A short compendium of stupid things you should never say

Sunday, 30 March, Year 6 d.Tr. | Author: Mircea Popescu

Stupid thing you should never say #1 :

psterryl it's impossible to call it one way or the other

I'll believe there's a god once she comes to my house naked and gives me a divine blowjob. Not before. Before god comes to my house naked and gives me a divine blowjob she does not exist.

The quoted nonsense is often deployed by barely literate proponents of various religions, something along the lines of "it wasn't proven god doesn't exist therefore you should waste your time every Sunday listening to talking heads of type X". It holds about as much water as Russell's teapot, of course, but that does not deter the barely literate : they don't know who Russell was.

In any event, the standard for calling a Bitcoin business a failure (which is often shorthanded to "scam" for very good practical reasons) is not nor can ever be "when and only when the initiator releases a gpg-signed statement saying so". Not only because would-be "CEO"s to this day fail to use proper contracts, much to everyone's ulterior detriment, but also because your run of the mill "CEO" is roughly at the level of the five year old : he WILL tear open the wrapping, no matter how long that takes, but he WILL NOT take the shredded packaging material to the trash, no matter how little time or effort that'd require. Because what's in it for him ? What is this reputation thing ? He doesn't need the WoT, he would just like some BTC. Please ?

The standard is generally speaking failing to file reports. It got BitVPS delisted, at any rate (and if you're one of these would-be webexchanges, do learn that article by heart, it's - like it or not, agree or not - the Bitcoin standard of how to do such a thing).

~ * ~

Stupid thing you should never say #2 :

psterryl everyone is entitled to their own opinions/deductions

This is plainly false, in exactly the same way and to exactly the same degree claiming "every plot of land could be a seaport" is false. Those plots of land adjacent to the sea could be seaports. Those plots of land not adjacent to the sea, however, could not. Never. No matter what.

This isn't a negotiable point, or in any manner open to any discussion whatsoever. Some are entitled to their own opinions. Some others, however, are not. Period & full stop. Claiming otherwise is at best ill disguised socialism (which is to say, an immoral drive to profit for oneself from the stupidity of others through application of ideology) but otherwise simply stupidity.

So how do we distinguish between those who are and those who are not entitled to opinions ? Well, this is where it gets tricky. Which is why

~ * ~

Stupid thing you should never say #3 :

psterryl well, my 1st class university degree should suggest i'm ok for #1

Generally speaking, the standard for whether you're entitled to your opinions or not rests in the hands of the other party. If you manage to establish your authority with them, then you have it. If you do not, then you do not.

This has the unfortunate result that it allows for what's been known for a thousand years as invincible stupidity, which is to say someone stupid enough to not allow any authority to anyone will then necessarily toil in a solipsist hell (and will most likely have to be put down sooner or later). Unfortunate or not it is also unavoidable, because any other standard would on the face conflict with Descartes' cogito, thus rendering the very (intellectual) existence of everyone quite questionable theoretically and quite practically absent. So it's one of those things required for the functioning of society and the well being of all individual members thereof. You know, like inequality. Exactly like inequality.

However, aiming to enact such authority on the theoretically very rotten basis of some entity external to the discussion (unless that university is in my WoT I couldn't care less what it says about you) and the practically very rotten basis of an anonymous such external entity belies a complete misunderstanding of pretty much everything involved, and as such certifies the emitter for the not-allowed-opinions campi.

~ * ~

Stupid thing you should never say #4 :

psterryl as of this moment, i'm officially talking to everyone in this channel apart from you

The problem with that is that it computes to a "please add me to ignore list" request (think about it). Which you know...

mircea_popescu aite.
* psterryl!*@* added to ignore list.

While it's true that I review the killfile once in a blue moon, it's not true that being on it does very much for you in that interval.

In closing, it occurs to me that this compendium is actually incredibly exhaustive, considering how very short it is.

———
  1. Or, to quote,

    punkman1 psterryl: congratulations, you've removed all doubt

    []

Category: Meta psihoza
Comments feed : RSS 2.0. Leave your own comment below, or send a trackback.

2 Responses

  1. Mircea Popescu`s avatar
    1
    Mircea Popescu 
    Wednesday, 7 May 2014

    Adding to the foregoing :

    DrewHorne: BUT the investment has a 6000% return, looking for $1,250,000 USD in exchange for 30% equity of a company we will sell for $250,000,000 in 5 years

    There's so much wrong with this approach I wouldn't know where to begin. Just don't.

  2. Mircea Popescu`s avatar
    2
    Mircea Popescu 
    Monday, 6 October 2014

    As a bonus :

    Oct 07 00:41:25 mircea_popescu ;;seen psterryl
    Oct 07 00:41:26 gribble psterryl was last seen in #bitcoin-assets 26 weeks, 2 days, 23 hours, 27 minutes, and 21 seconds ago: how many individual trades there were

    Guess what ? 191 days is just about 26 weeks and change.

Add your cents! »
    If this is your first comment, it will wait to be approved. This usually takes a few hours. Subsequent comments are not delayed.