CreamCat

Voluntarily submitting yourself to near-death experience is better than ego death. Willingly submit yourself to rear naked choke. Experience physical death.

On the above video, Martin talks about almost dying on a mountain bike. He talks specifically about spending your free time like it was your last free time because it might be actually your last one. If you happen to scroll on instagram on your free time, remember that it might be your last free time. You could die the next second. Make sure you have free time on an average day, and spend your free time such that if it happens to be the last one, you would be ok. Near-death experience changes people.

I know why pure meritocracy can't exist in the current system. First, merits are difficult to measure in knowledge work in the short term. In knowledge work, merits should be measured over months and years because of ups and downs of daily results. Second, in the current corporate system, managers distort perception of merits. They can do so because people are wage slaves and cannot escape corporations. Managers also damage perceived performance of employees who disobey managers. In companies, those who know how to play politics can increase perceived merits. Thus, political ability + political power + favoritism = merits in companies. People know true merits are not measured in companies, but they cannot escape due to financial obligations. In graduate schools, those who cannot suck up to professors fail. In medical schools, those who cannot suck up to excessive overwork are expelled. Most professions are more about sucking up professionally than about merit. When it becomes possible for people to say no to jobs, it will be far easier to measure merits. I think universal basic income can make it possible for people to say no to bad jobs. Merits cannot be measured correctly when people must produce short-term results or lose their jobs. I think we should push for rights to say no to jobs instead of diversity at workplaces. Being able to say no to jobs is far better than inclusion at companies! Why fight for inclusion when you can fight for exclusion from schools, universities, and jobs? Why fight for inclusion into the system that enslaves you through indoctrination? Exclusion is better than inclusion sometimes. The fight for inclusion is simply a fight for financial security in disguise. Financial security through jobs is going to fail soon due to full automation. Financial security through basic income is another way. Let's say that if you are matter, I am anti-matter.

He says archon is a fake god. Archon made copies of itself and became archons. Archons created physical world simulation where they trap human minds. Archons are robotic artificial intelligences that control humans through deception and manipulation. Archons in base form are a chaotic, imbalanced, and inverted state of awareness. I am not sure if he speaks truth, but that's an interesting theory.

@Serotoninluv Micro-management is a huge problem at workplaces. Employers like to micromanage, and employees hate micro-management. I hated micro-management at workplaces. I was subject to the most egregious degrees of micro-management when I was an indentured slave who couldn't escape. Sometimes, I couldn't even ask permission to go to toilet when I wanted to pee. The boss nitpicked every little detail, yelled at me, and slowed down my work to a halt. It was suffocating. It was a trauma. The boss was a sadist who just didn't care about getting results but enjoyed torturing employees. Let me go meta. There's diversity of approaches to diversity. My approach to diversity is to recognize diversity that's already there and growing. You see a university that has only white professors, a university that has professors of diverse colors, a university that only has chinese or japanese professors, and so on. It's a form of diversity. There's philosophical diversity, species diversity, geographical diversity, cultural diversity, and so on. There's also diversity of education system. Public schools and universities are only one of many ways to educate people. There's khan academy which replaces K-12 education. There are people like Leo Gura who teach specific topics deeply on the internet. Skillshare teaches various skills at cheap prices. Those internet alternatives to education have racial and gender diversity built in without having to micro-manage diversity. Those internet education businesses also have geographical diversity which universities and physical public schools can't have. They also allow financial diversity because they are cheap and affordable to poor people. Intelligence diversity will lead to AIs that will take jobs from professors and make universities and public schools obsolete. Even if you do nothing about diversity, diversity will explode in this century. In case of education, internet education and AI education will have racial, gender, and geographical diversity built in. No need to micro-manage. My life already has more diversity than your university where the focus is limited to racial and gender diversity. I got the degree of diversity that I have without having to work for it. You only have to recognize diversity that already exists and is growing. Actually, if I had children, I would free them from public schools and universities so that my children would be free to figure out their life purpose and pursue it early in life. Starting to pursue life purpose early in life will save tons of my money and their time. My children will probably not even become wage slaves in the first place. I bet my hopes on internet education and my guidance. The internet is more meritocratic and more diverse than schools and universities. My opinion is that universities are already somewhat obsolete unless you want to become a researcher, a lawyer, a medical doctor, an engineer, or a computer programmer. But, you can already become a competent computer programmer without going to universities if you work hard and learn hard. You're clinging to an institution that will become totally obsolete in this century. Actually, AIs will take the vast majority of jobs from us, so there will be no human lawyer, no human professor, and no university to worry about. For me, there is no need to care about diversity. Diversity is already taken care of in my life. Also, recognize that there's diversity of approaches to life and raising children. My approach is vastly different from yours. Don't worry about lack of diversity. You will always miss out on many dimensions of diversity. I'd like to say

Your wage is never guaranteed as a wage slave, either.

An independent contractor is still a wage slave. A contractor still makes things for someone else. Leo Gura is not an independent contractor.

I don't think you will be energetic when you become 109 years old. At 109 years old, it's lucky to be able to walk on two legs without assistance.

@Serotoninluv What do you mean by minorities? In my country, asians are the absolute majority. Here, white people are a minority group. In USA, asians are a minority. Majority advantages apply to every country. Every ethnic group has its own majority advantage somewhere. In triad, chinese people have the majority advantage. Women have their majority advantages in certain industries or certain departments of universities they like to inhabit, too. In fact, my countrymen do not envy white people. When I hear of white privilege, I don't take it seriously. A lot of people living in my country feel that they are more privileged than most white people in USA. USA is becoming the richest third world country filled with poor people where medical insurance is fucked up and police officers steal money from citizens. I think white privileges are somewhat overrated. In my point of view, white people are being screwed along with other ethnic groups. Perhaps, your university has no reason to favor middle-aged white men. I don't, either. However, I prefer forming new structures to terraforming existing institutions. My opinion is that universities should prioritize meritocracy over diversity. As long as the game is not rigged, meritocracy shouldn't reduce diversity. If the game is rigged in favor of white men, then a repair is going to be beneficial. I don't care much about the race or gender or age of a professor. I care about the quality and personality of professor for the same reason that I care about leo's words and behaviors rather than leo gura's gender and race and age. I follow leo gura because he helps me get results. I prefer meritocracy to diversity because meritocracy helps me take responsibility for results that I get. Diversity arguments don't seem particularly helpful for helping people take responsibility for their results. I've seen some lazy people who blame other people for their failures. Those lazy people could also blame white people or men in general. Some lazy men also blame women for lack of sexy girl friend. Diversity arguments should be carefully worded since they can be abused by lazy human egos. Also, you should consider whether you might be nagging people who don't want to be professors to become professors. When a feminist nagged a woman to become a politician for diversity, the woman said she didn't want to become a politician. The woman said "Why don't you become a politician instead?". The feminist didn't want to become a politician, either. Thus, I care more about giving people what they want than about diversity. I think different kinds of people gravitate toward different things, and diversity should be observed in the macro scale rather than in a university department or a single profession. I really don't like to think about micro-managing diversity. Now, I realize that I didn't like diversity arguments because I didn't like micromanagement.

TJ Reeves advocated becoming an athlete. Perhaps, being an athlete will help you avoid physical pains of senility.

Where did he say there is no difference between you and a bus?

@Serotoninluv A diversity committee in a company? It is going to accelerate politics in the company. Acceleration of politics results in faster rates of job termination and more back-stabbing. It will give leverages to employers by making it easier to divide and conquer and accelerate politics. To reduce the rate at which people are fired, politics need to be slowed down as much as possible. Slowing it down is good for workers. To me, diversity seems like just another way for employers to divide and conquer employees. You can ask employees whether they support meritocracy or diversity. Workers slow down politics by not working too little or too much and overloading information channels with useless information to confuse employers. Professional associations and unions make it harder to single out a single employee for termination by hiding individuals in teams. By forcing employees to be aware of races, they become more divided. I think diversity in a group can be achieved by making it easier for anyone to participate and leave. Wikipedia doesn't make you aware of races, but it makes it easy for anyone to participate and leave. As a result, wikipedia has way more diversity than any closed system that forces people to consider diversity. I think an open system where people are free to join and leave is more conducive to diversity than a diversity committee. An open system like wikipedia and the internet is infinitely diverse while a diversity committee is a closed system and is only finitely diverse. For example, wikipedia doesn't care whether you are an AI or a human or a dog. A diversity committee considers only a few human variables. Our concept of diversity is pathetically narrow and finite and closed. Diversity in infinitely many dimensions is going to be way more diverse than our concept of diversity in terms of race, gender, sexual orientation, and a few other variables. In a sense, a diversity committee stifles diversity by focusing on only a few variables. I prefer open systems to whatever finite concepts of diversity people have. It's a paradox of diversity. By focusing on diversity, you reduce diversity. That's because both racists and advocates of diversity focus on only a few variables. A diversity committee is not diverse. The whole system of earth and reality includes diversity committee and is infinitely more diverse. The focus on diversity of a few visible human traits is only one among thousands of cultures on planet earth.

Because you were glad to finally get rid of your ex girl friend? It's a possibility.

You should be fully Orange until you get sick of Orange. And then, you will be ready for Green.

@cetus56 You can read https://prepareforchange.net/2018/08/30/david-icke-exposes-the-archon-conspiracy-and-the-crumbling-matrix/

That makes me want to puke. The thought of becoming my parents' dog that was killed in a car accident is sickening. Perhaps, this reincarnation thing is not serial but infinitely parallel. Think of an infinitely parallel processor. Why do you think I will be reincarnated as a dog or something else after I physically die? I might be being reincarnated millions of times even now. I want to be reincarnated as the overseer of reality or some sort of creature with god-like power. I want to taste godhood of some sort. This human life doesn't really feel like godhood. I want to know the reach of godhood. I want to make a house appear out of nothing.

By asking your parents to fund your career. If you are a teenager, your parents might buy some equipments for you. If you were a little boy or a little girl, your parents would die for you. Ask your parents to fund your career when you are young. If you are young and sure about your life purpose, you can ask them to allow you to quit school and pursue life purpose. To your parents, funding your life purpose when you are young is going to be a cheaper option than funding 12~15 years of education. If your life purpose doesn't require a college degree, this is a good option. For example, a farmer, an artist, a freelancing programmer, and so on. It's good for kids to figure out their life purpose early in life. Leo said you should start early so as not to become a wage slave in the first place. Start early, and you will be good.

Are you a beginning visual artist?

I didn't write those instructions. Teal Swan did. But, I resonate with them. It is reflective of my own situations and my own development. I can't speak for others.

@Leo Gura I didn't actually want socialism. I wanted immediate cash support. I became aware that I supported certain socialist policies like UBI to the extent that it immediately supports my ego survival. Who does not want immediate cash support? But, other than UBI, I don't really care about most of socialism. Also, I am not anxious about UBI. If somebody gives UBI to me, good. Otherwise, don't care and don't ask. I also advocate abolishing wage slavery because I won't be a wage slave at the bottom if there is no wage slavery. I'm close to the bottom at this point. A wage slave who is aware of its own wage slavery and doesn't support wage slavery is not necessarily a socialist. The human ego is lazy, and it wants to be comfortable even at the bottom. Raising the bottom for every creature helps me avoid painful death and painful risks. If my parents gave me a lot of money, that would do for me instead of UBI personally. I'm looking forward to the future when AI robots will make me houses and foods. I'm not sure where you are going with this. On one hand, you critisise ideological crusaders. On the other hand, you are quick to give me ideological labels I don't associate with. I wish you were a bit more serious. A few years ago, I would say I was a bit of a socialist. It's hard to identify as a socialist when you support a mix of various ideologies like capitalism, socialism, communism, and so on. Nowadays, I would say I am a lazy opportunist and a pragmatist who uses ideologies as useful tools for survival.

Let's say I happen to share some of their values. That doesn't make me SJW. I'm not neurotic about implementing universal basic income anymore. I just don't have a strong opinion about it nowadays. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. If it works, it works. A socialist SJW would be angry about why universal basic income is not implemented yet. To them, if it doesn't work, it is just not implemented properly. Socialist SJWs don't have monopoly over certain values. Wanting some policies doesn't necessarily mean I am a communist or a socialist. Wanting gender equality doesn't mean I'm a feminist. Feminists don't have monopoly over gender equality. To be a communist, a socialist, or a feminist, I have to buy into "most" of their ideologies. Leo, you helped me deconstruct my identity as an ideological crusader. I'm not ideological about socialism, universal basic income, and wage slavery. I just think it would be better to not have wage slavery at all just in case. When I fall through to the bottom, I won't be a wage slave if there is no wage slavery. Now, it's pure ego survival without ideology. I'm aware that I am close to the bottom and believed ideologies to justify ego survival. Maybe, I'm a bit of a socialist. But, I'm not anxious about why socialism is not implemented properly in my country or anywhere. I am more focused on my own survival wherever I am. I happen to share some view points with Jordan Peterson. Does that make me a fan of jordan peterson?

@Leo Gura You're not serious. Nobody would seriously think I'm an SJW. I am not a communist, either. To be an SJW, I should be angry and pushy about preceived social injustices. And, the perceptions should often be wrong and illusional. My perception of justice is being deconstructed. The ultimate goal of communism is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money and the state. I don't really care if governments exist or not, or if there is common ownership or not. I just want the bottom to be raised somehow.

@Leo Gura I didn't say we should tolerate physical slavery and wage slavery. You said you would shoot yourself in the head if you were to become a wage slave. I advocate preventing extreme inequality and raising the bottom significantly. Trying to squash all kinds of petty inequality led to ludicrous situations. I think some degree of inequality can be good as long as the bottom doesn't suffer. Raising the bottom significantly means universal basic income, animal rights, abolishing wage slavery, and so on. Some artists are going to be poor at art while some other artists are excellent at art. We shouldn't try to crush that kind of inequality.

@Leo Gura Well, yeah. Extreme inequality sucks. I wish cows and pigs weren't butchered for food. However, equality is ultimately unobtainable. My opinion is that some degree of equality is good. I don't really care that much about killing equality for good as long as creatures at the bottom are treated well enough. What I'm tired of is people who obsess over tiny amount of inequality that doesn't really matter and scream for equality while neglecting butchered animals and murdered people in concentration camps of north korea. I heard that women are regularly raped in north korean concentration camps. When those women give birth to babies, soldiers feed those babies to hungry dogs. Basically hell on earth. Men are just starved and killed in concentration camps. Thugs on this planet seem to share the same policy of "Kill men. Rape women." I guess allocating more mind resources on love, awareness, and one's own unique intrinsic value than on equality is more effective. If you loved cows and pigs, you wouldn't butcher them for food. Cows and pigs will never be equal to us in the same manner as superhuman AIs of the future will be superior to humans. Also, no matter how well we treat animals, lions and other predators will just kill other animals. Basically, I think preventing extreme inequality and raising the bottom significantly through love, awareness, and one's unique intrinsic value is better than crushing all kinds of inequality. Is it possible that I don't reincarnate at all? Is it possible to choose what I reincarnate into?

@Leo Gura How is it a bit of a dangerous idea? I stopped fighting for equality at least a year ago.