Nilsi

Even within the framework of a Deleuzian Rhizomatic society, where hierarchical structures supposedly yield to interconnected networks, there are certain fundamental principles we can not get around. Think about the laws of economics, game theory, evolution, and other systems dynamics. It is undeniable that inherent disparities in genetics and upbringing persist and privilege few individuals with an initial advantage. These advantages are only reinforced by the laws of economics. Power differentials always grow and further the divide. Evolution works by way of the occasional emergence of advantageous mutations, but operates in such a way that these traits remain scarce initially. This deliberate scarcity prevents the risk of destabilizing the entire system. Even in an era of democratized exponential technology, which would empower humanity to influence the course of evolution, the propensity for arms races persists. First movers and the less risk-averse will always outrace the herd, producing runaway effects that ripple through the network. The only people talking about „ableism“ are the unable that got dealt a bad hand by life. Slave morality all over again.

My point is that it literally couldn’t be different. I’ll leave it at that.

I wouldn't want it to be any other way, because it couldn't be any other way. I don't mean to be a party pooper, but the question is simply illogical. There is a philosophical concept called "plenitude," which posits that everything that can exist must necessarily exist. Just look at nature. Every viable ecological niche becomes occupied through the evolutionary process of mutation and selection. Take the survival strategy of the cuckoo. It kicks out the eggs of other bird species and substitutes them with its own, because the absence of evolutionary pressure on these bird species to distinguish their own eggs has created an exploitable loophole - which must necessarily be exploited. The mere existence of mustard seeds, vinegar, salt, and water guarantees the emergence of mustard...

The less time you want to spend on actualizing this goal, the more scrupulous and immoral you have to be. Some fast (legal) ways to make money: Serving in the army $ Working on an oil rig $$ High ticket sales $$$ Pimping girls $$$$$ I suggest you don’t optimize for that goal to heavily and focus on what you actually enjoy doing/are good at.

Reality is too genius to dislike anything about it.

Never had any problems with this, luckily. I’ve always held quite extreme views on politics and religion, and I have no reservations at all about transgressing social norms — as long as you’re secure enough in your own perspective, you can always settle for a friendly „agree to disagree.“

Exactly. If your friends are bothered by your interest’s and are unwilling to engage with them, there is no friendship (goes both ways of course). Friendship fundamentally depends on you being able to share your passions and interests with each other.

The book is about the way in which capitalism and consumer culture alienates symbols from their meaning (e.g. zoomers wearing Joy Division band shirts, without even knowing they are a band, because the cover art has „transcended“ it’s original purpose). Extending this argument to broader evolutionary and developmental processes doesn’t make sense and leads to silly conclusions.

I know the damn book. My point of contention is that AI music is no less „real“ than a bird song. By this logic humans are the ultimate dystopian “simulacrum“ of prokaryotes and eukaryotes. What kind of an argument is this supposed to be?

I got some of my friends to watch Leo’s videos and take psychedelics and they thank me for it to this day.

Is this supposed to be a joke? I remember this show from the early Covid days. The host was some toxic manosphere loser, bitching and moaning about how he didn’t get any pussy in his time living in China, because of racism and propaganda.

You have to make it matter to them. Most people have no good reason to believe that this work has any relevance to their life, at all. They find it confusing and even repelling, because it’s so far removed from their everyday experience. If you actually care about getting your friends interested in this stuff, you have to be a master salesman.

Meaning?

The book he was referring to explicitly condemns postmodern culture for being oh so simulated, which is a stupid argument. There is no such thing as real and simulated, unless you create that distinction (by privileging some part of reality over another). These are the most dangerous and seductive ideas, because those explanatory structures (e.g. archetypes, grammar, psychological needs) are so robust and enduring — but ultimately of course just as transient and illusory, as anything else.

China is certainly quite neurotic and cynical, but they are just playing to their strengths - I don’t see anymore corruption in China than elsewhere. They have a clear strategy (create an army of highly trained and specialized people, and make sure that foreign ideals don’t corrupt their minds) and carry it out to it’s fullest — good for them!

This is conservative bogus. What exactly qualifies as a real thing and what as a copy? This is akin to your father cranking up the car radio to full volume when a Black Sabbath song comes on and saying “Now this was real music — unlike the stuff you young folks listen to.”

TL;DW?

People buy emotionally and justify intellectually. You can pull something like this off in a bar or club and pick her up before her rational mind has the opportunity to reflect . If you’re simply prospecting and generating leads (as the guy in the video does), you need to get her emotionally attached AND do it in such a way that once she’s back home thinking about you and perhaps consulting her girlfriends (which is what girls do), she can rationally justify meeting up with you again. These flashy gimmicky approaches won’t satisfy her rational mind. It makes for good YouTube footage, but that’s about it. I‘ve sold so much shit to people that don’t need my solution at all, because I closed them during our first interaction — while they were still emotional and had no opportunity to reflect and think about it. This is why cold calling and going for a one-call close (in the business world) and cold approaching and taking her home immediately (only really works at night; in the dating world) is so effective. They don’t see you coming and won’t know what hit them until it’s already too late.

According to Islam and Christianity, it’s the decision upon death of whether you go to heaven or hell (based on how well you adhered to their dogma in this life). It‘s a stupid toxic idea and easily the most detrimental lie in all of human history. Every philosophy that posits a „other world“ is toxic garbage and turns people into life-denying sheep that are easy to control and manipulate.

I want one of them as a cleaner. Probably does a better job than those robots.

Why did you decide to create a course instead of just offering consulting. I would imagine the latter is way more lucrative (in the beginning) and has a lower entrance barrier.

Dan Koe is a great resource for this. According to him, the key to success in this market place is to synthesize all your interests and expertise and thus create a totally unique product/service (your „Purple Cow“).

A serious relationship is probably the only place you shouldn’t do that. But in general, yes, being a good actor and is key to power.