Short Reason Why School Can't Teach

 If school had conferred information, I wouldn't have minded it at all. I don't know nearly as much botany and geology as I would like.

 A school that's a resource would have been a good. Profitable. A totally intolerable outcome for the devils that call themselves the government. 

 In addition to being anti-sadistic, school without pain would have no chance of destroying the intellectual organs it is attempting to amputate. Can't teach obedience to the whip without a whip.

 Insofar as school manages to educate, it is counter the interests of schoolmasters. Anyone who doesn't hate knowledge would slip through the cracks. Ideally students would be entirely innumerate and illiterate regardless of how hard they worked, but schools haven't figured out how to not even pretend to teach reading and writing. They content themselves with trying to make it as painful as possible so as to build a habit of aversion. 

 

 Put another way, truth is holy. 

 Schools are intentionally profane, and constantly try to "purify" themselves by removing all truth. 

 Their anti-truth lore is deep and sophisticated. Always finding new ways to be more disappointing to parents without risking the parents doing anything stupid like becoming opposed to the torture and maiming of their own children. 

 Since I like learning more than anything, it was unfairly obvious to me that school was a barrier to learning. Learning-prevention. The propaganda had no chance with me. The only reason I did not condemn it day 1 was that I thought they were merely (astoundingly) incompetent. Good natured...or naive, as expected of those with single-digit ages.
 It's okay. I learned better. At length...but I learned.

Virtue and Herd Survival

 The herd will lose its countries, its cultures, its race, all personal identities, and anything resembling history. It will, however, survive genetically in some sense. Enough herd members will blend into the new favelas that the needle will budge a few notches.

 And that's the point of herd behaviour. Survival...in some sense.
 Indeed being so deeply camouflaged they can't recognize themselves is perhaps a point of pride. If they can't pick themselves out of a crowd, how can the predator single them out? If historians claim you no longer exist, then nobody can come after you for the slights of your previous shepherd. Convenient. 

 When rome fell, 90% of the city's population vanished somewhere. That means 10% was still there. Score!
 By the way, recent studies found late rome was only ~4% made of the original latins, meaning 0.4% of the original population was still around in any sense. That's not zero. It's plenty, if you're a member of a herd of prey species. "Mustard seed." Sure the predation was really bad [[this time around]], but that's exactly why it was so important to get so many herd members. History repeats because it's working as intended.

 A certain amount of virtue is required to survive the coming slow-motion turmoil due to, you know, your own virtues, and not due to the virtue of the cockroach. There are several negligible-risk Exit pathways. Strategy works because security is affordable. However, finding and using these pathways is nontrivial. 

 In particular, you do in fact have to be a rightist. No american is so much as centrist; every single last one is unquestionably a leftist. A herd-mortal would genuinely rather die than become a pack-mortal. It is not enough that they will cheerfully embrace their statistical destruction. They will violently oppose anyone who suggests they build enough virtue to survive due to their own actions rather than due to dumb luck. That's why they're not merely prey, they are prey moralists. They sometimes like to try to use predator rhetoric to express this. "We will crush you! (Beneath our hooves, in a stampede.)" It's even sort-of true: if the shepherd drives the sheep aggressively enough, the predator can only flee. If enough predators existed to overwhelm the stampede, the predators would quickly starve, stampede or no stampede. Although subsequently the herd is too exhausted to flee the wolf's jaws...

 Yet, precisely because the herd has to inveigh so hard against predator rhetoric demonstrates they see some way they could discard their sheep nature. Although unlikely, it is possible to rise above the americanism soup. The moralist herd has to tell you nontrivial means impossible precisely because it's not impossible, even for the prey.

Mary Poppins is Ritually Unclean

 Julie Andrews is some kind of pure-blooded devil. 

 I don't know if the story itself is inherently unclean, which attracted a devil to star in the film, or it became desecrated because they cast a devil as the star. 

 Either way, avoid. Pollution. Conscientiously avoid. The correct attitude is to consider it a thing not of you nor with you. If someone tries to force you to watch Mary Poppins, they're giving you permission to kill them. Karmically permitted.

Bloodline Effects of Government Secrecy

 The commoners will avidly copy what they see of the [[elite]] family style, and the [[elite]] will show the commoners what they're supposed to be doing, not what they're actually doing.

 You're supposed to keep all your secrets from your wife. Meaning she's not really involved in your life. Optimistically she can be considered a courtesan. Explicitly barred from consultation on anything important. Sandwich lady. Since you work for the government, you're overpaid, so she probably nags you to hire a cook and nanny, and she won't even spend time with or on the kids. No sandwiches either. She exists purely to vent lusts upon...and she's probably not amazing at that, so the government agent has to look elsewhere even for this task. 

 You see how hideous government wives are, and you realize God is Just.

 You really do have to keep all your secrets from your children. What if they grow up to be blabbermouths? Have to wait until they're old enough to get clearances themselves. You can't talk to them about your work, and you certainly can't raise them to follow in your footsteps. Send them off with the nanny, because pedagogues (slaves) are obviously the best role models for your little darlings. As with your wife, you can't talk to them about anything of importance. Perhaps you can involve yourself a little in the trivialities of childhood. Naive, unrealistic toys. When work* *(real life**) **(the cult) permits.

  Every government wife is a functionally a beard for some kind of perversion or another. Any issue - which may or may not be yours, and really, who cares - is likewise nothing but knickknacks. 

 If they accidentally reveal any government secrets, it will be naturally and accurately traced back to you. Even if you do read them in, they will have to pretend you didn't. In other words, they will have to pretend to be trivial accessories adopted purely for public optics. 

 Further: any sexual shenanigans by the genuinely powerful could be used for blackmail (because they're kept secret) thus genuine national security risks, meaning classified at above top secret.
 (Instead of, you know, prosecuted or in any way deterred or prevented. What's even the point of black government power if you can't live out your most degenerate fantasies?)
 It's illegal for you to even know them, should one of the secret-keepers let anything slip. In other words Epstein's client list is at the library of congress. Everyone who matters can read it in plain text, probably with dates and in some cases with prices. Prosecuting anyone on it is more illegal than not prosecuting it, because it would mean publicizing classified information.
 Plus, you know, the prosecutors are all serial rapists and/or sex traffickers as well. It's not only not gauche, it's practically a requirement for seeking office. Nobody is going to pull on that thread.

 

 Unless you wife is also a minister (feminism), it means your wife and kids are not part of the cult. "All those other people are fools [including your own blood]." They're outsiders. Functionally, they aren't even human. Beastiality. "You give it up and just stop listening." "In effect, you will have to manipulate her." "what impression you want her to believe and what impression you want her to go away with." I.e. narcissist image managing. Remember, brains can't compartmentalize. If you start doing one narcissistic thing, without extreme discipline, you will end up developing the whole disorder. And narcissism is transmissible, especially to children.
 Which makes sense, since [cult] is the correct term for a cluster-B society. All cult members have personality disorders, and maintaining good standing in any cult means developing a personality disorder.

 For emphasis: the commoners are copying this family style on purpose. The commoners think government power is achieved by repeating rituals rather than through strategic assaults. "If I do exactly what they do, I will get exactly what they got!" If you had done exactly what they did, you would have achieved power, yes. Conditions have changed. Consolidating power, securing their shit, means closing the security hole they used to get in.
 Assuming you can see what they're doing, which you can't. You think Democracy means voting, lol. What you get by repeating the public facade of the rituals is narcissism. 

 Commoners love sending their kids to narcissism school because they want their kids to grow up to be narcissists like the celebrities they worship. "The neighbours and I are concerned. You're not abusing and demeaning your children the way big daddy goddy government does." "Teaching your scions useful skills? We don't do that around these here parts."  

 Extended family? Is...is that even a real thing? Either grandpa doesn't have clearances and can only prepare junior for being totally unlike daddy, or he also had clearances and the only thing of substance he can say is, "You'll understand when you're older, kid." 

 

  I assume some families do read their kids in or are simply too incompetent to keep it secret. Why is hunter.b so hunter? Because, "If only you know how fucked shit really is." Hunter concerns himself primarily with hookers and blow to drown out the knowledge of how stuff works, and to drown out the knowledge of what would happen to him if he told, say, assange. It's genuinely the most productive thing he can think to do, and it's hard to condemn that assessment. Every twitter personality would do the same if they weren't ignorant country bumpkins. 

  Come to think, the nature of the secrets is typically family-unfriendly, which is another major barrier to being a real person at home. "Yes honey, [[elites]] are primarily kept coherent by a system of sexual blackmail. For example, this one guy was caught..."

 The families that read their kids in on purpose are the ones you never hear about in the news. Not musks, not gates, not clintons, not sulzberger. The reading families are the ones who can silence anyone who hears a secret rather than anyone who tells one...and certainly without "whistleblower totally-random-but-convenient death" articles appearing anywhere.
 It is likely that their blood relations are themselves above top secret, though perhaps they don't go that far, due to streisanding. They are definitely secret in one way or another.

 P.S. Hollywood trying to slurp up all the 9s and 10s, because government agents kept looking at the hags they're married to and dying of jealousy. "I have to deal with this and some pleb gets to romance that? Fuck that noise!"
 It's guaranteed not to work, but admittedly I don't know what exactly goes wrong. For one, everyone in hollywood is plain at best...

dumb twitterism is still dumb

 If body cams were bad for the Regime the policy wouldn't be allowed. There's so many reasons it's left as an exercise for the reader - there's no way you can't find at least one. If, you know, you try looking.
 This is one of the dumb short-sighted shock troopers being gauche and unsophisticated. He has no power, does not matter, and doesn't indicate anything except the genetic quality of the refuse Egalitarianism prefers to employ. 

 "a guy who noticed that body cams undermined the leftist narrative about cops so he searches for a way to oppose them without saying that it's because they destroy the left's narrative"
 https://twitter.com/CovfefeAnon/status/1811744461027709165

 

 You know, I realized: it's pretty dumb to castigate a Communist for leftism-maxxing. It's like, "Yes? I am indeed as leftist as I can manage to be? What were you expecting?" 
 So surprising. Declared enemy of truth and prosperity and glory is attacking glory and prosperity and truth. "I can't believe that leftist is so leftist. How leftist of him. What a leftist."

 

 "It is absolutely necessary to hack this"
https://twitter.com/CovfefeAnon/status/1811751300792545600 

 "It's absolutely necessary to out-lie Satan." 

 Yeah nobody has thought of that before. Same way nobody has thought of writing a book before. 

 Real right-wing activism has never been tried. 

 But wait, it gets better: this alleged anti-egalitarian is laser-focused on trying to shift the herd. "Mobs are okay, we just need [[[right-wing]]] mobs." Divine right of mob goes uncontested. 

 Say Communist things, win Communist prizes. I have to assume Communism is the point, and insofar as it appears to be criticism, it's projection. 

 In america, there are no enemies to the left. But it's okay, there's no existences to the right. Everyone can be friends, I guess. There's two kinds of leftists: those who lie about their ideals and motives (winners) and those who lie about being leftist at all (less winners).

Bottom Line on Kingship

 The pay of a traditional king is below the cost of production.
 Consequently it is impossible to hire a good king. 

 You can hire a mad or stupid king, who can't do basic accounting.
 You can hire a corrupt king, who pretends to be a king but does something else, something personally profitable. 

 Crowns don't pay kingly wages, and consequently cannot attract persons of kingly worth.

 In large part this is due to traditional kingship being a form of black government.
 In a startling irony, crime really doesn't pay. Traditional kingship is a crime, and thus cannot and does not pay.
 Evil is stupid. You can only get stupid kings, as anyone non-stupid will be non-evil and will consequently ensure their non-king status.
 You could say it's because there's a ton of idiots who want to be king, producing a large supply and thus a low price. However, there is only a large demand for the job of black parasite king. Very high demand for eating without working. A responsible white kingship would have very low demand indeed. 

 E.g. assassination risk. When kings are real they very rarely rule for longer than ten years, and it's not because they retire peacefully. You can't quit the mafia (except Sulla). The Kaisar all the [[rightists]] admire so much ruled for less than a year, which makes sense given his especially parasitic blackness. Crime doesn't pay: by trying to avoid the law, Kaisar got himself extrajudicially executed. Whoops.
 Does kingdom pay price in the assassination risk? It does not. Nobody who is aware of the assassination issue, and simultaneously vaguely sane, would ever agree to be king.

Ironically Arson Reduces Wildfires

 Forests in north america burn. It's simply part of the biome. 

 When an arsonist successfully sets a fire, one of two things happen. The forest was going to burn anyway, and they simply moved up the timeline - functionally, they accomplish nothing. The forest wasn't quite ready to burn naturally yet, but the arsonist clears up the undergrowth, preventing an intense crown fire. 

 Haha, lol. All these guys trying to mortally immanentize the supermortal climate change eschaton, and failing as badly as it is possible to fail. And going to jail occasionally.

 ProTip: if you don't like getting flooded, don't build your house on the flood plain. Maybe consider farms, kek?

 ProTip: if you don't like getting your house burnt, don't build it in a firestorm forest, rofl. I hear trees can be used for lumber...or hunting grounds...

Simulation Theory is Contemptible Theology

 Simulation theory is the idea that all-powerful beings with root access to our universe live in a plane totally superior to our own. They can alter our reality to produce coincidences that happen to have meaning in our limited mortal socially-rooted perceptions. In other words, the theory that the ancients were exactly right about the structure of the cosmos. 

 Except the ancients were wrong because these super-astral beings aren't divine, they're, uh, non-divine. Because reasons. Totally different.

 There's no such thing as the sacred, see, because these transcendental superhumans can do literally everything a sacred being can do, point for point for point, without being sacred.

 The point of simulation theory is to believe in zeus without having to respect zeus as being superior.

 The point of simulation theory is that when you die, god uses ctrl-x on your code and ctrl-vs you somewhere else if he feels like it, except it's not god so you don't have to worship him. That just being transcendent doesn't mean you're, like, transcendent.

 "Atheism is wrong about absolutely everything without exception, with the exception that I get to go on being an atheist." 

 Simulation theory is the theory that neener neener we're better than you, because I said so. But we use long latin-rooted words to say so. Which means we're adults and not tiny brats.

 Utterly contemptible. Very democratic.

Herd and Pack, Replacing Nietzsche

 Rather than Nietzsche's master and slave morality, the true categories are hunter and prey morality.

 Let's first talk about plants. Why doesn't every plant have huge thorns? Why isn't every plant a cactus? Don't they need to worry about being eaten?

 Well, no. No they don't. You see the one plant being eaten. Probably because that's where the motion is - it attracts your attention. You don't see the hundreds or thousands of plants silently not being eaten.
 Plants are a bit poisonous, to avoid being actively inviting, but beyond that plants do not die of predation often enough for it to be an issue. Half the time being eaten doesn't even kill the plant. (Plants mainly worry about other plants - the sun affords germination to too many plants.)

 This means herbivores see abundant food. There's (almost) never too many herbivores for the available herbs. Basically, food is free. At worst, food is never the bottleneck.

 A brief diversion to hunters. For a hunter pack, each new member is a new mouth to feed. It's a guaranteed cost, and only a dubious benefit.

 To a prey herd, each new member is someone the wolves and crocodiles can eat instead of you. They only slightly compete for your food. They mainly compete for disasters. Herds form because the other prey sees the same tradeoff and agrees to make it. 

  The Democrat is a kind of prey. They yearn to be part of the largest herd, and the only contribution they offer is their mere presence. They offer to take the chance of being eaten to lessen their co-Democrats chance of being eaten. All life is sacred. A sacred thing to put between me and the predator.
 (Or so they believe. Fixed action patterns. It doesn't actually work like that, but they can't see the Real world, they can only think using blood memories.)

 

 Unlike plants, meaty prey can flee. It can kick or has horns.
 (Dinosaurs were superior. Ankylosaurus and triceratops. Rhinos, do better.) 

 Most hunts fail. Only unlucky prey fall to natural hunters, and even human hunters regularly fail to find anything to kill. 

 Because predators are so good at fighting, they can fight one another, they can defend territories. Strategic paradox: because they can defend land, they have to make do with whatever prey is found within. 

 Predators do not see abundant food. Prey does have to worry about the chance they'll be eaten.** You worry about the plant being eaten because you can't have blood memory of being a plant, and it instead reminds you of your blood memory of being mammal prey.*
 *(Occasionally lizard prey - those blood memories are faint, but they do exist.)

 **(One does wonder if this means herbivores are inefficient and carnivores are efficient.)

 Prey is not free. Predators have to work and strive.
 Most predators hunt alone, because maintaining a pack simply isn't worth the hassle. If someone is a better hunter than you, why would they carry you? If you're a better hunter than them, won't you get more meat on average if you only have to share it with yourself? In exchange for these dubious offers, there's social overhead and the risk of betrayal. Consequently pack hunters are rare.

 Humans are pack hunters.

 Even once the benefits of the pack exceed the costs, pack members must pull their weight. More importantly, the pack has a maximum size. The prey can only breed so fast, and consequently the territory can only support so many.
 Rather than the herd, trying to maximize size, the pack tries to minimize size. Get away with as few members as possible, so that each can eat as abundantly as possible. This is done via elitism. Excellence. Gatekeeping and exclusion. Not only is life not sacred, life is actively a vice. Quality quality quality => gotta pay for your original sin: being born.

 The above are are the defining features of herd and pack. 

 To a herd, bad things just happen; there's nothing they can do about it. You could make the herd even bigger so it's less likely to happen to you, but you already tried that.

 To a pack, the bad things are things the pack itself does. If it's you doing them, you can stop doing them. If it's not you, you can expel the problem from the pack. Humans can not accept the problem in the first place.

 There's no point to being friends with prey. You don't need their help. They broadly don't compete for food but they can still eat the choice stuff before you do - physically putting their mouth on the stuff you want to eat.. Explicitly the point of a herd is to betray your fellows - when push comes to shove, you shove your [[friend]] into the crocodile's mouth before your [[friend]] can shove you in there. A [dog eat dog] world is in fact a ram push sheep world.

 Pack hunters not only can be friends, but must be. The more friendly and bound together, the better. It's good to have buy-in, to remind the pack members not to abandon the pack during moments of disruption. Humans don't need buy-in anymore - not the non-herd types, anyway - because they can cognitively grasp the fact that short-term isn't long-term.
 Friendship is magic? Friendship is literally for killing. The purpose of friendship is to win wars. (No wonder women and gays can't be friends.)

 More babies more better is unquestionably herd ideology. The r-strategy.

 Carefully nurturing the best and killing the runts is predator ideology. The K-strategy. 

 Lol @ everyone who worries about birth rates. Declining rates are good. Lol @ nationalism or any race-based thinking. A [race] isn't a pack, junior. I mean, if you want to be prey...well, no son of mine is going to grow up to be prey. Trust me on this.
 Though the pack is hardly going to object to the herd expanding itself. If the herd contracts, well, it means I need to take the territory of the next pack over.
 Herd thought: even if there are runts, the predators will take care of it. Dysgenics is impossible. We can [[support]] them as much as they want. Genetic quality is automatic and free, like manna from heaven.

 

 Prey, by focusing on getting the largest herd, lowers the incentive to, you know, resist predation. It's about getting the problem down to tolerable so it can be perpetuated. Although individual prey avoid getting eating, as a species prey actively cooperates with predators, attempting to ensure there's always enough prey to eat. 

 Herbivory and foraging are extensive. Predation and hunting are intensive. Farming is intensive. 

 The mass market is the herd market. Appeals to prey.

 

 The most ironic part of all: neither adult predators nor adult prey die except to obscene bad luck. Healthy specimens neither get caught nor fail to catch. It's the juveniles who get caught or can't conquer a territory. Basically at all times all the kids are dying. The adults hang around tho, creating more kids, until an adult gets old or has an accident, opening a space for a former kid.
 Security is affordable even for (adult) animals. 

 What you absolutely can't do is carefully nurture and cultivate individual children while banning infanticide for mutants. Preypack. Predatorherd. Just don't.

 I shouldn't say humans are pack hunters. It's clear there's two major classes of human - the predator human, and the prey human.
 My issue with Caino masochiens can be boiled down to way it seems that predator humans (Sith?) are always pretending to be prey humans (Jedi?) The wolf, tiger, and lion don't pretend to be the gazelle. The predator human is always a wolf in sheep's clothing. It is dishonourable, pathetic, ugly, and it is to the eternal shame of the prey human that this predation scheme even vaguely works. A black government is a parasite, not a predator, and it makes the host sick and weak, ultimately replacing a slavering reaction with a [kill it with fire] reaction.

 

 Nietzsche's master morality is in fact a kind of prey morality, whoops. Yes it's a highly deviant, adulterated version, but those adulterations will get gradually filtered out were you to intentionally attempt it.

Engineers vs. Engineers

 There's the guys who design chip fabs.

 Then there's the deep blue-collar guys who are nothing but walking search functions for textbooks. 

 Both called 'engineers' natch. Their degrees don't even look that different in distribution. Some of the best chip fab designers will be oklahoma state grads or whatever.

Marsupials are Gross, not Cute

 I got psyopped by the cute pouch meme. 

 Pouches are fucking disgusting. 

 What's you're supposed to think of is a nice cotton band lightly sewn onto the front of a kangaroo. Handy built-in fanny pack.

 Except even unliving jean pockets get gross sufficiently quickly. You can't take a pouch off and throw it through a washing machine real quick.

 Instead, imagine what your armpit would be like if you never raised your arm and couldn't take showers.

 "Kangaroo pouches are sticky to support their young joey" 

 Marsupials need long tongues to "clean" the pouch. Mmm, unshowered armpit with stale spit.

 Marsupials are in fact a type of mammal. The teats are inside the pouch. Imagine your non-articulated armpit with stale milk.

 Imagine an armpit with stale milk that you've given birth into and you never shower. 

 

 I can go on, but you get the idea. It's amazing they don't all immediately die of some fungal infection. Very impressive. And disgusting.

On Government Secrets

 Spoiler: modern government is a cult. 

 Real spoiler: the secrets are all lawbreaking, lel. 

 "I’ll just say that much foreign policy criticism of this administration is met internally by sneers and claims of “you don’t know what you’re talking about.”"
https://twitter.com/alexbward/status/1807606650288615535

 "In the meantime it will have become very hard for you to learn from anybody who doesn’t have these clearances." "‘What would this man be telling me if he knew what I know?'"

 The point of all these security clearances is precisely to foment this isolating attitude. To ensure you only accept instruction from your cult leader. Who you're not supposed to know the name or face of, lol, you don't have the clearance for that. 

 Don't have a cult of personality, how gauche. Have a mystery cult, lol. "whole libraries of hidden information"

 

 I've seen the ellsberg quote a couple times, but I obviously wasn't paying attention. Evil is stupid, and consequently it's incredibly revealing. So secret, lmao. "since you’ll have to lie carefully to him about what you know. In effect, you will have to manipulate him." Note that this is a) spoken to someone without the clearances and b) appears in publications, meant for folk without any clearances at all. It's supposed to be misleading and manipulative. We'll see what it in fact is.

 

 "you’re about to receive a whole slew of special clearances, maybe fifteen or twenty of them, that are higher than top secret."

 This is obviously complexity for the sake of social status. Complexity for the sake of looking sophisticated.
 Nobody needs this many levels of secrets. You can't even reasonably keep track of them; wait which precise level of secret was this secret? Can I tell this person, quick show me your sheet of clearances...because it's not as if they fit on a card...thus revealing that I know things I'm trying to keep secret...
 Which is exactly why you get two dozen at once. They have to be bundled or lumped. It's not even real complexity, it's the appearance of complexity. 

 We're about to find out that ellsberg takes it for granted that folks with clearances are basically incompetent morons, and kissinger doesn't laugh, he enters a state of deep respectful reflection. 

"First, you’ll be exhilarated by some of this new information, and by having it all — so much! incredible! — suddenly available to you."

 Assuming the information is any good, that would be the sane response. A false assumption: we'll see it's journalist-tier. 

 Imagine getting the chance to try a bunch of new food. You're disappointed in the offerings of grocery stores, and you're sure the rich and powerful (the very richest!) can afford better food. Yes at first you're going to be very excited, because you forgot that Reality is a possibility.
 Then it turns out all they have is an epic junk food isle. That's Reality. Yes it's all [secret] and [expensive] junk, but it's still junk. 

 Human brains have buggy responses to new opportunities. Get caught in flights of fancy or catastrophizing instead of considering how similar situations resolved in the past. However it's not like this bug is itself a secret. Professionals are supposed to be aware of it and tamp it down. When someone can't ignore their field-relevant bugs, I deem them a non-professional. Tools, not tool-users. Cheap, cruddy tools at that.

 

 "But second, almost as fast, you will feel like a fool for having studied, written, talked about these subjects, criticized and analyzed decisions made by presidents for years without having known of the existence of all this information, which presidents and others had and you didn’t,"

 Again, assuming the information is any good.

 

 "which must have influenced their decisions in ways you couldn’t even guess."

 The whole point is that you feel like a fool for having suggested something that, in light of the new information, makes no sense. "Oh they have a secret agreement with Putin not to deploy abrams, in return for Putin not crashing a market in Syria." Huh, I guess he wasn't overlooking the abrams for no reason, whoops.

 If you couldn't guess how they made the decisions, you wouldn't realize you did anything wrong. 

 I think ellsberg is right, though: he wasn't able to guess, and neither was kissinger. 

 "you’ll be stunned that they kept that secret from you so well."

 I.e. "Bro conspiracy theories are real, rofl." Yes, most of the government is conducted secretly. Public information has no bearing on what's actually going on. Consider 9/11 as an example. Imagine there really are 20 layers of secret stories about this event, and the stuff that shows up in truther sites or even newspapers can't reference any of them.

 Come to think that might be why Assange pissed them off so much. He publicized some of this "secret" information.

 And then they couldn't feel part of the club anymore, could they? At least, not about that.
 

 I suspect this secrecy was true of Rome as well. Gibbon wrote based on public information, and certainly the results of the policies can't be secret, but the motivations behind them are well beyond the ken of the likes of him. 

 Was Constantine a christian? Eh, probably not. He merely made christian-looking moves for materialist-strategic reasons. 

 "You will feel like a fool, and that will last for about two weeks. Then, after you’ve started reading all this daily intelligence input and become used to using what amounts to whole libraries of hidden information, which is much more closely held than mere top secret data, you will forget there ever was a time when you didn’t have it, and you’ll be aware only of the fact that you have it now and most others don’t….and that all those other people are fools."

 Cult formation.

 Yes, you were fooled. This is most likely not because they're especially good at keeping secrets, but because you're a fool. Getting new clearances doesn't make you more competent, it merely increases the ways you can screw up. But anyway....

 Note the reflection. "Huh, I bet everyone in government thought I was a fool, the same way I think the outsiders are fools." Government thinks every voter is a fool. This is a sufficiently safe assumption, so by conspiracy and manipulation, they're not wrong.
 Because it's due to manipulation and conspiracy, if you are outside the government and not a fool, then they will never notice you're not a fool. Or, at best, they'll notice and be quite rationally terrified of you. "Oh shit, this guy knows more than me without any clearances. He could take down the entire government by himself if he wanted!"

 P.S. yes, you could. The scared little rat isn't wrong. However, if you're genuinely that wise, you know you don't want to. The rat can't imagine not wanting to. (My apologies to rats. They don't really deserve to be compared to government members. Probably won't stop, though.)

 

 "Over a longer period of time — not too long, but a matter of two or three years — you’ll eventually become aware of the limitations of this information. There is a great deal that it doesn’t tell you, it’s often inaccurate, and it can lead you astray just as much as the New York Times can."

 I.e. "Yeah it turns out our super top secret internal no-no information isn't any better than what you get in the newspapers."
 Turns out the government's ultra-classified documents - entirely hidden libraries of them! - are nothing more than gossip collections. 

 

 "In the meantime it will have become very hard for you to learn from anybody who doesn’t have these clearances."

 And, of course, afterwards too. 

 "Because you’ll be thinking as you listen to them: ‘What would this man be telling me if he knew what I know? Would he be giving me the same advice, or would it totally change his predictions and recommendations?’ And that mental exercise is so torturous that after a while you give it up and just stop listening."

 The reason it seems you can't get the government to listen to you is because you can't. They don't care what you have to say. You're not in the club.

 Except that mental exercise isn't torturous at all. It's an everyday thing for me, and I just sort of do it. This is because I'm not a mental midget.
 It's also because making it feel torturous is the exact point of the clearances. To get anyone who has them to stop listening to anyone who doesn't have them. Check: is the information special? We already know it's NYT-tier. Free, that is, worthless information. It's not the information that's the issue, it's a sneaky payload based on framing and presentation. They tell you so as to ensure you're aware you can't listen to anyone who hasn't listened.

 Literally a mystery cult. Not even a deviant variation, a regular-ass Egyptian mystery cult.
 Oh, but as is meet for Communist times, the secrets are bad. They suck.

 I don't have secret clearances, I have secrets that keep themselves. E.g. did you know you're already dead, this is the afterlife, and it's not the good place, it's the underworld. "What happens after you die?" *point in random direction* "That." I can tell this to basically anyone and it will remain secret.
 Heck, most talkers aren't even meaningfully verbal. Rather than, "What would they be saying if they knew what I knew?" It's, "What would they be saying if they knew what they knew?" I need to do transmutation to work out how to say what they're trying to say so I hear what they intend me to hear, never mind what they would be saying if they knew what I know.
 I have to correct their meaning because they get it wrong. Sure it's a hassle, but it's hardly [torturous].

 Non-morons can also simply ask.
 Curiosity, one of the great sins, according to black governments everywhere.
 Add in a little fluff for FUD, then ask: "How important is the Syrian market to you?" Okay you have this agreement with Putin and abrams you can't talk about, but you can build a model of his value schedule and simulate his ideas. It's extra steps, but it's not torturous.

 That is, unless you find curiosity torturous.
 Asking questions is, allegedly, a relationship of child to parent or pupil to master. As if kings didn't need to ask for information from their councilors. 

 Or, more importantly, never ask anything of outgroup. Ignore or command. Kissinger and ellsberg were only pretending to listen in the first place - Revenge is Sour. However, now they have a good excuse not to even pretend to listen. Pretending to listen anyway would, of course, be torturous.

 

 There's also the manipulation issue. I can't read them in even if I wanted to. If it's not about listening but getting a message across, well, I can't. I have to figure out what decision they would make if they could understand my secrets, then tell them something that will cause them to make that decision in light of their misunderstandings.
 My only problem with this process is that I'm too good at it. It turns out I'm not interested in the values of folk I can manipulate, it's all about maximizing advantage for me at minimum cost. 

 Btw, re: children. Often have to correct what they're trying to say, and always have to work out what they would be telling you if they were, you know, adults with knowledge instead of dumbass kids. Relevant to this issue due to fixed action patterns. Humans can't compartmentalize the like-a-child treatment away from the whole like-a-child package. Triggering one equivalent habit triggers the whole relationship. 

 Complexity for the sake of complexity is fine when you're making a toy.

 

 "You will deal with a person who doesn’t have those clearances only from the point of view of what you want him to believe and what impression you want him to go away with, since you’ll have to lie carefully to him about what you know. In effect, you will have to manipulate him."

 If it seems like gov agents and journalists and marketers (but I repeat myself) seem like they're never genuine with you, it's because they're not.
 The worst part is commoners. They seem to like this. You can see genuine ads from time to time, by mistake. "It tastes awful, but it works." They go viral, but they don't move product.
 Worse, the commoner decides being fake and gay is high-status and acts that way to his wife, children, and neighbours. "If I'm gay and fake, just like the government, I will eventually become the government." 

 Corporations do the same thing with trade secrets. Those aren't even real secrets, but they manage to make them appear secret to CEOs and so on. 

 E.g. Elon Musk believes in global warming and AI threat due to [trade secrets]. You don't have anything you can say to him, according to him, without first learning these secrets. I would guess the other twitter accounts he talks to are also read in. Excepting, of course, the information: "it’s often inaccurate, and it can lead you astray just as much as the New York Times can." I.e. it's lies.

 "The danger is, you’ll become something like a moron."

 Kek. [[Become]]. Revenge is Sour, my bros. The condition by which secret clearances can make you stupid is that you should already be a moron.

 

  "You’ll give up trying to assess what he has to say. The danger is, you’ll become something like a moron. You’ll become incapable of learning from most people in the world, no matter how much experience they may have in their particular areas that may be much greater than yours."

 I think primarily the [[secrets]] is that global warming and tranny policies are scams. "Yeah uh nobody buys that shit up here." Yeah, now you really feel like a fool. You've been inveigling against this carbon tax or that for years, and all of a sudden it turns out they're doing it because they've been bribed. "They kept the secret from you so well."

 So yeah, gossip-tier information, plus corruption.
 The [misleading] information is telling you who you can get bribes from, by mistake or when out of date.
 The good stuff is telling you what laws you can get away with breaking and how. Except a bunch of that is internal warfare misinformation too, rofl.

 And it really is rational not to listen to anyone who isn't in on the bribes. It's not secret because you can get serious jail time for saying it, it's secret because of the extremely banal and mundane realities of bribes.
 As soon as anyone argued for policy based on merits instead of kickbacks, you know they aren't offering a kickback and their business has nothing to do with yours.

 

 Also the bribes and their inherent secrecy form a cult culture.

 "Kissinger hadn’t interrupted this long warning. As I’ve said, he could be a good listener, and he listened soberly. He seemed to understand that it was heartfelt, and he didn’t take it as patronizing"

 I.e. "You, me, and everyone else in government is a moron, and you're going to be successfully inducted into their moron cult."
 "Hmm. Hmmm indeed. Food for thought."

 That or kissinger had an inkling he was about to be bribed/blackmailed, just as I would be thinking, and was doing the [torturous] transmutation.

 "But I knew it was too soon for him to appreciate fully what I was saying. He didn’t have the clearances yet."

 I.e. he hadn't been bribed yet, lol.
 Recall  the screed itself confesses to being manipulative. Carefully not mentioning the bribes makes it seem like the information is special, rather than...a banal criminal conspiracy. This is ellsberg relating the anecdote for public consumption, so it's likely not even accurate (like the NYT). The screed also confesses the information isn't special, but does so at one remove. Demonic chicken feet.

[[Right]] Wing Political Savvy

 Beside a few querulous far right extremists, no one is even pretending to give a shit that America has no functioning presidency right now.
https://twitter.com/xenocosmography/status/1815381505864020424

 America hasn't had a functioning president for the last 248 years.
 Today on revenge is sour, you have political problems because you keep behaving as if america has a president. All suffering comes from delusion.

 America's culture is [nobody could possibly be stupid enough to believe that]. Nobody could possibly be stupid enough believe america is a democracy and has a president. Except the [[right]] wing *(left of hitler, a socialist) gets so high on their own supply they're surprised when DNC presidents can be uninstalled as simply as a screensaver.

 Like I'm glad you noticed america doesn't have a president sometimes. China hasn't yet noticed mao was bad for china. China is highly vulnerable to being mao'd a second time, as a result. The [[right]] noticed that the assassination absolutely clinched trump at the ballot box...but hasn't yet realized that if you can steal an election once, you can steal an election twice. The ballots are irrelevant. You might as well just piss on it. Being used as toilet paper is the most useful a ballot can hope to be. When, in 2025, america still doesn't have a functioning president, will they forget 2024?

 I suppose this settles the question. Why was biden chosen? Simply to humiliate voters, to let them know their place? Naw, it was because removing a doddering senile has-been is easy. Why bother with the inconvenience of grassy knolls and so on? Simply inefficient. It's not like he does any work.

Female Lust is Defective

 The most common and strongest driver of women's horniness is betrayal. Specifically a traitor who gets away with it.

 When a man says it's important to be attractive to women, he is declaring it is his intention to betray you. If he hasn't done it already, it's only because he hasn't yet managed to secure his getaway driver. Don't worry, he'll have a plan worked out soon. He genuinely thinks it's important and isn't going to get lazy or forget.

 

 To a woman, treachery and parasitism is exactly what [high status] means.
 Women keep letting themselves to be drawn to men who abuse everyone else, then acting shocked when he treats her the same way. "No no you're supposed to abuse everyone except me! I'm the exception!" "Oh no, how could he do this to me, who could have possibly seen this coming."
 Women are specifically attracted to bad ideas, and their plan is to ride the tiger, trying to suppress the badness using female game or whatever. I repeat: if associating with you is not a bad idea, it's startlingly difficult to make a woman wet. It's not an emergent property. Being hueg incidentally makes it cheaper to beat someone up but that's not the point. It's being a bad idea in and of itself; being hueg or whatever is merely the means. The [danger] she wants is the risk you'll do to her what she loves so much when you do it to everyone else. 

 Red pill dating advice is basically to trick her into thinking she has you tricked or appeased, but to [[accidentally]] slip the bounds from time to time to show you both need to be appeased and can be restrained, somehow, by a woman. E.g. muscles mean nothing if you would never use them to hit her.

 

 It's a major reason white government hasn't been tried. If you're not abusing your underlings the women lose interest. A king trying good will go tyrannical to make his wife more excited about the bedroom. Telling folk what to do is not enough, they have to want to refuse but fail.  

 

 Why can't male peer groups allow women, especially unattached unrestrained women? φαγγωτρυ? No, the opposite: someone always tries to appeal to the woman by shanking one of his former friends. An ingroup man witnessing this realizes he wants to do the same thing, and realizes all the other men are realizing the same thing. Cooperation and femininity are antonyms. P.S. Phi alpha gamma omega tau rho ypsilon.

 It is not a coincidence that profound thinkers across time and space keep trying to make celibacy a major virtue. 

 

 P.P.S. I just now noticed that chastity is particular to women, while celibacy is particular to men. They're very different behaviours. Male chastity is trivial, unavoidable. Female celibacy is impossible, it's a self-contradiction. 

 P.P.P.S. It is also not a coincidence that the virtue-celibates keep failing to make their system coherent.

Elite Overproduction is not Elite

 Reminder that elites do not behave at all like "overproduced" [[elites]]. 

 

 A society made solely of geniuses would be amazing. A society of the intensely pious would be unfathomably glorious. "But who would take out the garbage?" The point of a genius is they're smarter than you and can solve problems that you can't solve, lol. What is impossible for you is easy for them. 

 Elites are very much born, not made. If you try to keep an elite from their elite education, they will smite you and get it anyway. For elites, self-teaching was the only real option in any case. The question is whether, after being (self) raised, they support your society or oppose and undermine it. The idea that anyone can choose to produce more or fewer is a hilarious egalitarian superstition.

 A [produced] elite is by definition not an elite. He's a commoner given delusions of grandeur. 

 If elites could genuinely be produced, the correct answer would be to maximize it. Only stop when costs get so high that more marginal elites were being destroyed than produced. 

 Since instead it's impossible, by inspection a society with a cadre of commoners playacting at being elites is going to have issues. Especially if large parts of the government are dedicated to materially supporting the stage illusion. Narcissists have fragile egos, and it's expensive to coddle these delicate snowflakes, especially for long periods of time.

 Imagine a government so weak it has to hire theatre kids to pretend to be aristocrats, or it will collapse. Impressively feeble.

 

Readership Increasing, Which is Concerning

 Most of my readers read out of guilt. 

 Don't do that. You can stop, it's okay.

 

 Readership numbers for this time last year are now invisible on the time series. Looks like a flat line hugging zero. 

 There's some twisted idea about "seeing both sides" or "getting out of your echo chamber" or "getting a wide array of views," and, well, if they could articulate it properly this post would be well pointless, because they would have already figured it out. This is one of those times where, if you word the problem precisely, the solution is not only easy, it is unavoidable. 

 Here's the question: what did you manage to do, as a result of reading my blog, that you couldn't have otherwise done?

 Nothing? Is it nothing?

 Okay, do you read for entertainment? We all have to waste time sometimes.

 ...no? 

 Do the accounting. If it's not entertaining, and it's not making you more powerful, stop. 

 Also wtf why are you all using chrome. how much do you enjoy being spied on

 Apparently I've picked on america enough that they, at least, have partially learned what's good for them, and my readership is completely dominated by [other]. Of identifiable regions, it's hong kong followed by singapore. That is, actual capitalists, so that's nice. America is down in third. These are absolute numbers, meaning considering per capita that's quite the ratio. Spain, of all places, in fifth. Below spain it's probably dominated by bots and scammers seeking vulnerabilities, but who knows. The difference between me and the government is that I'm aware the numbers are miles away from clean.

 Dear HK and SG, you're also brutal to your own children and tell 'em it's for their own good, but at least you don't tell the rest of the world you're the shining beacon of morality because you """ended""" slavery. You don't torture your kids for 13 years then kick 'em out when it turns out that wasn't good for them. In absolute terms you're traitors to your own blood, unquestionably worse than mythological!hitler, but so is everyone else and you don't double down. In relative terms you're kicking all of the ass.

 Wait, hold on, getting spied on in HK and SG is largely harmless. You're too far afield for the CIA to care, aside from extreme edge cases. Indeed I actively recommend orientals use american spyware rather than local oriental spyware (and vice-versa).  E.g. americans should be using weibo and the chinese should be using twitter, never the reverse.

Uniformity is Dystopia

 I have a recurring dream which, unusually, only occurs during the day. It's a dream about the failure of global communication, leading to a fractal elaboration of societies. Each neighbourhood, each house, even individual rooms, detailing themselves to infinity as they no longer have to "get along" or in any way be compatible with anything except what is immediately next door.

 I think the worst tyranny of the black government might be the imposition of legibility. Naturally, the tyrannized immediately become enthusiastic participants, attempting to make themselves understandable not only to the drooling-moron tyrant, but to everyone in some [[global]] [[conversation]]. At the cost of even the shallowest version of profundity. The lowest common denominator is lower and lower the wider the society must reach, so, of course, they deliberately reach for the widest possible [[international]] community. Childishness as virtue. The more immature, the better - less the curiosity inherent to childhood. Toddler-. 

 It is walls and barriers and divisions and inscrutability that lead to depth. Unity levels so aggressively, it razes everything to the dirt. Every community should be incomprehensible fae to every other.

 

 If there was no way to know what a place was like except by going there, it would mean every place could be different, every little nook could be a new possibility, spanning a massive cosmic space, instead of being yet another copy of every other place. 

 If every place wasn't striving to be readable to someone else who literally experiences night while they're having day, then while certainly not required, every place could reach for endless depth. Each tiny local quirk could lead to a whole explorable culture.

 There would be no way to know if what you're looking for is only a few streets over or a half-hemisphere away, and in return, there would be a nonzero possibility of finding it. It would, you know, exist at all.

 A crude metaphor: imagine building codes didn't have to be centralized, so there were parasitic buildings deliberately grafted onto others. Or not, as the local conditions dictated. Imagine every possible variation on Kowloon Walled City, and imagine they all existed. Open, closed, tall, deep, artificial, natural. The point being, really, that you can't imagine it. The point being that you would have to go and look, instead of explicitly having no need to. 

 As always, there is no need to wait for permission. You can turn off the TV. Could start right now.

 Doubtless you've already realized rather than being a fractal of possibilities, it would only be the fractal of various kinds of self-destruction. Dissolution, but now inefficiently so, lacking a central distributor of self-abnegation lore. Profound only by accident. Yet, I dream anyway. 

 You don't have to lie to deal with self-hatred. Accept that the buddhists are right and the purpose of the afterlife is to stop reincarnating. Then, distract yourself. Don't dwell on it. Don't think about it. Throw yourself into...not-yourself. 

 Even under ideal conditions, many places would still be samey. At least, samey across a particular city. Biomes don't vary drastically from inch to inch. 

 It couldn't possibly be worse if they didn't have to be samey. 

 

 Global connection is local isolation, which is the true isolation. It is due to pathetically attempting to reach so far that nothing, even the immediate and trivial, is grasped. 

 Global isolation is local connection, local identity, local Existence.

Guide: Metroid NES

 I fired up Metroid 1 because a video was slow and often boring, and accidentally got gud. Here are my findings.

 

 Most importantly, screw attack is easy mode. You can get the most powerful videogame upgrade ever and blitz your way through everything before tourian, except Kraid. I ended up leaving missiles on because I hate how the varia suit looks. With the screw attack, it's not like I need to shoot. 

 Screw attack quirks: it's not really supposed to work within one tile of the platform you jumped from, which makes the hitbox weird. Invincible rippers can hit you since they don't die on contact. It will let you kick zoomers and other short enemies on the upswing, although the timing is tight. Sometimes other enemies attacking at knee height will do damage instead of taking damage.
 If you want to kill zoomers by landing on them, then you need to jump from below their platform. If you want to kill enemies on platforms below you, you can't. Move down, attack up.
 You can jump straight up in a somersault, by letting go of forward at the same time you jump. Although you will activate obligatory sideways movement if you start moving after jumping.  

 

The beginning of the game is real slow, since they expect you to backtrack through all of brinstar twice or more. I will also call out the fact the first vertical corridor is absurdly long and tedious. Pacing lol. Definitely don't fall down. I found I don't want or need to go back for the varia suit. Although I do like the eye-searing purple/cyan missile mode.
 If you also dislike the varia's looks but want to use it (perhaps for acid and lava), there's a handy easy password that lets you start unsuited. Two twos. https://strategywiki.org/wiki/Metroid/Passwords

 You don't need missiles before tourian for anything except doors, and metroids drop 30 missiles at a time. You can kill two metroids at once if they're on top of each other. Stick your gun in there and shoot. If you kill metroids in pairs or even gather them up by letting them latch onto you, you can quickly refill missiles. 

 Accounting: every missile pickup you can't use because you're full is a wasted missile, so before tourian you might as well use them anyway. If you feel like shooting something with a missile, just do it.

 When I first played Metroid I didn't memorize the layout and I did kill everything I saw. Both of these are serious mistakes. Enemies are bullet sponges and I often have to wait for them to even be shootable, never mind in the way. Moreover, drops on these easily-avoided enemies are terrible. 

 If I do need to refill health (and can't get to metroids yet) then I don't use zoomers &c or the spawning pipes. Kill things which drop 20s. Ideally, one-shot leapers or desgeegas (the leaper clones) with the screw attack. The five energy from respawners is regularly not worth picking up, because it lets the pipe spawn another.

 Metroid 1 strongly rewards aggression. The best way to kill Kraid is not to try to avoid or freeze all his claws and spikes, but to get inside him and go for the damage race. Either missiles or bombs will work fine. His belly spikes will block the missile and it will hurt him anyway if Samus' gun is already inside him. Likewise if a particular room seems dangerous, I don't try to be more careful, I blast my way through it as quickly as possible.

 The map of Metroid is small and simple enough that remembering the whole thing is perfectly viable. In particular, keep in mind refill rooms with high density of 20-energy drops. It is said that Ridley's lair is easier than Kraid's. This is true. I would guess it's due to having 20-droppers everywhere, whereas Kraid's is littered with fivers. Ridley's is also smaller.

 There is one exception to aggression, in green norfair. The tall eye/egg pillars with lava. I can't escape the tallest pair, and there's a multiviola perfectly positioned to spawn and knock samus down into there. Instead, be very very careful in this one place. Do note there's a weird second-controller suicide combo, so if you fall in with the varia suit and aren't using save states for some reason, you don't have to wait ten minutes to die from the lava.

 

 Know a technical limitation: scrolling can't happen in both directions. Only vertical or only horizontal. Vertical corridors can't have secret passages on their sides, and horizontal ones can't have them on the floor or ceiling. Cuts way down on bombing/shooting every block. All those copy-pasted rooms also mean secret passages are copy-pasted. 

 

 If it seems to you that drops mysteriously stopped dropping, it's because they did. Rooms have a limited number for some reason. Max about ten missile drops (20), less if the room didn't roll high on missiles, and energy too will slow way down after a bit. Change rooms to refresh the pool.  

 Yes, you can get cheap-shot while entering or exiting a door. On entering, it reminds you that enemies can and should be baited into unwise attacks. On exit, remember that samus is extremely well armoured and a few stray hits here and there don't matter. Don't bother with annoyance or frustration, just keep blitzing.

 Ice beam + screw attack would be a nasty combo, except I can't stop shooting two icicles at once, instantly unfreezing them, and anyway stopping to freeze them is superfluous. The things with good drops aren't hard to hit with the screw attack, while the things with bad drops have bad drops and are best left alone.
 If you can shoot one time (or three times) stuns are OP in every game and Metroid is no exception.
 Ice beam + screw attack would be the best if you ever needed to shoot, since missiles are relatively plentiful, meaning ice beam's weakness wouldn't matter. But you have the screw attack, so it really really doesn't matter.
 It would be much better if the wave beam was before the screw attack, instead of the reverse. The only real use for the wave beam is letting me murder floor enemies more murderously. 

 Oh wait I could deliberately shoot two to miss and aim with the third.

 

 Everything in a particular area does the same damage. Brinstar is 8, norfair is 10, hideout 1 is 20, hideout 2 is 24, and tourian is 30, with the bizarre exception of mother brain who does 20.

 I've heard that doing 100% is a pain since there's no percentage tracker. Um, guys, you can get six energy tanks and 255 missiles. If you have less than that you haven't picked up everything yet. Cool? Cool. You get 75 missiles for each hideout boss, so there's 105/5 = 21 missile packs in the world. 

 The e-tank in kraid's room is very easy to get by dropping off the higher ledge rather than the closer one. Can also bomb jump over the close ledge, from the arena floor.

 Exploit: you can jump in midair using various means. Mainly by unmorphing from a ball. As long as you don't move sideways after the unmorph, you can jump at any time. Conveniently, unmorph uses the jump button, so you can mash.
 Technique: bomb jump, then unmorph and normal jump. I regularly do this to get over ice beam obstacles even when I have the ice beam and don't need to.
 There's that one super-hard jump in Ridley's lair. All that's over there is one missile, and it takes like two minutes to reset if you miss the jump. Use a save state. Or the exploit. Or just skip it.

 I put my toe into super metroid and I don't like it anymore. Metroid's movement is kinda jank but sm's is worse. Symbolize it this way: in sm you can easily jump two screens, meaning you have no idea what you're jumping into. It's also easy as piss. Get the spazer beam and missiles are obsolete...
 The only metroid game with genuinely dangerous metroids is the first, and even then it's merely a learning curve thing.

 In metroid 1 you can triple bomb jump. It's done by simply holding B (for bomb) until it works. This means there can go backwards through Kraid's one-way passages. There's no point, but it is possible.

Newsreaders Feared Nuclear War Because They Love Nuclear War

 Nuclear war scared the boomers so much because they knew if they had a big red ragnarok button, they would smash it. No hesitation. The button would be fully depressed before they even thought to think about it. The hand would already be pushing it by the time they consciously noticed the button is there.

 Humans are comically evil. Saturday morning cartoon villains. Conquer the world, then kill everyone in it.
 But without, like, blood, because that's icky. Everyone would die in sanitary agony, see. Like they do in cartoons.

 Won't admit it even to themselves, of course. If you offer one an omnincidal world emperorship, they would turn it down. However, if you put them in front of that button, after they've already pressed it, they would be delighted and fulfilled. Especially if they get to watch the dying. 

 Try not to admit it, anyway. They were aware enough that they were terrified someone at the consoles was like them.
 For one, you're not supposed to be the guy getting killed, you're supposed to be the guy doing the killing. The end is nothing. The guy who pressed the button is going to end up dead too. The means are everything. For two, how are you supposed to torment your children if you're both dead? Evil is incoherent: the omnicidal urge conflicts with deep sadistic needs. Humans like hell because knowing their own children are in torment gives them deep comfort, and there's always the possibility they will be allowed to do the tormenting themselves, if they suck up to Satan enough.

potus is an attack, not a reward

 The american political game is responsibility laundering. The job of potus is to take the blame, the very opposite of getting away with it. The only kind of prize this can be is a booby prize. 

 You try to force your rivals to take the office while stringently avoiding it yourself. 

 The biden faction's rivals not only forced biden to take office, likely exploiting his cognitive decline, but forced his faction to falsify the election for that purpose. A tremendous propaganda coup. 

 Do you think the deep state didn't know they would lose in ukraine? I don't. I think one faction provoked it deliberately precisely because they knew it was a losing proposition, and wanted to drain the biden deep state faction's coffers. The bidens can't afford to lose ukraine, and likewise can't afford to keep it. The ploy has succeeded well beyond what was needed.

 The election merely sped up the process. Made responsibility for ukraine completely unavoidable for the ukraine-owning faction. Merely not letting someone else's crisis go to waste.

 What if the hunter laptop was released by biden's own faction, in a desperate attempt to dissuade their own foot soldiers? It didn't work, lol.
 Evil can't hire competence, and, then, this happens. All these electioneers who think american politics is something more than rewarding your friends and stiffing your enemies....
 Due to all the responsibility laundering, it's even more dangerous to directly command your foot soldiers than it is to let their command structure get seized by enemy agents. Usurpation-positive Regime.
 To commoners, the losing strategy always sounds better than a winning strategy. More persuasive. It's remarkable that these sorts of unintentional betrayals don't happen constantly. Perhaps it's a MAD thing, and revenge is sour. The biden faction found themselves in such a bad situation that they couldn't credibly threaten to subvert their enemies anymore, i.e. they had already lost, thus 2019 happened.

 Until the debate, all the deep state factions were "cooperating" in "protecting" the dignity of the nation or whatever, but the biden rivals have concluded victory is thoroughly decided, and now, simply...stopped providing air cover for him.

On Reasoning From Identity Instead of Values

 "I am a ninja, I will die in battle like a ninja."

 If you check for manipulation here, the manipulation is obvious. Some guy doesn't value your life. He has convinced you [being a ninja] means throwing away your life for his benefit. 

 It's even easier to notice it's reasoning from identity rather than reasoning from values. "I am an X, therefore I will..." That's narcissism. "I want X, I believe Y will lead to X, therefore I will do Y." That's strategy. Dying in battle won't lead to anything of value...it will only lead to posthumously retaining membership in group [ninja]. Because obviously, after you're dead, you mainly care how mortals will gossip about you. Top priority for cemetary residents.

 

 In particular, it's an excellent idea to run the hell away from any social group which demands a personality type for membership. It might superficially seem profitable to adhere to their deontology. "I want to be part of this group due to [benefits] so I will profess and embody [identity]." It will 100% turn into traitorous parasitism. Because it's narcissism. 

 If it wasn't narcissism, the group could hawk the benefits. They wouldn't need to think about identity at all. It becomes a trade: follow [rules] receive [benefits]. They don't need to mock or shame (they might anyway, but it's unnecessary) because rulebreakers lose the benefits and that's plenty of deterrent to keep everyone in line. 

 Comcast doesn't have to say, "We're bill-payers. I will pay my cable bills like a true bill-payer." They just cut off your cable if you don't pay. 

 Reasoning from values makes it dramatically more difficult for manipulators to get the free stuff they desperately think they need. This is why they shriek constantly in pain about identity. "That's not who we are." "Patriotism means..." "We don't do that around these parts." Narcissism, narcissism, narcissism. 

 

 "But nobody would join the army if it weren't for king and country." Have you tried having the pay be worth the risks? Have you tried not deliberately entering losing wars because your buddy is an arms merchant? Pretty obvious you have a meatgrinder that turns peasant lives into personal money.
 A snazzy device. And so obviously fraudulent you have to turn to conscription. Even commoners can see it for what it is. 

 I think the best part is how they keep identity vague so it can be warped into any shape that happens to be convenient. This is the main reason there can't be any test for a real christian priest - the conditions change constantly, and the test would either force them to stop or become directly obsolete.
 It makes the idiots who take the identity seriously constantly question whether they're [[really]] [identity]. Twists them right up into knots, because the masters refuse to permit a definitive criterion that would lead to stability.
 If you don't know exactly what gets you thrown out, leave. Trying to follow nebulous rules isn't worth the hassle.

 

 Sometimes they exploit a no true scotsman equivocation.

 "I'm a philosopher, I will talk your ear off about A => B." That's not identity reasoning, it's a prediction. Given a known, it predicts an outcome.
 "I'm a Christian, I'm loving or whatever." This is true only due to selection. If you are not "loving" in the way Christians are supposed to be (of traitors and enemies, primarily), they will throw you out. If a philosopher refrains from [bad philosopher habit] they don't get fired from their university.
 Watching for equivocations like this is a pain. Best leave it to your pope, it's what he's paid the big bucks for. If [outgroup] is trying to convince you to do something, mindlessly ignore them. Trust your pope: [outgroup] doesn't have your best interests in mind. In any case, if it were truly valuable to them, they would try paying for it instead of wheedling.

Wordcels condemn vitamin D

The "evidence" base for vitamin D is observational.
https://twitter.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/1815533088069357769

First problem: the correct dose of vitamin D is more than twice the "safe" dose, meaning essentially no study will give you anywhere near enough.

 Second problem: I'm told much of what's sold as vit D in america isn't vit D at all. Else it's mixed with so many poisons it will cause more problems than it can solve. Do these studies test their vitamin D supplies themselves? The very idea is laughable. Bureaucrats? Do work? lel

 This is because vitamin D supplements are not well absorbed by the body. My wife had low vitamin D for years. She took supplements, with no change in status, and the doctors started giving her vitamin D shots at regular intervals which also accomplished nothing. I did some research, bought a UV-B light, and magically, her years of deficiency were solved in a month. Supplemental D3, cholecalciferol, is essentially rat poison that does nothing but leech calcium from one's bones.
https://twitter.com/lesliedouglasx/status/1815542835032252674

 No, you gullible peasant. What you were taking was not cholecalciferol, it was rat poison. That's why it acted like rat poison. See also: the stuff in olive oil jugs at the american supermarket is not olive oil. 

  

 Devils know the sun is sacred, and encourage you, as far as they credibly can, to avoid anything involving the sun.

 

 Third problem: cremiux straight up lies about the study. "highly convincing evidence of [...] highly significant results" becomes "basically no evidence"

 "randomised controlled trials reported a nominally statistically significant summary result for [...] 13 of the 57 outcomes"

 Since the 57 outcomes were a grab bag of random hypotheses, you would expect most results to be null.
 The ellipses elide the word [only] as the authors are trying to suggest that usefully affecting 13 medical outcomes is somehow a bad thing. 

 

 Fourth problem: vitamin D is cheap. Indeed if it's sunny and your environs aren't flooded with violent commoners, you can get it without spending any money at all. You don't get industry bribes for suggesting anyone use vitamin D. On the contrary. Means, motive, opportunity: assume corruption, scientific fraud, unless corruption has been specifically falsified in every particular.

 

 Naturally the meta-analysis is basically innumerate and doesn't mention magnitudes of the dose, or does so buried in the fine print somewhere else I can't be arsed to read.

 Numbers, for those of you who are numerate: the original observation that tipped everyone (in this cycle) off to the benefits of vitamin D was dosing folk with an average of 30,000 IU per day. The "safe" dose is 4000. Approaching a factor of ten. 

 Thus what this meta-analysis in fact proves is that, if you know that 10,000 IU is medicinal and you respond to this by giving folk 2000, nothing much happens. Yeah, uh, no shit.

When La Wik Lies Less than Moldbug

 "When one of the tribunes, Lucius Caecilius Metellus interposed his veto against Caesar's attempt to raid the state treasury, his veto was either ignored or his life threatened until he backed down.^[56] This also showed the sham nature of Caesar's claimed casus belli in protecting tribunician rights: "the man who had proclaimed that he was championing the rights of the tribunes in January was now as ready as his opponents... [to] threaten one".^[57] Caesar's raid captured some 15 thousand gold bars, 30 thousand silver bars, and 30 million sestertii, even seizing a special fund kept over the centuries to defend against Gallic attack."

 

 Kaisar waged a war on Rome because he wanted to loot Rome.
 He won the war, therefore Rome was looted.

 His actual casus belli was "I don't wanna go to jail," which was a direct result of his casual lawbreaking. He had criminal policies because he was a criminal kind of person. Stalin was a bank robber, and would have found Kaisar to be a brother. (And probably killed the shit out of each other for that exact reason.) 

 

 Note that mainstream historians are so Satanic they can't even tell the truth about how to pronounce Kaisar's name. (Καῖσαρ). Roman c is not at all like the [[latin script]] c, and even if it was, it's before the a, not before the e, holy shit what is wrong with you idiots. 

 When someone says they admire Kaisar, it's a confession. They're saying they want to loot the country openly instead of covertly. If you give any of them power, you'll find they do exactly what I told you they would do, regardless of not only any verbal professions, but regardless of previous behaviour.
 Though it's extremely rare that any Kaisar admirer is remotely admirable as a person. They can't keep it in their pants any more than Julius could.

 

 

 P.S. Ref: Dutton's spiteful mutants. Caesar suffered from either epilepsy or strokes in his 40s and 50s. His genes were poor. He was a mutant - a highborn commoner. The kind of phenotype I call a bastard. His behaviour was spiteful at best.
 Alternatively, it is not at all implausible that Aurelia cucked Julius senior with a slave or something.

Bottom Line on Right vs. Left

 I primarily went into comment sections and twitter and stuff to find someone wiser than I am, so I could ask them to be my pope.

 I didn't find anyone wiser than I am, and that's certainly been a something. I'm looking because I have difficult problems I don't know the solutions to, and I'm told mortals are a social species. When you don't know something, you ask for help. (lol)

 The original plan didn't pan out. However, I've become familiar with the difference between dominance-seeking behaviour and submission-seeking behaviour. I've become very familiar with pro-hierarchy behaviour and Revolutionary behaviour.

 When leftists see someone wiser than themselves, they want that person to submit to them. The high shall be brought low, that the low be raised up.
 If there were rightists, they would have already created a hierarchy. They would have already designated their wisest group member as effective-pope, and enumerated the ranks below them. When the lower disagreed, the pope would win. You would see twitter accounts openly accept the dominance of the higher members of their society. "I tried what he told me to do, although I knew it was wrong because X, Y, and (all very reasonable and persuasive) but it worked. I was wrong. It was only a mistake."

 Online, there are no rightists. Offline there are no rightists either. Even literal church-going catholics don't change their behaviour when their pope says to. 

 Bonus dynamic: if the leftist succeeds and the wise one is brought low, then the one raised up is considered wise and high, and needs to be brought low. The society cannot stabilize. 

 Bonus 2: Socrates was deliberately hacking the leftist paradigm. "As the one asking questions, I cheerfully profess I'm in the submissive position. Right? Right?" We can see how that worked out for Socrates and for Athens. Regardless, this security hole was closed a long time ago. If you try the Socrates thing today you'll find, as I did, that it assumes some minimal level of integrity which moderns no longer possess. They will blatantly and knowingly lie to your face to get out of a gotcha, and their allies will cheerfully misremember past sins to paper over direct contradictions. 

 Bonus 3: the only way to become familiar with hierarchy-seeking behaviour is to deliberately engage yourself in hierarchy-seeking behaviour. If you don't do it yourself, you can't observe it, because it won't exist. I accidentally chose the rarest of possible options, and found a perfectly unique perspective. Most likely this occurred because prayer works.

 But as far as community building and having babies, that's what I want to promote because it extends the lifetime of the movement forward.
https://twitter.com/MikeAnissimov2/status/1801375843148513735

 lol "Movements can be right-wing." I guess that's what they did wrong in Ukraine. They didn't [raise awareness] enough and the [movement] was insufficiently popular, lmao.
 Bridges falling down? Just got to start a [bridge-building] movement. Why aren't planes staying in the air? Need a [flying] movement.
 That and the ukies didn't hurl enough racial slurs at the ni- Russians, kek. Should have had a [win the war] movement instead of, I guess, not having that. (The joke is they really didn't.)
 Gee guys, why are the righties having difficulty gatekeeping a [movement]? rofl

Found a Fresh Hell

 Discovered an interesting corruption technique.

 royal road has review swaps. Naturally a swapped review feels strong pressure to fall into extreme marketing-speak. "Wow your story is amazing (my story is amazing too right)." You can edit reviews, so any defection from the conspiracy can be immediately punished.

 They even helpfully tag swapped reviews as review swaps, knowing it doesn't matter and won't change anything, except for being useful for [plausible deniability]. Maybe it would be relevant with a robust reputation and introduction system, this is a more-anonymous-than-anonymous made-up-name system...
 Even if reviews had a wiki-style revision history, nobody would check them. The site isn't exactly for professional readers, it's for braindead zombie-morons.

 Hack: solicit dozens of review swaps. Result: the few genuine reviewers read all the glowing fake reviews and, well, monkey see, monkey do. 

 However, here's the best part. The rr popular list is not like the nyt bestseller list, it lists pages read per week or something of that nature. A review section, no matter how distorted, can't convince readers they like reading that trash, and they stop. Speaking of dozens, I checked two dozen page deep into popular, but it's on page 30. It's well behind short stories that last updated in '22.
 For extra context, recall that nearly all readers still stop before reading through five comments under a post. Google results beyond the first are nonexistent to illiterates.

 The second best part is that the reviews hardly mention anything you can't learn from skimming the chapter titles and reading the self-written blurb. Marketing speak is vague to avoid anyone accusing it of lying, lol, they blend right in.  

 Third best part, from the top-ranked five-star review:
"I found the constant injecture [sic] of inner thoughts into normal narration difficult to read"
"While I don't quite like how there's no real pressing plot for [any chapter I read], which mostly consists of exposition and low-stakes character building"
"Most of my issues with the writing are already mentioned"
"Admittedly, I didn't find myself greatly interested in most of the characters introduced in the first eleven chapters."
"In Conclusion: This story is a must-read."

 The rabbit hole on that one. The layers. This illiterate review is at least two qualitative levels above the story it's about.

 For reference, I find the story literally unreadable. The prose physiognomy is so bad my eyes gloss over the entire chapter. Strikes me a perfectly unalive, less vital than riverbed stones. I can't assess it properly because it's impossible to pay attention to. Or at least, I would never read it for free. Should probably charge north of $200 per hour.

Learning Isn't Enough, Practice Believing

 Step 1: "If I believe this, how would I behave?"
 Step 2: deliberately seek out situations where you can act out that behaviour, so it can replace whatever habit you had previously. 

 It's not enough to learn a thing. Only in extreme edge cases will it automatically change behaviour. It's necessary to deliberately enumerate the habits that it should change, and then deliberately do reps of doing the habits differently.

 Moreover, if you try the behaviour and it's not effective, if it lowers the value you gather, then that's a quick and cheap way to disprove the idea. Catches mistakes. There's some caveats about long-term vs. short-term, but you already know them.
 This is so important that without some special excuse, believing things that don't change your behaviour is a waste of time. There's no point in spending time listening to it or spending energy trying to understand it.
 You can push it further. When someone tries to convince you of something, rather than listening to the evidence or logic or anything, simply ask how they want your behaviour to differ. Then ignore the logic and evidence and mindlessly try it. If it works, maybe consider asking more to understand the underlying foundation of it. The only real reason to ask about evidence and shit beforehand is to ensure you're trying what you think you're trying.

 "Metroid NES is fun if play carefully."
 To you, playing carefully means a) taking on an emotional posture of [care] and b) killing every enemy you see, so they can't damage you.
 What they actually meant was not falling in that one inescapable lava pit in deep Norfair. (The one with the tall single-tile eye columns, with the multiviola positioned to spawn mid-air and knock you into it.) They meant, you should do the chess thing, in advance keep in mind things you're already aware can kill you, and not try to react to them when they appear on-screen because that's too late.

 "I tried playing Metroid carefully and it sucked." Yeah, uh, no you didn't. You proved you're illiterate...
 "You give bad advice." Well, it's true that you shouldn't listen to advice, since you won't hear what's being said, and will try something different, at random.*

 Likewise, the only reason to ask about the underlying foundation after the fact is to help ensure you don't accidentally misapply the behaviour. It has a valid domain and it's important to avoid invalid regions. 

 * I find this generalizes. If I ask someone what they think I'll do, they'll say something completely batshit insane, for reasons that are wildly delusional. Then I ask what their response to this is, and it will make perfect sense assuming they have a pretty good idea what I'm actually going to do. They came up with a rational response, from somewhere, then very poorly rationalized the pre-existing decision. The rationalization doesn't matter, because it's not causal.
 However, rationalizing like this makes it impossible to learn verbally. They can't work out what habits the beliefs should change, nor can they change their behaviours based on these beliefs. In the short-term it's not necessary to rationalize rationally, saving superfluous effort, but in the long term the rationalization must be perfectly quarantined, since it's never exercised properly and atrophies to pure derangement.

 

 Here's some behaviour-changing advice: don't give advice.
 Good advice is not, in fact, rare or expensive. Revenge is Sour. They've already heard it, or already thought of it themselves. E.g. you already know unsolicited advice is rude at best. If they're not already taking the advice, they are either cripples who can't, or the advice is bad because they don't want its results. Usually due to self-hatred driven masochism.
 Do all the idiots offering advice on twitter not realize advice is rude? Of course they realize. It's not advice, it's a dominance play. "I'm smarter than you," or whatever. Maybe it doesn't work 99.99% of the time, but they're desperate enough that 0.01% is the best they can hope for. That's the true form of [unsolicited advice is rude]: unsolicited advice is 100% a dominance play, not advice. It's only not phrased that way becauase social status dare not speak its own name. 

 Hence, mindfulness trigger: "Next time I'm about to give advice, I will notice. I will not give the advice." Try it. See if it works for you.
 Unsolicited advice is [selfless], i.e, horrifically evil. Be selfish instead: think about what you can buy from them for less than it costs. You probably don't need to painstakingly convince them to take value from you in the trade. Odds are. 

 I look forward to the total lack of comments pointing out my hypocrisy when, such as now, I'm genuinely being hypocritical.

 

 Bonus: it's all but impossible for a manipulator to hide the fact that they want you to serve their interests in place of yours. They will desperately avoid being specific about your actions. A cheap and efficient litmus test.
 Double bonus: if you falsely conclude someone is a manipulator but ask them about specifics, the innocent can prove their innocence. "Oh. Huh. I hadn't thought of that, good idea."

so I worked out why dinosaurs go extinct

 Buried lede, turns out evolution can tune mutation rates, which will in turn tune the evolution rate.

 Sharks, for example, don't get cancer much, because they can afford to evolve very very slowly. 

 On the flip side, very large animals must evolve slowly to avoid being offed by cancer. Very very large animals, especially combined with their long generations, must effectively stop evolving entirely. Consequently, when the environment changes, they die. 

 In the short term, being larger lets you win both intraspecific and interspecific contests. In the long term, it gets you culled. A real shame.

 

 If the genome wasn't such heinous spaghetti code, evolution would regularly tune mutation rates in specific tissues. 

 Human brains are under such strong selection pressure that they've adapted to mutate twice. After conception brain genes are shuffled a second time. Generally this makes you stupid or insane, lol. However...

 

[Saved Lives]

 Human life is worthless. A startling mass of problems vanish if you accept this truth. Fake, made up problems. 

 Mortals don't value their own lives. If they did, they wouldn't have been born mortal in the first place.

 What happens if you let some extra mortals die? Do you run out? Know anyone who has run short of mortal life? Got anyone whose demand is lower than supply?

 Why didn't they protect their own lives? Why do they need you to meddle? For example, perhaps your own life, despite everything, is valuable to you. I don't much care for it, but it's not really my business, now is it? I'm not forbidding you from securing it. Why would I? What for? 

 Example. What if telling a lie will save a life? Telling the truth is vastly more valuable than than life. You're paying more than it's worth. Mortals are constantly trying to get you to trade valuable things for mortal lives. Which makes sense - they hate joy, they hate wealth, they hate glory, they hate virtue. In their nega-world, it can't be any other way.

 If a mortal's life is valuable to them, let them reward the one who is saving it by, you know, paying them. Perhaps, dare I say it, paying them a living wage. If they themselves aren't willing to pay for it, why are you willing to pay for it? 

 If you think it's everyone else's duty to [save] your [life], how much time and energy do you spend saving your own? How often do you recklessly risk your life, knowing someone else [has to] step in? 

 The life itself is not valuable. Somehow, however, the life's owner uses it produce something valuable to you. Protecting the life is idiotic, but protecting the valuable behaviour is not.

 Likewise, going out of your way to kill someone, for its own sake, is just as deranged as plotting a multi-year strategy to kill a particular squirrel. Even if it works, it merely means there's room for another squirrel to be born. 

 "Boiling water for tea [saved lives] by cleaning the water." You dumb shit, why do you think tea became so popular in the first place? It's not the taste, lol. 

 Doing [something] about immigration can [save lives]. That's an argument in favour of doing nothing. If that's really the primary purpose, it is meaningless.

 Air bags [save lives]. Right, so they're worth $0. Mandating their installation is simple vandalism. Vandalism is far more important than mortal life.

 The [[vaccine]] really [saves lives] does it. But not, like, my life? If it won't save my life if I take it, why would it save the life of anyone who takes it? Devils and narcissists always immediately tell on themselves. Devils on purpose, narcissists by accident. 

 "But you'll risk [your life]!" Yes? And?

 Even if animate animation was somehow in danger of running low, even if they were willing to protect their own lives but couldn't, it would be trading the short term for the long term. When you suppress honour to [save lives] it costs more lives in the future than you saved.

 Which makes sense. Mortals meme themselves into thinking life is valuable, hence, they must minimize it. Commimaxxing. Life worth living? Straight to gulag.

Social Layers and Women

 Women lack focus, so they're better at multitasking, and they also tend to see all levels of a social interaction simultaneously. This means, when you're talking to a woman, it's challenging as you need to keep in mind all the levels that she will see. Seriously obstructs the goal of getting some main message across. (Usually tagged as the main layer.)

 Unfortunately, women are still basically stupid. She will see all the levels, but she can't do much about it. She's going to say whatever she thinks she's supposed to say. If you don't like some of the layers that implies, well, tough shit, take it up with her slavemaster. 

 Naturally you can't be friends who takes that kind of attitude with you. Especially if you're also a woman and taking the exact same attitude with her. Going up a level, why bother being friends with someone who is going to repeat what she's supposed to say - something you, too are supposed to say? You already know? Maybe be friends with whoever sets the rules she obeys...

 

 Still looking for female advantages. Women have better colour vision and fine manual dexterity.