifism is all about disgusting craven assholes ensuring their own survival and NOTHING else. It makes me want to murder them. (Pacifists should learn to shut the fuck up about their disgusting pacifism if they care about their own skin.)

In the USA, the do-nothing pacifist scum are held up as some kind of angels or something compared to the warmonging scum. As if they were any fucking different. Letting injustice happen is exactly the same as approving of injustice and committing injustice, the outcome is exactly identical. Letting a murder happen with only token protest is exactly identical to murdering someone, you still end up with a dead body at the end. So long as warmonging scum continue to exist, do nothing Gaians will be guilty of all of their crimes. And in the USA, THAT is what gets held up as an example of enlightenment and principles. Disgusting.

So that's half the reason French politics is so superior. It's violently anti-pacifist. And India? India should be fucking nuked with nuclear bombs. That hotbed of disgusting fucking pacifism should be razed down to the last man, woman and child. A nice nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India would do the whole region an enormous amount of good. Pacifists can only be tolerated in regions where they shut the fuck up and sit in their corner, not where they dominate and choke minds to death with their stifling mysticism and obsessions with circles, cycles, wheels, turn ons, and karma.

Right Wing Authoritarians' Obsession with Holes

Right wing authoritarians like Brian Wang over on NBF are obsessed with going out into space. They don't want to contact extraterrestrials. The mere fact that aliens don't exist hasn't stopped a single autistic moron from believing in aliens so that's not the reason for RWAs' disinterest in "aliens". Rather, RWAs are just not interested in organic life since it breaks down far too easily and can't be crafted. Nor do RWAs want to go to other planets or to explore "the final frontier". Nor do they want to go to the stars. No, they want to go out into space because space is empty and is The Void.

When Siths die they get cast into The Void. Louise de la Valiere the nazi bitch in Familiar of Zero is a Void Mage. And Warhammer makes everything better by putting it in Space. Elves ... in space! Orcs ... in space! Skeletal zombie robot empires ... in space! And of course, Warhammer makes Nazism look good, so calling it right-wing authoritarian is an insult to mere fascists, stasis and nazis. Warhammer represents the wet dreams of right-wing authoritarians.

Right-wing authoritarians love cubes, such as displayed by the Borg before Star Trek became a "franchise" and the enemy became someone OTHER than right-wing authoritarians. Why cubes? Becasue cubes stacked on top of each other have no holes. And this issue of holes vs no holes is sacred to right-wing authoritarians. Consider that prisons are made up of little cubes. As is Minecraft. As are cubicles. All neatly arranged little cubes caging people within them. And prisons have "the hole" where someone is reduced into nothing through sensory deprivation.

Consider that shitting is called "voiding your bowels" and RWAs are also called anal-retentive. That is, they are obsessed with making sure their bowels are full and don't have a hole in them. You can see the critical issue of hole vs no hole. It's also a critical issue in their sexual relations because right-wing authoritarians are masochistic. You see, it's psychopaths that are obsessed with their own cocks, as well as obelisks and cylinders and on and on. Gang bangs exist in order to add more cocks to a porn scene because obviously one isn't enough. To RWAs, one cock is too many.

Right wing authoritarians worship the sacred hole. The hole which brings forth infants (not children, the distinction is extremely important) which can then be beaten, abused, controlled and otherwise crafted into replicas of themselves to continue their Legacy. But the important thing here is that it's WOMEN that have the sacred hole, and men only have the dirty hole through which shit comes from. Also, dirtying the sacred hole by putting psychopathic cocks in them let alone injecting dirty water in them is disgusting.

Which also explains right-wing authoritarians' obsession with anal sex when women derive far more pleasure from their pussies. The sacred hole is too sacred to touch, and in any case, being masochists they're providing women the OPPORTUNITY to feel pain. Not that they enjoy it since only psychopaths are sadists, but they do know the woman will since all women are right-wing authoritarians just like they themselves so all women are masochistic.

Again we see the central tenet of right-wing authoritarian minds: who has the hole! Since women have holes they're to be worshiped and men are not worthy of being with them. So how do you solve this problem? Well, it depends on whether you're high libido or low libido. If you're low libido then you're going to want your (owned but sacred) woman to be a madona, chaste and pure and untouched. And of course providing infants through the miracle of virgin birth.

If you're high libido then things are going to look very different. Right wing authoritarians aren't into polyamory, that's anathema to them. Same for lesbianism (unnatural) or gang bangs (which really need to be distinguished from orgies and threesomes and swinging). Perhaps surprisingly, they're not into polygamy. Why would they want multiple women when men (having only a dirty hole) are obviously unworthy of owning a SINGLE woman. RWAs instead are into polyANDRY.

One woman, multiple men, that's how it should go. And how does this arrangement play out in modern society? Well, you've got whores with multiple clients. And given the fact that every person is either high libido or low libido and women are persons then it follows that ALL women are either madonas (low libido) or whores (high libido), or SHOULD be, since every good person is a right-wing authoritarian. Can you spell madona whore complex? I knew you could.

The alternative to whores is dommes, who are kinds of whores anyways. They're the kinds of right-thinking whores that have no problem crushing their clients' filthy rods and kicking them in their filthy spheres. Which they have the total right (and obligation!) to do since they have the holes whereas men merely have filthy rods and spheres. And RWAs hate spheres almost as much as they hate rods since spheres are the obsession of the RWAs (non-insane) self-righteous sanctimonious brethren. Holy sacred balls batman!

I'm always annoyed at juvenile scum writing stories where every male character winces because a woman kicks a man in the balls. Seriously, WTF? I don't give a shit and I'd kick someone who tried to kill me in the balls over and over until they died of fucking shock. But really, to right-wing authoritarians it's something that gives them sexual pleasure so all those stupid little "winces of male sympathy" grate on my nerves for how diametrically opposite to the truth they are. Also, "sympathy" is the province of scum. I hate sympathy and I hate scum confusing it with empathy or believing it superior.

There's a rumour that went around about Hitler, the leader of the brownshirts, that he was into scat. Now, idiots argue over whether or not the rumour is true, yet somehow they completely miss the fact the rumour's very existence meant most people considered it *believable* for a Nazi to be playing with shit. The same would not have been true if someone claimed Hitler was into bestiality, cumplay or watersports, those would have been aberrant to Hitler's right-wing authoritarian personality. But scat? That's entirely believable, especially after learning of how often the SS made Jews play with shit. And the fact that it's believable is far far more important than whether or not it's true.

But anyways, it's not true that most or even very many right-wing authoritarians want to play with feces, or are even willing to play with feces. Feces are biohazardous waste and far too closely associated with human beings' mortality. Although RWAs love human mortality ... go figure. What *IS* true is that they're ALL, every single last one of them, obsessed with holes. Who's got the hole? You will also note that when spheres stack on top of each other, they only fill 74% of space, leaving 26% holes. Another reason why the dirty sphere lovers are hated, those wrong-thinking bastards don't care about filling holes at all!

Another reason why cubes are so wonderful? When you pack cubes together and they make a hole ... it's a cube-shaped hole! Isn't that wonderful? Try to make that happen with filthy spheres!

In math and physics, rods are known as "one dimensional topological defects" and cubes are known as "three dimensional topological defects". I'll let you figure out what's a two dimensional topological defect and who could worship those.

Why Atheists Are Stupid

Mankind has always created the gods in His own image, and so it came to pass that when mankind sought to become unified, it created God. The God that domesticated wheat and invented language and created the ability to see, all things which Mankind is responsible for. God is Mankind's representation of Itself to Itself. And that is why worshiping God is dumb as fuck.

The God of the Old Testament commanded people to worship the representation of Mankind. Meaning, people were worshiping themselves. How fucking narcissistic is that!! But do you know what's worse than worshiping God? Fearing God, being "God-fearing". Because it means you're a pathetic mewling infant scared of people and scared of your own species.

Even respecting God is too much to ask. What exactly is there to respect? Humanity is, in theory, a wondrous phenomenal species. And in practice is a total pile of crap that hasn't succeeded in eradicating war, disease, poverty, and death. In fact, you can find half a billion filthy pantheists on Earth who'll tell you these things SHOULDN'T be eradicated.

Of course, much of the blame for that is laid at the feet of anti-human cesspits like India and China, let alone Africa. Places that never believed in Humanity aka God. But even omitting all of these Hells, to which you'll be exiled if you can't get along with your fellow first worlders so be good, let's face it: God is a schizophrenic autistic shithead. Not deserving of respect!

But beyond the stupidity of respecting God, beyond the idiocy of worshiping God, beyond the utter dysfunctional patheticness  of fearing God, there lies the utter retardation of refusing to acknowledge its existence. Or even worse, being sanctimonious about refusing to acknowledge your own species' existence.

This is why atheists are the lowest of the low. Not only are they too stupid to figure out what God is, but they use their stupidity as an excuse to deny God's existence! Hey how about that, I'm sure there are plenty of people too stupid to comprehend what the Sun is. But do THEY deny the Sun exists? NO! Do they claim "Helios doesn't exist, only the Sun does"? NO!

One can only conclude that atheists AREN'T denying their own species' existence. How can that be when by definition they deny God's? Well, it's because they aren't human. What the fuck are they then, Cthulhu?! Yeah, atheists are solipsistic Cthulhus creatures denying that Mankind exists. Shapeshifting is the only possible explanation for why human-appearing creatures deny humanity exists.

Seriously though, atheism is the opium of sanctimonious primitives, and I am proudly ecclesiastical! Oh man, I think the only people who'll ever agree with me are Jesuits. I always did like them, very hardcore those fuckers. Not Karl Marx though, he's so stupid he wrote hundreds and hundreds of pages on a topic too obvious for words. Three volumes on communism? You might as well write three volumes on why we need the color blue. It's in the fucking sky! Like God.

For anyone questioning whether I'm serious, I like my parody to be 100% truthful and logical. It makes it funnier that way.

Gutlessness Never Helped Anyone Avoid Embarrassment

There exist people who are unable and unwilling to process intense negative emotions. Emotions like contempt, disgust, loathing, and murderous. Since they can't process feeling murderous, their answer to the question of what kinds of people they would kill and for what reasons, is nobody, at any time and for any reason, under any circumstance whatsoever. And for this reason, many of them feel virtuous.

Of course, the consequence of being unable to process disgust is that they cannot stay away from people who disgust them, people who are bad for them. That's a mental catastrophe waiting to happen because they'll let themselves get close to parasites and leechers who will drain them dry financially and emotionally. So effectively, gutless people are passively suicidal since disgust is necessary to mental stability just as much as pain is necessary to physical well-being.

Pain doesn't tell you when your body is being damaged and about to die, nor does it teach any such thing. By that point in time, the point where a lion has his claws in you, it's far too late to do anything about it. No, pain teaches you when YOU are hurting your own body. By pinching yourself too hard, by nicking yourself with a knife, by sleeping on one side constantly. Those things cause pain because if you do them on a long-term basis you will kill yourself.

So too disgust teaches you not to avoid mental torture at the hands of others, but rather to avoid hurting yourself emotionally, mentally, and psychologically. By staying away from people and jobs and companies and situations which you are disgusted by. It isn't the narcissist that is hurting you and taking advantage of you, it is yourself that is hurting you by staying in a relationship with the narcissist. You can blame gutlessness for such pathetic victim stories.

But let's set aside the fact that gutlessness is contrary to mental self-preservation and is passively suicidal. Or that the unwillingness to act negatively in negative circumstances is pathetic as fuck to witness. We will focus on something infinitely more prosaic and ordinary and yet infinitely more important precisely for its ordinariness. The avoidance of embarrassment by making mistakes.

After all, let's say you kill a psychopathic serial killer like the Joker but it turns out they killed only in self-defense and aren't psychopathic and they're not even the Joker but a tied up hostage wearing a mask the Joker put on them. Killing is a bit extreme, final, and irreversible so what if you make a mistake? Wouldn't you feel dumb? Or ashamed or guilty or something else? Isn't the consequence of making a terrible mistake inevitably some kind of intense negative emotion? Shouldn't intense negative emotions be avoided entirely in order to reduce the chances of mistakes?

But mistakes happen in a probabilistic complex universe. You're afraid of them? They're fucking inevitable! And if you believe that feeling certain of yourself and then later on your course of action turning out to be completely wrong makes you feel dumb, that's because you're not looking at it correctly. Because inaction brings no surety. false uncertainty brings no safety. It's impossible for a 2 liter brain to thoroughly think through a 10^89 liter physical universe.

After all, do you feel dumb if the laws of physics change under you? Would you feel dumb if someone appeared and said, and proved, that the universe is a game simulation in a 100 dimensional universe run by aliens? It's not about factoring in what you know versus what you don't know, it's about the fact everything is a probability distribution and there's no reason to factor in things with infinitesimal probability.

So you make a mistake, so what? You move on and deal with it. your mistakes are just obstacles like in parkour, things to run over. There's a world of difference between being dumb and making a mistake. mistakes you learn from. being dumb you generally don't. and gutless people are being very dumb in how they approach facts and embarrassment.

You don't feel bad for not accounting for an infinitesimal probability.
You don't feel bad for not having the time to account for a small probability.
You SHOULD feel dumb if you act all shy and awkward and uncertain that you can't own up to your major-probability approximation after one hour's calculation.
You SHOULD feel dumb if you never voice what you know to be true because you're worried about the 1% or 0.1% or 1 in a million probability of being wrong

You make mistakes. It happens. It's an inevitable fact of living in a probabilistic universe. An inevitable fact of being a finite being in a much, MUCH bigger universe than itself. The universe is fucking 10^53 kilos when your brain is 1 kilo. So you should feel very, very dumb for ever expecting your 1 kg brain to grasp the entire 10^53 kg universe before it decides on courses of action. This is not a functional way to approach reality.

Let's say you kill 1000 people for being psychopaths, and 10 of them turn out to be innocents and 1 of them turns out to be an anti-psychopath. How many people would those 989 psychopaths have murdered if you hadn't killed them? I call this a win. It doesn't mean you don't IMPROVE your detection mechanisms if you're bothered they're so poor, but it doesn't mean you lose any sleep over it either.

Doing nothing doesn't mean the universe is on hold or on pause around you. The universe keeps going and people keep dying while it keeps going, and psychopaths keep killing while you worry about who's a psychopath and who isn't. While you worry about not killing innocent people, innocent people are dying due to your inactions. Because inaction is a type of action after all, just a despicable kind of action that denies all agency and personhood. A type of action that revels in humans' atavistic nature and makes them no better than animals.

That said, doing nothing is fairly acceptable if you judge the universe to be wholly and entirely positive. After all, what needs to be changed in that circumstance? Just enjoy it while it lasts. But then, people don't resort to violence unless they judge things to be negative, and usually very negative. It's not true that people are gutless because they're scared of being wrong or scared of violence. It's the reverse. Gutlessness causes fear of being wrong and fear of violence.

When you're capable of processing intense negative emotions, intensely negative things like mistakes and errors in judgement and innocent people dying are just a fact of life. (And here the Gaian says Aha, shrugs their shoulders and is happy that people die, because it's a "fact of life" and life is sacred to them. Okay, screw this.) So as I said, they're facts of the universe and facts of reality. And your job is to optimize or maximin or equalize the negatives, not to avoid them entirely. You can avoid the negatives once you possess full control over the physical universe, and not one second earlier.

Yet another salient point is that when bad things happen, or even when you cause bad things to happen, the emotional response is NOT generally speaking embarrassment or shame or stupefaction or things like that. There are a LOT more negative emotions than that! There's rage, frustration, anger, determination, grimness, resignation, depression ... and those things are a lot closer to victory than happiness is. You know what negativity tastes like? It tastes like potential victory. I enjoy victory.

So think about this. You want to avoid embarrassment? You're not going to succeed by avoiding negative emotions, a field which is much MUCH vaster than embarrassment. But I can guarantee you WILL succeed, eventually, if you dive into that field and your emotional profile will change, maybe even to including murderous. Transforming your mind and your actions until you feel only the emotions you want is a long and involved and exacting process, but there is no substitute. Dumb and mindless avoidance of all negative emotions merely ensures you remain a pathetic wretch who never gets what he wants in life.

I wanted to be able to dish out violence online and make enemies while never feeling humiliation caused by anyone else's or my own actions, and I succeeded totally. So I do believe your own much more pathetic emotional goals are entirely achievable so long as you know the math behind it and follow it scrupulously.

Who Needs Brain Bleach and Dreads Puppy Dog Eyes?

There is a particular type of person who keeps saying "OMG, TMI, I need brain bleach" at something innocuous like seeing old people fucking, or their parents fucking. Or even more innocuous, seeing their siblings fucking. Why the fuck would they do that? It's not like they have to do anything about it.

But the thing is, these people want to do absolutely nothing, not even think, so the mere learning of highly unexpected information is deeply traumatic because it requires them to think, to learn and to assimilate that information. And thinking, learning and assimilating are doing things, thus are highly negative to them.

Basically, these people are saying the equivalent of "OMG, I have to lift a finger! I don't know how to lift my finger! Freakout freakout freakout!" Which is utterly pathetic, and yes they are that utterly pathetic because their minds are fragmented and autistic. That's why thinking and learning are onerous chores to them which they will do the least possible.

These people still want to move to prove they exist, they just don't want to go anywhere so they twirl in circles going nowhere. They want to sleep because they don't want to die, and at least being asleep proves they exist. Dreaming proves they exist. They want to be, but not to do. They want to be Smaug the sleeping dragon sitting on his hoard, feared and left alone. And doing nothing.

Every time they have to move their paw to scratch themselves in a place they've never scratched themselves before, they have to remember how to scratch oneself and cobble this together with the new spot that is scratchy and see if that works. This is effort, but not half as much effort as having to learn something out of nothing, like learning to use a backscratcher when you've never scratched yourself before. OMG the trauma!

Why do these people dread "the puppy dog eyes" or "the stare"? And I don't quote dread because yes they do dread it. Well, it should be obvious by now, they want to do absolutely nothing, and someone personally connected to them asking them to do something forces them to do something ... which is not nothing and hence is to be feared and dreaded. "Oh no, I have to lift my finger, the horror, the horror!!!"

Other things they say are "I could eat". As opposed to "I want to eat" which requires having desires and so takes effort. As opposed to "I am hungry" which requires determining the actual state of their body, which takes effort. Yes, minimal effort, the kind of effort which virtually everyone scoffs at and says "that's no effort at all" and laughs in derision. But that's still effort to people who want to do ABSOLUTELY NO EFFORT.

Speaking of that, speaking in a thunderous voice, or getting angry, or caring, or even raising your voice, that all takes effort. Which is why these people are always soft-spoken, because that requires no effort. Which is why they always get along, because that requires no effort. Which is why they're always polite, because that's expected of them and takes no effort. In a lot of ways, these people are my antithesis, which is why I loathe them.

Another thing they say is "I see how it is" when they feel put upon. Why? Because that's the minimum possible reaction to an insult. Why, it's virtually no reaction at all. It's a mere placeholder for a reaction. It says "I should feel insulted but I won't go to the bother of it because then I'd have to do something about it". Except "I see how it is" is 5 syllables instead of 27. The only possible way to expend LESS effort would be to ignore insults entirely and be completely imperturbable. Which some of them actually do.

These people's minds are autistic and fragmented, with jagged bits and pieces grinding against each other painfully. That's why they don't like to think. It's also why they're all shy and awkward about virtually anything. It's also why they worship grace (least effort under adverse circumstances) because they consider virtually everything an adverse circumstance.

And it's also why they worship ecosystems since ecosystems are made up of animals that constantly grind against each other, whether to fuck or to kill. Ecosystems resemble their minds and Man always did create God in His own image. That's why these retards talk about loathsome "ecosystems of ideas". And it's also why they worship evolution which is just going along with random meaningless arbitrary forces their autistic minds can't hope to ever understand.

And it's also why they keep saying exterminating mosquitoes "will have repercussions we cannot hope to understand". Because they are autistic retards so of course they can't understand anything, and frankly don't want to ... because that requires effort. But you know what? Exterminating mosquitoes requires effort too, which is the actual reason they don't want to do it. And of course, they are terrified that those "repercussions we cannot hope to understand" might require effort.

To them, everything should remain exactly as it is. And if you're hurt by it, you should be soothed, because that's the minimum amount of effort. Slavery, war, disease, murder, infanticide, poverty, death, none of it matters and none of it could possibly matter enough to ... expend effort. Just ... compensate. Everything is in a beautiful "balance" which should remain exactly how it is indefinitely. Balance, the point of least effort to everything else.

And when that "beautiful balance" gets upset then it requires ... token effort to redress it. The people waving around placards and street signs saying "white people like me don't get shot by the cops" are basically whining "stop making me feel guilty for my white privilege". You'll notice that not one single word on the placard signs refers to the people supposedly being protested over, only to the protestors. But that's alright, waving that placard around got rid of their guilt so problem solved! Black people still getting shot? That's no longer their problem, they expended the effort to get rid of the guilt after all.

It's good to be privileged. Even after people make you feel guilty over it, you only need to put in token effort to fix it. On balance, it's a win-win-win. You win, your friends win and your buddies win. Corruption? Nah, *friends*. Because strangers don't matter and what kind of asshole would make you go to the ludicrously insane amounts of effort that caring for strangers would require? The notion of caring for strangers you don't personally see, talk to, or interact with in any way isn't even comprehensible to them.

To them, it's never "everyone should be free" or "everyone should be treated well". It's always "me and my buddies should be free and treated well". That word "corruption" is only bad because others think it's bad, and might ... require effort to deal with them.

It's always easiest (least effort) to deal with others when nobody knows what you're doing in the dark. So smile smile smile at everyone during the daytime and hide what others would disapprove of at night. Because it's only considerate to others to not tell them the things that would make them *go to the effort* of becoming upset, and would in turn make you *go to the effort* of dealing with their emotional reactions.

Also, everyone has the same basic drives (ie, wanting everything to be effortless) that they themselves do, because processing how alien minds work would require effort. In fact, just the notion that others' minds are alien to you requires effort to assimilate, so is basically anathema to them. And if for some reason they need to recognize the existence of other personality types, they will only recognize the minimal number of them for their particular goals. Naturally enough since that is least effort.

Ah yes, another giveaway word they use is "monsters". Not psychopath or narcissist or nazi, but "monster". What is a monster? "Someone or something whose body or mind I don't recognize and can't process with my autistic mind or otherwise makes my life difficult." An unexpected freak.

The Paradox of Getting Along

Some people are confused about why it's wrong to lie. "Does this dress make me look fat?" White lies, polite lies. What's wrong with sparing people's feelings? What's wrong with getting along? What's wrong with being nice and kind?

Well, the problem with it is that if you ever lie, and especially if you ever lie casually then you become known as a liar and fundamentally dishonest, and at that point people will never trust you. And there's just no point getting along with people who are untrustworthy so nobody will bother getting along with you.

This is the paradox of getting along. If you try your hardest to get along with others, nobody will ever get along with you and you will fail in your endeavor. You will fail abysmally, wholly, and completely. If you care only about making friends with others, you will never have friends. And if you're lucky, people will snicker to your face rather than wasting your time.

Now, there is a good explanation for this paradox and it's this. People who care only about having friends or getting along or survival or whatever, they basically don't care about anything. Yes, they care about having friends, but others care about having friends PLUS they care about their projects, their goals, their dreams and their principles.

Nearly everyone cares about something more than getting along, and is perfectly willing to sacrifice getting along for what they care for. So how are they going to perceive someone who cares ONLY about getting along? Those people are going to fall into the Uncanny Valley and will subconsciously register as hollow, fake, and un-people.

Real people care about things and people who care only about getting along aren't real people. You can never trust someone who seeks only to get along with others because you can never predict what they will do. They are in fact a mere object thrown about by the whims of others, not an independent entity possessed of free will, not a person.

It's difficult for most people to understand others who are fundamentally unlike themselves. And what isn't understood can never be trusted, unless your entire personality revolves around faith and even then, faith is given to some people in preference to others. People who care about faith above all else will never place their faith in people who care about nothing.

And caring, genuine caring, can never be faked using hobbies or pastimes. Accumulating a steady succession of hobbies only shows to others that you just don't care about any of them. There's no way for people who care only about getting along to fake genuine caring or to fake out others about the fact that they don't care.

In a world of people who care about goals and dreams, those who care only about getting along and fitting in with others will never fit in and never get along. Why else is there an obsession with being "cool"? With literally not giving a fuck what others think? It's a reaction against "friendlies". Even if the "friendlies" have tried to corrupt "cool" to mean "popular".

If you care only about getting along with others, that is all you will ever have in life. You will never have comrades, you will never have brothers, you won't even ever have friends. And you might not even succeed in "getting along", that is, avoiding conflict at any cost.

You Are What You Eat

Eat fat, be fat, right?

Eat meat exclusively and you're a mighty predator RAWR like the lion who claims all four parts of the kill. One part because he's king, one part because he's noble, one part because he's a team-member, and the last part he'll kill anyone who touches it.

Drink milk and be a cow, led hither and yon to pasture. It doesn't even taste good, it's not all that healthy with the growth hormones in it, so why are you doing it? I suppose it's the regression to infancy most desired by right-wing authoritarians.

Be a vegetarian and you're a plant. That just sits there and does nothing, merely "being" and "aware" of its environment. "Environmentally-aware", get it? Fucking plants, no wonder they feel so much sympathy for trees. Ought to take a chainsaw to them.

Eat honey and you're a worker bee, busily buzzing around for the benefit of the worker hive. All for the collective! Save the pupae!!

Eat fish and you're ... a bigger fish. Swimming in the currents of the great material continuum together with your school of identical other fishies while clinging to the belief that you're a precious unique individual. Ironically and ambivalently since there's no sense of direction out in the ocean.

Be an omnivore and ... you know, I don't know what the fuck you are but you might be like me. Maybe you're a monkey, clever little monkey, hihihi. Laughing at all the other stupid animals while chucking the "bend with the wind" trees into the fire. The trees that whine because they "never did anyone any harm".

Pacifism has saved: 0 people from slavery and/or a bullet to the head.

What personality does the Sun have?

Let's set aside the fact the Sun is a runaway thermonuclear fusion reactor outputting a lot of X-rays in the sky and that worshipping it in preference to building nuclear power plants is fucking insane, and extremely annoying besides. And while we're at it, let's set aside the fact it's a ball of hydrogen above a critical mass for self-ignition. Got it? Now, what IS the Sun? And, since I already gave it away: what personality does it have?

The Sun is the object that pleases everyone equally without exception. It can be harsh and unforgiving out in the wastes around the Nile but you would much, much rather it be there than not. So the Sun is a people-pleaser. As are people with a ... sunny disposition, by no coincidence whatsoever. Going further, what is the Moon? The Moon is the object that takes care of you in your literally darkest hour. Without it, you're fucked.

The ancients didn't say someone was the Sun King or the Lord of Light as a metaphor or symbol for their personality. They said it because the Sun and Moon HAVE personality. And you don't need to anthropomorphize them one little bit to recognize this fact anymore than you need to be a mystic or occultist in order to recognize the GOP Republicans are vampires out to suck you dry of blood. Or that environmentalists are archaicists who hate all humanity.

Calling something a metaphor makes it sound ambiguous and impenetrable, and definitely intended to obscure meaning in order to sound "deep". These things were neither, they were explicit, blatant, overt and most importantly, PRECISE. When you're out working on the Nile every day in the fields, the meaning of Sun is as clear as day. Just as clear as any other in-joke or pop cultural reference. In fact, pop culture references are infinitely MORE obscure than the big glowing object in the sky!

The Sun, the Lord of Light, the original pop culture icon. Far far bigger than the Beatles, let alone Jesus. And still actively worshiped by legions of solar zealots putting out their feeble little solar panels and going out to beaches at enormous cost to themselves.

"You sound like you think they really are gods."

"They are gods."

"No, they're not. They use technology to trick people into thinking they are, but we can show you those tricks. They are not gods. And if you think they're gods, why are you helping us defeat them?"

"The fact that they're gods does not make them good guys. I don't have a problem with fighting gods. And it doesn't matter what technology they use. We're not talking about the omniscient, omnipotent singular god of judeo-christian beliefs, we're talking about ancient pantheonic gods. They can use whatever tricks they want, the facts remain that they have power of life and death over their followers, their followers do worship them, and their temples are holy ground. They are gods. I know that and Teal'c knows that."

"He calls the goa'uld 'false gods.' He knows that they're not really gods."

"They break faith with their people. They play their worshipers falsely. That makes them false gods. It does not make them non-gods." - awesome story by MarbleGlove

How Dumbo Can Fly

It is a mystery to some people how Dumbo the flying elephant can fly when rabbits clearly cannot. The mystery is resolved instantly by realizing that Dumbo has neither mass nor density. What he has is geometry and volume with ears proportional to his body similar to birds' wings to their bodies.

When human minds develop in infancy (and the way AI minds should be built by idiots) they learn to process geometry and volume, then color, then mass, then sound. So anyone developing speech recognition as an independent function is going about it backwards.

What this means is there's a period of time during which very small children have no concept of mass. Or not a very accurate concept of it at all. And you don't need to examine children to figure this out.

Plato had a very good grasp of geometry, Leonardo had a very good grasp of color, yet mass had to wait for Galileo, and even a thousand years later, people are still pondering "If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?" when the clear and obvious answer is "no". And anyone who says otherwise simply has no conception of what "sound" means.

Philosophers to this day still have no idea where color comes from. Because philosophers are idiots. They're obviously mind states. But in order to have states first you must have entities to hold those states. And that's what geometry and volume gives you. And mass? Hell, physicists don't know what mass is, because it's even more advanced.

Great Minds, Middling Minds, and Little Minds

"Blessed is the mind too small for doubt."

The greater the mind, the greater it encompasses reality. But what is reality? Reality is one's perceptions, one's memories, the present, the past, the future, the alternate futures, the sea of possibilities (called the Astral for reasons that totally make sense if you bother thinking about it ... for a few years), and the realm of pure knowledge (which has no special name and never could for equally good reasons).

Little minds are concerned with their own perceptions, and nothing else. Everything else they dismiss as "not real" and thus not a concern. Narcissists believe only "the evidence of their own eyes". Because everything else is unreal. Right-wing authoritarians like Brian Wang over at NBF don't believe in the past as a physical reality, only in their memories of the past. What they CALL the past isn't a physical reality, they merely pretend it is because it's part of modern convention and they're conventionalists.

Conventionalists believe that reality, and thought, and everything else, is a mere construct of human minds ... a convention. They believe that physics is a convention, that mathematics is a convention, that all of these are ARBITRARY. Brian Wang once argued in a post many years ago that the speed of light was an arbitrary convention which would be overturned just like the speed of sound. The best part is he justified his belief in the overturning of that convention using the blessed power of humanity's present ignorance, whatever can happen WILL happen. And unquestioning faith of course, whatever we want to happen CAN happen, the very purest kind.

His right-wing authoritarianism is also why he's obsessed with the lifeless void that is space. But I digress, let's forget that pathetic fuck. The reason I brought that pathetic necron-worshiping worm up is to highlight how RWAs have no sense of physical reality at all. To them, reality is just myths and stories leavened with the direct impressions from their senses, nothing more and nothing less.

For middling minds, reality is far more extensive as it definitely includes a physical present and a physical past. Hell, Realism is the middling-mind philosophy that "physical reality", aka the present and past, are real. Middling minds may even stretch to believing that one single future, the "true future", is real. But that's pretty much where they're stuck. Everything else is about as real as fiction.

To great minds, it's all real. Even fiction might or might not be real. Or at least SHOULD be real. To great minds, possibilities are real. Futures, plural, are definitely real. And ideas are real too. And they are real whether or not they interact with, are connected to, are useful to, or benefit people. Something the so-called "thinkers" and philosophers in academia do not actually believe, though they do pretend to believe it at least, something the overwhelming majority of middling-minds are simply incapable of.

Middling minds, even those of intellectuals who value pure ideas, do not natively nor habitually operate in the realm of pure knowledge. They operate in the realm of "people will like this" and "this will give me status". The reason why philosophers care about pure ideas is not because they value pure ideas, but because they found it necessary to value SOME small amount of pure ideas in order to pursue their preoccupation with organizing society under the most complex, most general, and most exigent conditions possible. Pure ideas are an occupational hazard to Thinkers which they are willing to accept or tolerate.

Greatness of mind is not predicated on necessity, ease, success or failure. It is only middling minds that believe a great mind is one who preoccupies itself with great things. Because of course, that's the closest they can get to greatness. And it is only little minds that believe a great mind is one that operates quickly or has high memory capacity (ie, high intelligence), because again that's the closest they'll ever get to greatness. The truth is that greatness of mind is a personality trait, and no amount of ease or preoccupation will ever make a lesser mind WANT to encompass all of reality.

The Most Hated Personality Type

Meet the universally despised personality type ... no, not Psychopaths, but Gaians. It's characterized by nicheism and cronyism, its only (and secret) claim to fame is corruption. Its superpower is doing nothing and the goal of all Gaians is to achieve nothing. They can turn the world upside down, but only if it was inevitable anyways and their own actions really amounted to nothing in retrospect. Being nothing and doing nothing is comforting to them. Status quo ante is their motto.

Their dread fear is to die. And disease and the undead, so obviously not real fears in the modern world. They will do anything for survival and for others' survival, even puppies' and whales' survival, so that having survived, the animals can go on to do nothing. And in their view, animals are equally deserving of survival precisely because animals are equally capable of doing and achieving nothing in between their eating and fucking. And sleeping and dreaming incoherently.

Eating and fucking are all that Gaians do beyond ensuring survival so they can eat and fuck some more. Gaians will turn the world upside down and then right-side up again to ensure their survival, preferably coinciding with the 24 hour daily cycle so that it's indistinguishable from the motion of the Earth. Gaians LOVE automation because automation is about doing the least effort so you can make no effort.

Gaians also love efficiency. And they love effortless ease, also known as "naturalness". What could be more efficient than achieving zero effort? What could be more automated than setting the Earth spinning so it has motion (thus asserting its existence, its survival) while forevermore doing nothing to move it? Because of rotational momentum, spinning is natural motion, and everything in nature is awesome, even malaria bearing mosquitoes. Because nature takes no maintenance.

Gaians do not believe in personality types, so if you believe in personality types then this doesn't describe you. And if you believe this description can't possibly be about you because there are no personality types, or because nobody would ever admit to (insert whatever), or because "human minds are too complex to understand" then it totally is about you.

What Gaians DO believe in is tokenism. Whenever they make a team or a fellowship, there will always be one token black man, one token asian, one token woman, one token nerd, one token enemy. (Or, one air-bender, one water-bender, one-earth-bender, and one fire-bender from the enemy nation, and even one magicless person.) If Hollywood hires token black men as magical negroes, that's good enough. If the government raises minimum wage by 1 cent, that's good enough. If they protest something that makes them feel guilty for their race and privilege, that's good enough. Results don't matter, the token action does!

Gaians have a casual relation to the truth. They will lie and lie easily, not because they believe that lying is fun but in order to avoid friction and appease people and otherwise do the least amount necessary. That's why nobody trusts them, even though Gaians want to be trusted by everyone. And why even pathological liars despise them, because the lies of pathological liars have a structure discernable to them, and are meant to achieve something always, whereas Gaians wish to achieve nothing.

Moralists despise Gaians for their corruption, for their apathy and indifference to society and groups and standards. Anarchists despise Gaians for ... their corruption, and their conspiracism. Whenever anarchists decry "elitists" they mean Gaians even though Gaians aren't elitists and Anarchists ARE elitists.

What the anarchists really hate and mean by "elitism" is conspiracism, they loathe and despise that, but often don't have the right word for it so they substitute the nearest concept they DO understand, and well Anarchists love to contradict themselves so they don't mind using a word they love to condemn others with. So long as you sort of know what Anarchists mean (group elitism = castes are loathesome) and subconsciously distinguish it from themselves (individual elitism) then that's good enough. And yes, castes are a Gaian concept, and India is ultra-Gaian.

Right-wing authoritarians hate Gaians ... for their corruption. For compromising, for giving way, for being flexible. Also for lying all the time. RWAs lies are to please the establishment and their superiors, they are not dysfunctional lies to please whoever's nearby. They are lapdog lies, not doormat lies. And everyone knows being a doormat is loathesome. So is conspiracy and lack of forthrightness.

Narcissists hate Gaians ... no, not for corruption. Narcissists are nepotists, they believe Gaians AREN'T CORRUPT ENOUGH. But mostly they hate Gaians for being doormats, for being slaves. Oh sure, Narcissists LOVE slavery and love taking slaves and having slaves, but that doesn't mean they actually RESPECT those slaves now, does it? Slaves, like toilets, are useful, that doesn't mean you respect them. Incidentally, Gaians are the only non-Evil personality type that believes in slavery. Due to corruption which is their defining attribute.

Psychopaths hate Gaians for not being free. And well I don't know what else but I'm damned sure psychopaths hate Gaians. Oh yeah, because of the inaction and lack of killing and the obsession with survival. Even the obsession Gaians have for claiming that personality types don't exist and that everyone else is exactly like them, grates on psychopaths. Hell, psychopaths have more empathy than Gaians because psychopaths admit there are non-psychopaths. Gaians claim that EVERYONE values survival at any cost, even psychopaths, and that it's a lie lie lie that psychopaths value murder more.

Incidentally, why is it that Gaians are the most despised personality type when psychopaths are despised by everyone? Ahhh, but that latter claim is NOT TRUE because GAIANS don't despise psychopaths! Gaians LOVE monsters, so long as they're USEFUL monsters. Gaians love the idea of TAMING monsters. They think psychopaths can be tamed. Hell, Doctor Robert Hare believed exactly this and spent his entire life trying, to no effect of course, the idiot. Oh but as a good Gaian, achieving nothing is validation of his life's choices, there is no higher ambition he could have aspired to.

Everyone loathes Gaians and with good reason. It's part of why I loathe Gaians. As well as them being massive hypocrites who claim to have integrity but have none, who claim to have empathy but have none. who claim to be smart bub really be idiots, who claim to be humble but are arrogant as fuck. Gaians are the opposite of everything they claim. It's because they're niche-ists (everyone in their home and a home for everyone) and they always claim their "virtues" in relation to someone worse than them, and there always are people better than them, at absolutely everything.

Gaians claim to be humble because they're more humble than Narcissists, but Moralists are infinitely more humble than Gaians. Oh except Gaians claim to be more humble than Moralists because Moralists are holier than thou and go around SMITING evil. Gaians claim to be empathetic ... again compared to Narcissists, but well there's a personality type called Empaths. Except Gaians claim to be more empathetic than THEM too. Gaians claim to be smart and knowledgeable except ... gah! It's the same story over and over again for every single last trait Gaians claim to have.

Gaians are elves (and elves Gaians), they're better at everything, even the things you do better, because your notion of better is un-Gaian so can't possibly count. Plus, understanding other personality types and other people's point of view and other people's metrics takes EFFORT, and we can't have that, can we?

I know hundreds of different tells of Gaian, which I made sure to learn so one of this most despicable of all kinds couldn't sneak up on me and waste my time. And they do so love to do that since wasting time is doing nothing, and since everyone is a Gaian in their mind, you should be happy to waste time with them!

If I learned all this to protect myself from scum, you can too! To give you a head start, Gaians love having useful friends and contacts, and prize loyalty (their own and others). This is cronyism.

They also love schizoprenia since it's like being lost in dreams that intrude upon reality. If you see someone not-loathe schizophrenia (eg, they stop taking their meds) or make excuses for it being not as bad as psychopathy, then it's likely they're Gaians.

Their drug of choice is tobacco and heroin. Not that this is very reliable but anyways. Why? Because heroin makes you happy, and being happy while doing nothing (or grinding mindlessly) is the ultimate goal of every Gaian.

Another love of theirs is sensationalism. Reading the National Enquirer or going to a homeopath isn't a dead giveaway of a Gaian, but actively defending those practices? "Why do you have to ruin my fun with your stodgy truth." Very high indicator.

Yet another tell is worshiping the internet as a god. Not acknowledging that it's a god (omnipresent and omnipotent and omniscient) or being bitter about it, no, HAPPILY worshiping it as a god. If you see anyone do that ("let's put it on the internet! that's sure to make anything better!") then you've got a Gaian. Why? Because the Internet connects everyone. Like the Force except it isn't used by Jedi to enforce a monarchy so the internet isn't Evil.

Gaians worship wheels and circles because they move endlessly nowhere, always coming right back to their starting point. So, Wheel of Time and Circle of Time. Time isn't circular, WTF, obviously someone's catering to their own ego. Circle of Life where you're born, eat, reproduce and get eaten. Breeding is Gaian too, but raising children isn't since well, that takes extreme effort.

Gaians also worship dragons. I couldn't figure out why since dragons are monsters (psychopathic) and come in all colors of the rainbow (so are gay), but then again, dragons are best known for eating and lazing in the sun all day. So ... dragons do nothing. Also, dragons in AD&D fuck and breed with every other species. I did mention bestiality, didn't I? Add voyeurism, swinging and orgies to the mix.

Most psychologists are Gaians. If a psychologist wants you to be normal or average or up to standards then they're a Moralist. But if they want you to be productive and happy with yourself for no reason then they're a Gaian. Pretty much every other personality type despises psychologists so you'll only have those two. The notion of a psychopathic psychologist like Hannibal Lector is ludicrous. Yes you heard right, most psychologists don't believe in personality types.

Now, void and nothingness and space ARE NOT Gaian, they're right-wing authoritarian. Gaians want to DO nothing and ACHIEVE nothing, they don't want to BE nothing the way RWAs do. RWAs worship death because the dead know nothing, are nothing, and of course are ancient and obsolete. Whereas death is anathema to Gaians, Life is what they cherish, even dark life = non-photosynthetic life = fungi = rot = Corruption. Yes Virginia, it all makes a sick amount of sense.

Gaians worship mushroom management. "Keep them in the dark and feed them shit". Dumbledore's style of management, which is corrupt as all hell. The style of management where you have a secretive inner circle that controls and puppetmasters everything while doing the least amount possible in order to stay on top and ensure its own survival.

Extend that management type over generations and you have a caste system. A system where you and your cronies and your families end up in a high-survival niche while everyone else (eg, Untouchables) also ends up in their own niche, where they're meant to stay forever. Or at least until their biomatter gets recycled by the great Cycle of Reincarnation.

(Fairness? Equality? Those sound like principles and ideals. Can't possibly have those because they sound like EFFORT that stand in the way of corruption! How dare you be so arrogant as to practice ideals and principles around a Gaian?! And don't you know that Gaians are twice as humble as thou art. Because doing nothing is the ultimate humility. Isn't it humble to know that nothing you can do can be better than nothing? That everything you achieve is meaningless? So give up on that fairness and equality!)

Going back to caste systems, Gaians worship personal lineage and PERSONAL history. Other personality types worship collective history, and still others don't give a fuck about history. But Gaians worship personal lines of descent and genealogy. Only Narcissists do too so if you have someone who does but isn't in favor of mind control or eager to enslave others and break them to their will, then you've got a Gaian.

Gaians also worship trees. Genealogy is always depicted as trees even though tapestries is vastly more accurate, because it caters to Gaians who love trees and dislike tapestries. Why? Because trees are plants and plants ACHIEVE NOTHING.

Plants do nothing but drink and eat and breed. The Gaian ideals! Gaians are vegetarians because you are what you eat and if you eat fat you'll be fat, if you eat chocolate then you'll become chocolate, and if you eat plants then hopefully, God willing, you'll become a plant! Doing nothing all day, not even thinking! Mmm, mmm mmm, it does a Gaian good.

Gaians like to have their fingers in every pie, it's part and parcel of fucking anything that moves (every race, every creed = pantheism, every belief = syncretism, every species = zooeroticism, dogs, horses, every job, jack of all trades and animal lover = PETA), so it's an absolute certainty that there is a Gaian near you, secretly lording it over you for having and being true to your personality type, for having principles and ideals. Because corruption wins! And for the corruption!!

Functional vs Object-Oriented Programming

Long ago I said that functional and OO were opposites in a way and I pointed to the fact that functional is verb-oriented whereas OO is noun oriented. Well today I have discovered the relation they have to each other. Functional is a gutless paradigm and OO is total.

They have the exact same relation to each other as deontology vs consequentialism, and for the exact same reason. Deontology is obsessed with obeying rules about actions regardless of consquence (state) and regardless of context, even when those rules appear blatantly insane and the consequences are insufferable. The question is WHY? Why would anyone do such a thing?

Obviously, deontology was invented by gutless people to deal with a universe they can't bring themselves to even comprehend. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. The mantra of the gutless insane fuck. These people make up rules to deal with the universe and then they ... *hope for the best*. Even when they're facing the very worst, when they're facing an immoral unjust crazy and evil universe. Even in such a situation, they blind their eyes to the truth and hope for the best.

If you're going to blind and deafen and mute yourself to the actual state of the universe (state, get it?) then you have to blind and deafen and mute yourself to any consequences of your actions (future state). And while you're at it, you might as well blind and deafen and mute yourself to ALL state, because state is painful, isn't that right? If you have no coherent notion of state then you can't USE state (or nouns) in your methodology. You must resort in referential transparency (and verbs) as a last ditch method, no matter how insane it is.

The opposite of deontology is consequentialism. Consequentialism is about NOT blinding yourself to the actual state of the universe, be it so harsh or vile or nauseating or evil. Consequentialism is about understanding the state of the fucking universe, no matter how disgusting it may be, because only then can you ameliorate it. Only then can you make it less bad. Only then can you make it LESS harsh, LESS vile, LESS nauseating, and LESS evil. Consequentialism is about lessening badness.

And object-orientation? Is about understanding fucking reality. Especially, understanding the fact we live in a STATEFUL universe. A universe where objects clobber their past versions, where objects have side-effects, and where objects clobber other objects. THAT ... is ... THE UNIVERSE. Object-orientation is about fucking reality, and functional programming is about ... being gutless and weak and living in a fucking never never fairyland full of sugar plums and fairies.

Functional programming is despicable.

And logic programming.







And declarative programming.

Inferior tools for emotionally inferior minds.

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.

How Yoga, Homeopathy and Alchemy Make Sense

The personality type that goes for homeopathy, naturopathy, yoga, zen and alchemy is not merely "magical thinkers" and is not merely people utterly incapable of logic or any semblance of a concern for truth. It's far, far more specific than that.

The underpinnings of the Gaian personality type are all about trade and interaction and continuity. If you put two things together then they MUST interact and they MUST have a lasting imprint on each other (mutual contamination) due to continuity. And two things brought together are always together, which is of course one of the laws of magic.

Hell, alchemy is trading off the properties of X for the properties of Y. Want green steel? Mix in copper because it's green, or mix in leaves because they're green, or mix in green dye ... water + metal = mercury! Alchemy is magical dissociation and reassociation, nothing more. Elixir of life is made from liquid gold because gold doesn't corrode but lasts.

By ingesting liquid gold, you ingest the property of not corroding and lasting, rendering you immortal! The same way that if you ingest fat then you become fat, if you ingest meat then you become a muscleman and if you ingest sugar you become a chocolate covered waffle. You eat natural things because you want to be natural, thus ingesting the naturalness.

Now, homeopathy works by taking a poison that mimics the disease you have then diluting OUT the poison until it's non-existent. then by magical association (ie, mutual contamination) it follows that what you have left is an ANTI-poison, and this perfectly shaped anti-poison will cure you of whatever you had to begin with. Simple and oh so comprehensible.

What is yoga? It's breathing exercises for long life. Why? Because living things breathe so by practicing breathing you're making yourself better able to able to breathe which means you're able to live longer. If you could practice heartbeats, yoga would be about that. Instead, it's about "not wasting" heartbeats by lowering your heart rate. It's all about trade.

Incidentally, Gaians are also sensualists and also pro-poverty. This combines in the bizareness of "no-food dinners" where insane nutters prepare dinner then waft the smells around so they can comment on its deliciousness, then NOT eat it but continue starving. Low-calorie, don't you know?

Personally, the only pathy I believe in is telepathy. Also cyberpathy in Elf Sternberg's sense of someone who has an intuitive magical understanding of technology. I also believe in magic, but this is not enough. And I also believe in one golden glance of what should be. It's a kind of magic.

Magic? Magic!

No Interfaces Worthy Of The Name

Between self-sufficient concepts such as cars or Class Car on the one hand and large scale models on the other hand, there are interfaces. Not interactions or relationships but interfaces. The problem is that the software industry is extremely impoverished in those and as a result, dealing with it is excruciating torture to me. Because interfaces are what I'm best at and what I love. MVC is a good example of interfaces which are debilitatingly painful to me due to being hopelessly broken and low-level.

Think about it and think about how many concepts there are for large scale structure. Some patterns, architectures, frameworks, libraries, that's 4 categories already. Then how many concepts there are for small scale self-sufficient structure, probably hundreds of the latter. And then how many concepts there are for interfaces that one would be willing to use (so command and instruction and function don't count).

Events? But events are broken and not first class, so they aren't real. Object-capabilities? Disgustingly low level and broken. Object, maybe but that counts as small-scale structure really, or non-interface even. So there's message passing, inheritance, polymorphism? that one doesn't count. delegation. cloning vs instantiating, subclassing. Oh yes, aspects vs crosscutting, those are nice. Agents? Not really. Actors? Hmm maybe, maybe not. Probably not. Meh, probably yes but the problem is I just don't give a damn since it's about distribution and concurrency.

So there's no first class events, there's no first class dependencies, aspects aren't in any language I know. Transformational programming seemed in its infancy when I first heard about it, and I've never heard anyone ever ever mention it since then. Namespaces suck rocks so they're broken. Naked Objects? Oh yeah there's some guy who implemented it as a library or framework in Java, that's good for him honestly but doesn't count. Especially with the implementation being so kitsch and primitive rather than thorough and comprehensive. I mean, where's the IDE using naked objects? Nowhere.

There's remote message sends and proxy object, doesNotUnderstand: NullObject, those are another 4 interface concepts. So that makes what? 10? An even dozen? Twenty? It doesn't matter how many there are because here's the sick thing, they're enumerable. and they're not categories of things either, they're discrete instances of interfaces.

The software world forms an uncanny valley type field to me. There's large scale structure and then there's small scale structure and there's no bridges between them.

I don't think I'm the only one who loathes debugging or reverse-engineering with a passion. But I do think I'm the only one who understands why. The tools are worthless because the concepts to even minimally support asking "where did this bug come from?" and "how do I use this?" don't exist in software.

Conversation On Secure Multiplexing

I drew some insights into the execution stack from TUNES. More of them than the whole exokernel thing.

Main and only insight from exokernel was that secure multiplexing is independent of abstraction. You can have ONLY secure multiplexing enabling you to present something that looks exactly like the bare resource you're multiplexing. That insight fueled Xen and other hyper-virtualization things.

The only problem with it is it's a lie. Secure multiplexing is an abstraction by itself. You run into the limitations of the abstraction if you push it, exposing the underlayer's existence, at which point the abstraction starts to fray and reveal its nature. For example, that there ARE other OSes running on top of the hypervisor because there's "missing time". and then it becomes obvious that hiding each other and not permitting any way to cooperate or interact is a choice of abstraction.

Joe B: fuck, I comprehend nothing

Okay, say you've got a CPU. now the traditional way to multiplex (slice and share it) is with a scheduler. Problem is that OS schedulers look nothing like CPUs, they're higher level. What people managing a cloud want ideally is to present CPUs, bare and naked, and tell everyone to fuck off because hey there's your CPU, your problem.

Now they don't want those CPUs to be REAL CPUs because that's not scalable. But they also don't want them to interact, so one asshole customer can't bring the whole business crawling to its knees. They want no-stick teflon quarantine isolation from each other. better than quarantine, they want everyone stuck in their own reality with no way to guess that they're stuck in a virtual reality.

multiplexing = slicing and sharing
secure multiplexing = teflon nostick compartmentalized quarantined isolated slicing and sharing

If you're a bank, you give out gold. but you want to give out virtual gold tokens that function just like actual gold. and you want to give out as much as people will buy without collapsing your business. You don't want to give out REAL gold because most of it's just going to sit in people's homes unused rather than being consumed in jewelry and electronics. And if people are only going to trade them then they only need to be pseudo-real enough for the purposes of trading. The virtual gold tokens need to look and feel real when they're being tested by a buyer, and at no other time, which is money.

Any questions? Or is this too primitive?

Joe B: no, this is perfect

Well, the exokernel folk tried to pull the same stunt as gold => money but with CPU+memory or in general 'comp hardware'. the only problem is that nobody pretends that money ACTUALLY IS gold. nobody tries to melt money down to make jewelry. nobody tries to electroplate anything with it.  so what these guys were doing is ... debasing.

They were debasing CPU+memory+hardware and saying "it's just as good as the real thing!!" and the problem with that is inevitably they'd run into someone trying to treat it EXACTLY like the real thing (ie, someone who bought into the propaganda) and then they try to use the debased gold to electroplate something ... and feel gypped because it doesn't work.

So with exokernel, if you have a really high load on the CPU, many operating systems, you come to have missing time. and the whole mockery of it being teflon and no-stick comes crashing down. Now it's not a problem if admins in the cloud-providers keep a watch on resource utilization and add more physical computers in time ... but those admins can't pretend to themselves that it's JUST AS GOOD AS real physical computers.

And if you're going to have something that's intrinsically different from physical computers, then why not do away with some of the problems of it? So the exokernel folk's attitude that their project was somehow purer and better than everything else is just a lie.

What does the Unix scheduler provide as an execution abstraction? It provides processes. C processes to be specific. GemStone provides Smalltalk processes or smalltalk images even. The C processes *ARE* images, they're just dumb as fuck images ...

So what is the exokernel lesson? The REAL lesson? At any time, at any point in the stack of abstractions, you can insert a circular loop from a node (layer) to itself, presenting a facsimile of that layer higher up. And if you understand that then the whole exokernel project is revealed as limited in scope because it was providing ONE such circular loop among the one to two dozen layers of abstraction found in a typical operating system.

Joe B: what is this layer, and how does it loop on itself? is it the physical computer, which loops by resources being added to it?

It's any layer. you can take ANY layer and make it loop in on itself. the loop forms a layer.

Say you've got a harddisk. it presents blocks. So you can partition it and now you have four hard disks which also present blocks. And if you're smart you can make those partitions flexible.

Say you've got a monitor with 1 framebuffer. well, you can partition the monitor and present multiple framebuffers. and those are now called windows. Or you can have multiple monitors present as one framebuffer.

You generally need some OTHER resource mixed in with the first one in order to fake the first resource.

gold + paper = paper money

If you could completely supplant the underlying resource, you would do away with it and it would be called a change of technology.

TCP allows how many different sockets? That all run over a single physical copper wire. The phone company uses multiplexing to provide virtual circuits instead of real circuits.

Richard: you got what I said about OSI, right? about how SOCKS is just a circular loop of a layer?
Joe B: oh yes. I got the words, not the concept. I'd have to learn the OSI model first.
Richard: SOCKS provides a sideband and extension to the layer below but it really does nothing else. Much like barebones secure multiplexing provides a sideband, although the exokernel tried to pretend the sideband didn't exist.

application layer (protocols used by applications, supposedly close to humans)
V
transport layer (virtual circuits)
V
data layer (packets)
V
link layer (0s and 1s to the next computer)
V
physical layer (physical connectors, physical cables, electrical voltages, radio frequencies)

Joe B: okay, that makes sense

In the fibersphere model, there are no packets and the virtual circuits are pretty close to real circuits so they're fused in with the link layer. Too bad we have no fibersphere because it might have been resistant to wiretapping. since you'd need to own a substantial fraction of the world's computing resources to wiretap everybody. Not even to interpret or do analysis, JUST to wiretap.

So, the OSI's model provided two additional layers to the above, and both of them were sidebands off of the application layer and the transport layer. SOCKS takes virtual circuits and provides ... virtual circuits. + some proxying and crypto. The so-called presentation layer took in application stuff and provided ... different application stuff. MIME took text and provided images, both of them being application layer.

The fact these two layers were BESIDE the application and transport layers really confused the dumbasses that made OSI, which means moralists since this was a standard, they thought since SOCKS takes in virtual circuits we'll just ignore that it provides virtual circuits, we'll focus on the other stuff it provides and call it a higher layer. And as for the presentation layer, since there's nothing closer to humans than applications, by definition, then by stupidity it follows presentation must be below applications and let's ignore the facts to the contrary.

Joe B: yeah, I stalled at trying to distinguish application from presentation

An email is an application object. the application layer provides for emails. Well, MIME took emails and provided images and that's exactly how gmail attachments work. They just hide the MIME, as they should have in the past but didn't.

Basically, those two layers are extensions of an existing layer rather than separate layers in themselves. Extensions which aren't accepted enough to be considered part of the same layer. Or weren't at the time that OSI was made. Hence the service and presentation layers belong on the same level as transport and application ... just besides them.

Joe B: so… a loop layer is one that can take in the same entities that it can provide?

It's basically a type of extension of the layer. It's aware of the other layer and the other layer isn't aware of it.

Joe B: hmmm

Joe B: is this design, or is this analysis? well it's both. it's awesome, lol.

It's the kind of high level analysis that fuels systems design, and NOT normal design. It's part of the majestic overlayer that has been until now entirely missing. This is lesson 4?

• definitions / thinking
• manipulating datasets
• injecting values

Spacetime, Energy, Bits

Most of these I ran across in just that form ... I just accumulated insights I ran across (being able to recognize them as insights, something most people are utterly incapable of) until at some point I went beyond what anyone had thought of.

1. spacetime exists, energy exists, both are mysterious
2. we see space because it actually exists and our brains decompose it that way
3. information / entropy exists, information / entropy is NOT spacetime OR energy
4. information / entropy is JUST AS fundamental as spacetime and energy, despite physicists' lack of any grasp of this
5. energy CARRIES information / entropy
6. the universe is MATH, the only thing that distinguishes pure math from physics is "physicality" which is probably this mysterious arbitrary substance energy cause there sure as fuck are bits and dimensions in math
7. math + time = computation
8. the holographic principle says that any N-dimensional non-local theory is equivalent to an N+1 dimensional local theory
9. time is just the dimension along which information / entropy is conserved
10. information vs entropy are higher order related to values / loops and at lower order there is simply bits

Local means that bits can only interact with nearby bits. Non-local means that ANY bit can interact instantly with EVERY other bit in the whole universe.

So time is just local space + weird interaction with information. Local space is just a way we have of organizing information as "nearby" other information by moving up one dimension above what actually exists (so if 1D your brain moves up to 2D, if 3D your brain moves up to 4D). And non-local space seems very weird but also exceedingly abstract, however it's also exceedingly simple: it's the bulk effects of information. And of course Information is just bits
your mind likes. And energy is just ... your perception of math from the inside of math, the quality of existing in THIS branch of math - in logic it's the predicate "exists".

It's all incredibly simple if you understand each of those individual concepts, these are just their interrelations. What's missing is the meanings of life, mind (derived: intelligence, soul), entropy, chaos, order, energy, representation and how these interrelate. But to clearly explain those you need to understand values and loops, and those I haven't cracked yet.

There Are Two Kinds of People

Those who say there are two kinds of people and those who don't. The former are all sociopaths.

Then there's the people who say "we all". It doesn't matter whether it's "we're all in this together", or "we're all the same" or "we're all different". Retards, every single last one of them.

And then there's people who say "there are 197 different kinds of people as of last count" or "there are 21 different kinds of people in the Personality Description Language".

And those are the people who say it not because it's in some book or some fellow retard told them so, but because it's the truth. Which means, they're the people you will never trust.

Everyone is much more interested in what the sociopaths have to say.

Physics: Think Like A Narcissist

In Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, the software developers put in a Time God who controls the world's timeline. In the previous games of the Elder Scrolls series, various events happen in different ways since the gamers control the outcome.

But aha! None of that ever matters because the software developer decided to merge all those divergent timelines back together. So in-game, there is a god, the Time God, who took all the divergent timelines of previous in-game historical events and brought them back together.

The software developer is the god that decided how things really happened inside the game and made it so the actions of players never really mattered. And this is now official history and an official Theory of Time inside the game. And this is how I'm sure narcissists view the world because it's got that insane personalistic feel to it.

And because narcissists worship gods, and the time god in that game series is the king of the gods (a Narcissist slot) and because Time Gods is what the Tibetan Buddhists worship, and the Tibetan Buddhists are fucking sociopaths. So the evidence is pretty conclusive.

As well, Presentism is sociopathic. Only the Present matters, neither the past nor the future even exist. And others' perspectives on time or reality don't matter. As well, this worldview stinks of "how the cosmos was created" which is a Narcissist worldview and obsession. And is opposed to "what is the cosmos".

But Elder Scrolls isn't what I wanted to talk about. I wanted to talk about Copenhagen. In Copenhagen, physicists (empiricists every single one of them) make experiments and then they see the result of these experiments with their own eyes. And because they see the results with their own eyes, that makes them real.

Narcissists trust only what they can see with their own eyes because nobody else is real. Except of course other narcissists who can't be trusted, and psychopaths (goes double), and Nazis (same deal). The world doesn't just exist due to the evidence of their own eyes, it can only exist thanks to themselves. Thanks to their miraculous power of perceiving the world.

So then these good toadying Narcissists who've made all these experiments ask themselves how the cosmos was made. And it's fucking obvious! The cosmos was made through the miraculous power of perceiving the cosmos. Physicists create reality by observing "wavefunction collapse" so by the same token God creates the cosmos by observing the cosmos!!

It's so fucking obvious! God is just. like. them. He's just another narcissist ... exactly like everyone else. And the whole universe and the whole entire cosmos works on the principles that narcissists understand the world by!! Again, so fucking obvious. The evidence is literally as clear as your own eyes! Everyone who cares (only) about what they can see with their own personal eyes can see it's the only option!!

Niels Bohr, the great "father" of Copenhagen, was a sociopath. He isn't the first and won't be the last sociopath doing physics. And isn't it awesome how inclusive physics is that sociopaths can freely work in it and get acclaim and renown and even dictate what is and isn't physics for a whole fucking century?!

Is it any surprise then that Creationism (Big Bang) was heralded as "enlightenment"? Too bad that the truth about the universe (eternal chaotic inflation) doesn't fit so neatly the preconceptions of any idiotic retarded personality type. It literally fits the preconceptions of one of the smartest (and rarest) personality types.