Pronouncing Foreign Words Correctly Doesn't Make You Educated

 It makes you a cuck.

 Especially as an english speaker, correctly pronouncing french words cannot be justified. Go miles out of your way to avoid using one, if you can't get away with mispronouncing it. If someone tries to put you in mandatory french classes, kill them.

 Likewise, it is incredibly difficult to justify correctly pronouncing japanese words. I mean if you're in japan and trying to talk to nihonjin, then sure. Outside such extreme edge cases...

 Do wish I could purge my vocab of latin roots. Bureaucuck words.
 Sadly nobody would appreciate the effort. Not worth. Learn ancient greek to get away from the frankenstein trash fire that is english: have nobody to speak it with. Such a strategic plan.

Reminder: Balloons >> Satellites

 A high-altitude balloon can do 99% of what a satellite can do for a fraction of the cost. Probably less than 1/10th."But satellites last longer," balloons do come down fairly quick, but they still cost less per unit time. If you have to send up six balloons or whatever per satellite lifetime, that means each balloon costs 1/60th of a satellite.

Satellites are used for peacocking.

 Any idiot can use a balloon. Satellites are high status. The fact they cost too much is the point. You're not a poor are you? That plus balloons sound like blimps and blimps are something ze Germans did. You're not going to admit the Germans had a good idea, are you? That's not very cash money! A good American does it the tasteless gold-plated cock statue way. Ostentatious, tasteless, ugly, and wasteful! If it's polite and considerate you're plain doing it wrong, rofl.

 You may notice that making a reusable balloon is way easier than making a reusable rocket.
 Part of the reason I ask about Musk's underwater city: he's obviously not serious. It's about showing off, not about getting work done. Turns out in America, "Look ma, no hands!" is a multibillion dollar industry. "Flash Gordan was cool, you want to be cool like the Gordan of Flash, don't you?" (Reminder: a literal children's show. On TV.) "Come work for me!" "Yessir right away sir!" Flash Gordan didn't make no underwater cities, thus neither will Elon Musk. Inhabiting hostile environments is not the point.

 Much of the reason Russia can outfight America is that Americans would literally rather die than buy anything that makes them feel poor. With 1/3 the population and 1/2 the GDP/cap or so, Russians can still buy more total effectiveness because they don't refuse to buy inexpensive things. They don't try to ban poverty and declare it religiously anathema.
 You can buy like 40 artillery bombardments for the price of one airstrike, but warplane pilots are flashy and cool. Gun factories are dirty and crass, so very WWI, whereas airplane engineers are well-paid and allegedly bright and gleaming. The fact they cost so much is yet another reason for the American never to use artillery unless they absolutely have to.

 Meanwhile satellites all need microthrusters for microadjustments, which means they need to be refuelled...but can't be, so they steer themselves into the atmosphere eventually. Distinctly limited lifetime. Or drift into space junk. Orbital littering - also very American. Only a filthy peasant uses the trash can. Slaves, right guys? What, you put junk in the junk box? Lol saluted the king recently lmao? You can tell someone's really high status by how they live in a pile of dirt they refuse to clean up themselves. Perfectly sogical. P.S. Reminder that Kigali, $2000/cap, is clean because they pay folk to clean it every day. Weird concept, eh? Who does that? Who agrees to take that job? What a loser. The fact Shenzen and Singapore don't look dirty makes them unAmerican. 

 Which you would think would make sense, not being in America. You would think being American would be considered weird in these cases. Americans don't agree.

 Part of the reason Americans like wind and solar power so much is precisely because it's way more expensive than nuclear. The fact America can't afford it is a major sore spot. America has failed if not everyone can afford their own solar-powered flying car reusable orbital rocket. If you can't have a launch pad in your front yard, it's time to pack the country up and go home. Egalitarianism doesn't work - not everyone is identical. Dreams' over. 

 Likely this is ultimately for tax reasons. Consumerism is about maximizing sales taxes, and no American would consider not acting in the government's best interests. Slavishly (but voluntarily!) sacrificing for your master is just what freedom means. The more everything costs, the less they can save, and the more money ends up in Washington. Monetary velocity is considered good by Regime economists because more transactions => more taxes. 

 

 Solution: remember not to act in the government's best interest. Unless it's your government, as in you're charging it rent, I suppose.
 Solution: it's okay to buy cheap things. If someone thinks you're low-class, that doesn't make you low-class, that makes them delusional. Even if you were low-class, it wouldn't matter. You're not in a Muslim country where there's extra taxes if you're in the wrong class. On the contrary, there are extra taxes if you're in the ""right"" class...with a few exceptions where the government tries to bully the poor out of sheer insecure sadism.
 Peacocks are at least genuinely glorious. If you're going to peacock, you have to do it in a way that freaks out and disturbs Americans, in other words, by promoting genuine beauty. They'll hate your guts once they stop having an anxiety attack. I suppose that's a tax too. Do the accounting.
 Dumb solution: put a show on TV (ideally for children) about underwater cities. Have them use blimps, so the FAA unbans them.

 These solutions really do go without saying. By writing them down I'm mocking anyone who needed me to write them down. It looks dumb because it is, that's the joke. They say if you have to explain the joke it's not funny, but, as we can see, that's not true - in special cases it's even funnier.

Hang by the neck until dead

 When Curtis Yarvin says, "Y'all are obsessed with political power," what he means is, "I am obsessed with political power." Narcissists gonna narc. On themselves. Yarvin makes a big deal about the motes in others' eyes as a way of distracting you from the beam in his own. "I can't be a hardcore addict, look how much I condemn the addicts." Here in Reality, it is weird when a narcissist doesn't condemn their inner selves, rather than when they do.

 Kratia is parasitic defection. Yarvin is confessing to dishonourable treachery. He must lie, as cooperating with him is unmysteriously imprudent.

 Neither dishonour nor treachery are right-wing. Traitors get the rope. 

 To be fair, to be a proper traitor Yarvin would first have to trick you into thinking he's your friend. Likewise, dilbert guy tried to portray himself as dispassionate about trump...

 You can test this scientifically if you like. Find some of his unreconstructed Christian-Egalitarian brain worms, and openly, verbally notice them at him. "Great No? You missed a spot." If he's a narcissist, then he will have to gymnastic up a defence. If it's merely a mistake or oversight, he will correct immediately or soon. He has more than one, so you can safely rule out a misidentification on your part - you don't have to worry about accidentally seeing something sane as something Christian so as to get a false positive.

 To be fair, it is true that he can easily identify other thymos kratia addicts. "Sounds like me. Greetings, fellow addict." Sadly there is no methadone for kratia. He's a bandit. A highwayman. He simply seeks to brutalize and rob through words instead of guns. Moderns and especially Jews are too cowardly to use guns. 

 To be fair, it is broadly true that Democratic Tyrannous Man is obsessed with, you know, tyranny. An addict.
 Bit of a base rate issue. Dowsing rods work because you can dig a well anywhere there's a water table. Any test will look reliable when the condition is nigh-universal.
 However, the only cure for stupidity is Thanatos.

Overlooked Something Dumb With Public Comments

 Due to fixed action patterns, public comments sections are guaranteed to be sewage canals even without CIA speech interference. 

 

So, fixed action patterns. I'm sufficiently sure that public speaking counts as a fixed action pattern. Naturally, if you think you're doing a public speaking event, you're going to talk like a politician, or at best, a marketer. Or, put another way, marketers and politicians talk the way they do because that's how the public speaking fixed action pattern works. 

 The issue is that public comments trigger the public speaking fixed action pattern. Similar to the way outlawing marriage triggers the prostitution and/or adultery fixed action patterns in women. 

 I had been assuming that pseudonymity or anonymity meant it was sufficiently private. However, I did the dumb thing: I forgot to check. Didn't question that assumption. This has been a problem, as I was clearly wrong. 

 Politicians and sophists are the way they are because the public is not trustworthy. Public speaking is an obligate-defector arena. You can't negotiate with the crowd. If you're their leader you can command them, but of course Despotism has no overt leaders. The speaker can't build trust in the crowd, and in return the crowd can't built trust in the speaker.
 Outside very specific and unlikely contexts, public speaking (and listening) is an act of warfare.

 Consequently, public comments are nearly guaranteed to be useless. Unless someone consciously and painstakingly subverts their fixed action pattern, it is unlikely that they can say anything worth trusting. It is near-impossible to communicate using broadly-visible feedback. 

 Even if you do want to subvert the fixed action pattern, it needs some etiquette or norm to deal with the fact that others will not subvert. Your pseudo-private communique will be warfare'd on by publics. E.g. the subverters need to be able to reliably identify and ignore the publics. This invokes a coordination problem, e.g. they need to find a Schelling etiquette, which in turn invokes Revenge is Sour. If folk could coordinate they would not be Democratic Man. 

 Check: usenet solved the etiquette thing by applying coordination. They "gently" bullied all the immigrants until they were socialized. I expect there was a shadow king or a shadow pope commanding the morals. 

 Double check: usenet failed because they were "high trust." They blacklisted instead of whitelisted. They accepted everyone until someone refused to submit, who they would ostracize. Originally the newcomers had a smaller population than the regulars, allowing assimilation (using cult indoctrination dynamics). Being "high trust" is okay in this situation, as they could bully the blacklisted ones off usenet.
 When the population they needed to blacklist outnumbered the validly-whitelisted population, the blacklisted ones assimilate the whitelist, instead of the whitelist carrying on ignoring all the immigrants. 

 Triple check: when usenet was limited to university students and profs, it was sufficiently non-public. You knew most of the population would and could never see it. More like a cafe, ephemeral speech, than an internet forum. Doesn't forcibly trigger the fixed action pattern.

 Basically what public comments are useful for is cheering and jeering. Mob behaviour. Not, in my opinion, useful. 

 Solution: public commentators openly pledge to subvert their fixed action pattern; they get interviewed for possible whitelisting. Physically possible but it probably would have happened already if remotely likely.
 Solution: use public comments only for invitations to a private realm.
 Solution: ensure your private realm isn't pseudo-public, e.g not a game developer discord.
 Technique: write out a public-facing comment, then explicitly avoid saying any of what it says in the private forum.

I suppose I have been hankering to drive off my last 12 readers. I can go full pseudo-private. Maybe start by posting my nighttime dreams. "I don't care." Yes, I know. Only irrationality made you think you cared in the first place.

 P.S. I just analytically proved that ads are inherently criminal. All billboards are vandalism. Women like ads because hybristophilia. Even verbal hawking is vandalism (which is why it's unpleasant). "Free" advice is worth less than you pay for it. P.P.S. Blogging is godless communism, not an exception to the free lunch rule. How substack is not a solution: I can't give free subscriptions to folk I want to talk to, and functionally the 'stack, due to KYC rules, is an FBI honeypot. If I accidentally trigger a Regime allergy, they don't need to round anyone up because we've all helpfully rounded ourselves up. Sure they're unlikely to J6 a private 'stack, but that's not the kind of risk where 'unlikely' is sufficiently low.

Peasants Talk Pointlessly

 The peasantry has high demand for excuses to not do anything. 

  Peasants like talking about the weather precisely because talking about the weather is completely pointless. Nobody doesn't already know. You can't do anything about it.

 The public norms of communication are deliberately arranged to make it as difficult as possible to get anything done. 

 Almost any productive input is considered rude. The only thing you can politely do is rehash what is already known. If you're very lucky, you can get a peasant to tell you something you would have soon learned through context. Even attempting to extend what was said is considered a play for dominance, rather than a ploy for construction and accumulation. They won't let you build up, they will only counter-attack.

 Peasants like talking during retail precisely because it's completely pointless. The only things the clerk can do for you that you can't do for yourself are things they're going to do regardless of what you say.

 The only way to successfully communicate with a peasant is as a non-peer, through commands. Do not explain, simply order. If they did it wrong, order them in such a way that they do it differently this time. Don't try to make them understand why they're doing it - they're not verbal or articulate enough to understand. Just tell them what to do step-by-step. Have them memorize it by rote. 

 When they say 90% of communication is nonverbal, they're being class-specific. These ones don't know what words mean, and consequently the content of the words can't matter. 90% is simply the highest non-100 percentage that you can express at the precision of one significant digit. 

 If you can't get the peasant to assume you're a non-peer, then it's best not to attempt to communicate with one at all, because it's impossible. You can safely ignore anything that comes out of their mouths. It was deliberately designed to be as irrelevant as possible. They can't understand anything that comes out of yours, unless they already understood it.

 When peasants complain that their work or lives seem pointless, it is in fact humblebragging. If it makes them sullen, that was the goal. They have a rule about not immediately repeating yourself, because it gives away the game, which is hilarious because it stops them from talking only and always about the weather, which is what would make them happy. "Wow you're tall." <= if it was something you couldn't help but notice on your own, it wouldn't come up.
 If it wasn't waste of breath, they wouldn't have said it.

Iconoclasm and the Products of the Times

 The bottom line is that iconoclasm doesn't work. It's fake.
 Allegedly iconoclasm is about not being the 'product of your times,' instead trying to transcend them. Put in spade language, it's about putting your thoughts in a hierarchy of logic rather than being shackled to producing support for the existing social hierarchy.
 Iconoclasm is in fact always hypericonism, the idea that the icons are unworthy representatives of the higher status, and need to be replaced with better icons. Idolatry is (supposed to be) the mistake of worshipping the symbol instead of the symbolized, and iconoclasm is the process of destroying the symbol so as to reach the symbolized more directly. It is never about idolizing something else. Iconoclasts never stop being idolaters, they simply want somewhat improved idols.

 If you're of low status, it's tempting to support high-status individuals because they can beat you up if you don't. If you're of high status, why would you want to rock the boat? The system is already rewarding you (so you believe, ref: wealth caps) why do anything to jeopardize that? Never mind defecting on cooperators, if you're already in position to change the system, wouldn't changing the system be defecting against yourself? (Revenge is Sour.)

 As a low-status individual, you can't change the system anyway. (Revenge Sourer.) If you could make it do what you want, you would already be of high status. Your live options are to appease the system or to antagonize the system. 

 This happens not merely subconsciously, but unconsciously. Trying to "win" the existing game happens as a reflex. It's not strategic.

 Put this another way: you don't normally think about the symbols of foreigners. For iconoclasm to be perceived as iconoclasm, it must be about the local, parochial symbols, and if it doesn't immediately fizzle into a fringe niche (burning sodomy-pride flags) then it's a winning move in the domestic game. If you have not submitted to the GAE in a sufficient sense, you don't think about rainbow flags at all, unless someone is trying to forcibly nail one up in your living room. 

 Even if you are wholly fascinated with base motives and rat racing, you don't want to be nothing more than a product of the times. Rome fell; all Empire will fall; if you are nothing but a product, you will fall along with it. 

 When an Empire falls, the elite are slaughtered. The Empire is always, sooner or later, overrun by barbarians. The barbarians successfully identify the old elite as a possible threat, and eliminate that threat the simple and easy way. You can't stop old-money families from rising to the top, but you can certainly stop them from existing, if they were dumb enough to shackle their fortunes to Empire. Indeed there's an argument that aristocrat slaughter is the primary driver of post-Bronze dysgenics.

 

 Society needs replaceable parts. If Sulla had not voluntarily relinquished power, he would have produced a Rome which relied entirely on a Sulla to function. As we know, there was no replacement Sulla. You don't want to run a machine that instantly collapses if one guy retires, gets sick, or gets assassinated by a product-man.
 However, you don't want to be one of those replaceable parts, due to the [why bother] factor. Why work hard if someone else is willing and able to work at least 99% as well as you? Take an easy job instead, perhaps part-time. Buy an index fund or real estate until you can live off rents and let the strivers do the striving. Technically you could be in it purely for base material motives, for the money, but it's not hard to find someone who will work better than someone motivated purely by pecuniary incentives. 

 Society needs NPCs, but there's no reason to be an NPC unless you don't have a choice. You want intellectual liberty.
 Iconoclasm &c is not intellectual liberty. Ironically, intellectual liberty is discipline and submission to a higher power. To avoid being a redundant and predictable product of the times, 

 As any kind of scholar or thinker, intellectual liberty from social status is non-negotiable. While we can use another cabinet-maker, as cabinet-makers have a finite throughput, there is no need to think a new idea more than once. 

 Put another way, there's a reason the shaman or witch-doctor lives out in the woods, rather than with the rest of the tribe.

Remember, Oversleeping Isn't Real

 Oversleeping is even harder than overbreathing. The more you manage to sleep, the higher your IQ. It also improves athletics. With few caveats, if you can sleep, you should. Unless you want to be more stupid, I suppose, then the opposite applies; try to stay awake as long and as often as possible, especially with an alarm clock.

Space Travel vs. Genetic Engineering

 I was thinking about genetic engineering. I realized you have to be way smarter than us to do any good genetic engineering. No amount of incremental improvement is enough. You can't do the computer thing where you hack together black boxes in an abstraction stack. If you want to edit a natural genome, you have to understand not only what it's doing, but why it's doing it that way. What mortal scientists can manage doesn't even count as finger painting. It's not even banging rocks together. It's a monkey smearing their shit on the wall, spreading the stench and waste-borne disease.

 Scifi often portrays space travel as about as hard as genetic engineering. And that's true, now isn't it? I can't prove it, but I don't think I need to.
 Humans can't go to space without getting dramatically smarter. Probably 600 IQ at least - and that's assuming significant nonlinear growth in epistemic competence with IQ. Seriously superhuman intelligence. Smart enough to deliberately engineer for IQ, making the subspecies even smarter.

 If aliens visited us here on Eden, we wouldn't even look like children to them. We wouldn't look like monkeys. They wouldn't be able to even see we're conscious without advanced instrumentation or special epistemic techniques. They wouldn't try to go to war with us, any more than we tried to go to war with the dodo or passenger pigeon, as per Jared Diamond. Reflect on thy hubris, or more accurately, the hubris of Hollywood and its sponsors. (Narcissistic demand for hubris.)

 Heed: a metal species wouldn't work. Wet carbon nanoengineering is clearly better. A metal organism can't automatically self-repair, as just one example. Not to mention the brain runs on 20 watts. Uses rare parts, sure, but even so. Figuring out carbohydrate engineering is non-optional, and nobody but me has even conceived of attempting it.

 Evolution is conflict; know thy enemy (environment) know thyself. Mortals have indeed seized control of the environment. Other species are not peers, but fluffly flavour details. To be or not to be, it doesn't matter. If it's important they will be domesticated, becoming little more than an extension of their farmers. However, without control of the self, control of its own genome, mortal species remain a natural species. They control their environment, but without self-control, who really is in control of the environment? 

 Lo, it is so. All is indeed one. The self is part of the environment. The genome is part of the environment. These parts of the environment remain wholly beyond plans and artifice. What runs down the middle of the soul isn't the line between good and evil, but the final frontier. The last wilderness to be tamed lies in the heart. (And everywhere else DNA is found.)
 Mortals are too dumb to even notice this constitutes an unexplored frontier, never mind conquering this virgin land.

 If Musk wants a Mars colony, studying rockets is the wrong approach. He needs to study rocket engineers, and more importantly habitat engineers. Where is his test colony site? Where is the trial Antarctic city? Where is the prototype underwater city?
 You uh having fun playing in your box, there, Musk? Got enough sand to be getting along with? Mind the walls...wouldn't want to upset the caretakers...
 More importantly, he needs to rehabilitate eugenics. Without an IQ breeding program, he will find that the reason there is no underwater city is that the habitat engineers aren't smart enough to make it profitable. They can't work out how to make it self-sustaining. 

 Revenge is Sour, in this case, due to lack of self-control. If space were a viable environment, mortals would have already been controlled into it. It would have just happened. 

 But wait, there's more. A big reason there's no eugenics breeding program is that stockholders have a 3-month time horizon. It's not even long enough to gestate a fetus, let alone go through multiple generations. Musk needs to study not habitat engineers, but securities law engineers. He needs to study law engineer engineers, to figure out why security law personnel lead to this securities policy, so he can reintroduce long-term thinking. In other words, he needs to study the Lords of America.
 He needs to be the kind of person who isn't remotely surprised by the advent of [Woke]. We should be skeptical when Plato says the unexamined life is not worth living, but it seems, in the end, he was correct. With perhaps some caveats, but certainly this applies to someone like Elon Musk. He needs to have the kind of education that I developed, or his project is flagrantly hopeless, with the one base exception of efficiently sucking blood from the society.
 God's sense of humour: Musk has his bureaucrat whispering. The prank is that he refuses to use it for what he needs. The heavens are incomprehensibly generous. There is no conceivable reason for them to shower us in gifts like this, but they have done it anyway. Musk has the necessary skills; he can't blame anyone but himself.