Enjoyed this. Was it a rant, or a full stream of consciousness as written? I felt like I was there with you, in your mind. Good stuff, as usual. There are other substackers who write and snag me with the headline or first paragraph, and who I decide to ignore because it’s always regurgitation or meaningless highlights of other stuff I know already.
You’re different. I see you come at things in from a different angle, but arrive where I am too. I appreciate that and what you write, and therefore YOU very much.
I think your suggestion about a way to check for truth and transparency is good, for twitter and perhaps other applications. I’d love LOVE something like that on “edicts” from the US Govt. Whether it be presidential who-haa’s or bills up for a vote. And then of course for all news stories. But I wonder if it can also be manipulated?
Overall, the idea of a ‘model’ for us on ‘team reality’ (or obv multiple models?).... that is something that I hear a bunch, and even just yesterday, from the Darkhorse Podcast with Brett Weinstein and Heather Heying. Do you know of them? I believe your system would find them acting in exactly the way you described.
And have you heard of Catherine Austin Fitts, or Whitney Webb? Those two are fabulous truth tellers and need to be rewarded!! Your system would likely hold them up as highly valuable, yes?
More of a rant than was probably productive. My primary intellectual motivation was just to share my specific definition of a lie. Then speak to the importance of removing liars. And also to be funny at a few points to illustrate how genuine sky difficult it is to speak truth and how much we all just kinda fill in because of things we’ve heard.
I know of Whitney Webb and Brent Weinstein but am not deeply familiar with their work. I went through a period working on the house before my son got here where I just binged podcasts all day while painting, flooring, etc and they were guests on a couple if I recall.
Holy cow I lost my train of thought. Am at a reality where my illness is manifesting weird shit. The body is showing symptoms that do not align with the scant scientific and medical data. Easy bloodwork comes back clear, though a simple look at my body show things are very wrong.
Point trying to make, and will delete this comment after you’ve digested this: I am in deep uncharted space with very smart experienced doctors who are understandably conservative in my treatment. If I go into crisis (paralysis, intubation) then things change.
So, I get to make my reality to the point my body allows. My treatment is guided by how I feel. I get to tell one doctor your ideas aren’t going to work, so no to that autoimmune medication. I’m going with this other doctor’s idea for treating local site.
Same goes for pain. The palliative doctor takes an hour to carefully probe and talk. Then the doctor writes refills for highly controlled medications.
When society hits unprecedented pressures, interesting things happen. I remain steadfastly hopeful for humanity. The hole in the ozone is healing. There is always hope to be found.
When 60 minutes airs the likes of Ehrlich and the Duke of Sussex, it’s pretty damn clear everyone involved has less credibility than three raccoons raiding a bird feeder.
Both dingles are trying to sell their books. For Ehrlich a hard numbers person, perhaps stats or actuary, could review and grade his garbage appropriately. A peer review by a scientist not in his orbit. That’d be lovely. Would put money on this to be done. though bunch of folks on substack are vigorously going through Ehrlich’s claims. heh.
I know this is so trite but I really am sorry to hear you feel badly and I hope they can do something for you soon. Expertise is such a finicky thing and it seems like it can only exist in a narrow band of activities. Biology is so complex it’s almost miraculous that anyone can make a prediction that sticks. I hope that eventually some kind of crazy Panamanian mesenchymal stem cell stuff finds it way to you and actually works.
Truth is a strange creature. Facts appear to have edged closer to statistics. So much tortured language is out there! I endeavor to stop throat clearing.
I will never forget the immediate changes in room temperature when I spoke too truthfully and broke the politeness script. Everyone is off kilter until someone pumps extra fuel on the fire and conversations restart. Typically I’d find a dog to massage a mindless kitchen task at large social gatherings to avoid this. Unfortunately, my version of exposure therapy required socialization. Thankfully my teensy stature lets me get away with shit in a similar way that your size allows.
There is a kabuki to many interactions, especially news and media interviews. I find it incredibly dull and frustrating.
Bloomberg hosts intelligence squared debates that are genuinely interesting. It’s free on streaming.
Love intelligence squared! My only problem is that outcomes and face checks disappear. Winning won’t change the social view except in very slow non rigorous ways.
To this day I still mostly just listen to people at in person gatherings. If I radically disagree with someone I’ll mostly ask them questions to understand their worldview. The only thing that makes my blood boil is when people are okay with hurting kids, but that has almost never happened to me in real life and while it has happened a couple times in public settings never a social setting.
Enjoyed this. Was it a rant, or a full stream of consciousness as written? I felt like I was there with you, in your mind. Good stuff, as usual. There are other substackers who write and snag me with the headline or first paragraph, and who I decide to ignore because it’s always regurgitation or meaningless highlights of other stuff I know already.
You’re different. I see you come at things in from a different angle, but arrive where I am too. I appreciate that and what you write, and therefore YOU very much.
I think your suggestion about a way to check for truth and transparency is good, for twitter and perhaps other applications. I’d love LOVE something like that on “edicts” from the US Govt. Whether it be presidential who-haa’s or bills up for a vote. And then of course for all news stories. But I wonder if it can also be manipulated?
Overall, the idea of a ‘model’ for us on ‘team reality’ (or obv multiple models?).... that is something that I hear a bunch, and even just yesterday, from the Darkhorse Podcast with Brett Weinstein and Heather Heying. Do you know of them? I believe your system would find them acting in exactly the way you described.
And have you heard of Catherine Austin Fitts, or Whitney Webb? Those two are fabulous truth tellers and need to be rewarded!! Your system would likely hold them up as highly valuable, yes?
More of a rant than was probably productive. My primary intellectual motivation was just to share my specific definition of a lie. Then speak to the importance of removing liars. And also to be funny at a few points to illustrate how genuine sky difficult it is to speak truth and how much we all just kinda fill in because of things we’ve heard.
I know of Whitney Webb and Brent Weinstein but am not deeply familiar with their work. I went through a period working on the house before my son got here where I just binged podcasts all day while painting, flooring, etc and they were guests on a couple if I recall.
Happy to be on team reality.
Holy cow I lost my train of thought. Am at a reality where my illness is manifesting weird shit. The body is showing symptoms that do not align with the scant scientific and medical data. Easy bloodwork comes back clear, though a simple look at my body show things are very wrong.
Point trying to make, and will delete this comment after you’ve digested this: I am in deep uncharted space with very smart experienced doctors who are understandably conservative in my treatment. If I go into crisis (paralysis, intubation) then things change.
So, I get to make my reality to the point my body allows. My treatment is guided by how I feel. I get to tell one doctor your ideas aren’t going to work, so no to that autoimmune medication. I’m going with this other doctor’s idea for treating local site.
Same goes for pain. The palliative doctor takes an hour to carefully probe and talk. Then the doctor writes refills for highly controlled medications.
When society hits unprecedented pressures, interesting things happen. I remain steadfastly hopeful for humanity. The hole in the ozone is healing. There is always hope to be found.
When 60 minutes airs the likes of Ehrlich and the Duke of Sussex, it’s pretty damn clear everyone involved has less credibility than three raccoons raiding a bird feeder.
Both dingles are trying to sell their books. For Ehrlich a hard numbers person, perhaps stats or actuary, could review and grade his garbage appropriately. A peer review by a scientist not in his orbit. That’d be lovely. Would put money on this to be done. though bunch of folks on substack are vigorously going through Ehrlich’s claims. heh.
I know this is so trite but I really am sorry to hear you feel badly and I hope they can do something for you soon. Expertise is such a finicky thing and it seems like it can only exist in a narrow band of activities. Biology is so complex it’s almost miraculous that anyone can make a prediction that sticks. I hope that eventually some kind of crazy Panamanian mesenchymal stem cell stuff finds it way to you and actually works.
Truth is a strange creature. Facts appear to have edged closer to statistics. So much tortured language is out there! I endeavor to stop throat clearing.
I will never forget the immediate changes in room temperature when I spoke too truthfully and broke the politeness script. Everyone is off kilter until someone pumps extra fuel on the fire and conversations restart. Typically I’d find a dog to massage a mindless kitchen task at large social gatherings to avoid this. Unfortunately, my version of exposure therapy required socialization. Thankfully my teensy stature lets me get away with shit in a similar way that your size allows.
There is a kabuki to many interactions, especially news and media interviews. I find it incredibly dull and frustrating.
Bloomberg hosts intelligence squared debates that are genuinely interesting. It’s free on streaming.
Love intelligence squared! My only problem is that outcomes and face checks disappear. Winning won’t change the social view except in very slow non rigorous ways.
To this day I still mostly just listen to people at in person gatherings. If I radically disagree with someone I’ll mostly ask them questions to understand their worldview. The only thing that makes my blood boil is when people are okay with hurting kids, but that has almost never happened to me in real life and while it has happened a couple times in public settings never a social setting.