Money, fucking and lying

Yeah, they're related.

First, as to the part of money and fucking, from the source of all thoughtⁱ :

Generally it's not understood that money is a burden, not a boon, and this current child porn cultural trendⁱⁱ is mixing the worst ingredients : child-hydrazine with money-methanol (it WILL make you blind, if you drink it!). So far all that's coming out of this recipe are wrecks.

I happen to be very fond of this particular expression. Now consider the context. For one thing, in Bitcoin is creating a whole new set of problems

This problem is currently - at least in my eyes - the largest issue plaguing Bitcoin. On one hand, its fascinating ease of use is possibly its greatest asset. On the other hand, kids’ ease in disregarding reality and highly esteeming themselves may not be their greatest asset, but it is statistically and from a species point of view their only utility. Neither can reasonably be made to go away, neither can sanely be dispensed of, and yet their contact creates a huge problem.

For the other, in The problem of too much money

Why ? Because there’s money, fake, bullshit, useless, fiat money constantly being pumped into the economy. This money is a fucking burden of the first degree on the shoulders of the people who do capital allocation, which is to say the investment bankers, fund managers and all the rest of the “evil” “financial elite”. You see, the curse of money is that you have to do something with it. You can’t simply take the Seinfeld out and “Why should my money work for me ? Let my money relax, I’ve worked hard enough for it.”

So what are you going to do with it ? Tin women, that’s what.

Child-hydrazine ? Check. Methanol money ? Check. Kaboom in three, two, one...

On the topic of money and lying, hmm... And at this juncture, allow me to dedicate the following explanation of the utility, importance and rational necessity of the bezzle and of the living wage to my engineering friends in #bitcoin-assets, who are certain to be blown away by this realisation, in loving memory of their much more comfortable uptake of my earlier explanations as to how corruption is equally important, useful and rationally necessary. That part was easy, because you're not invested in the bureaucracy. But to that set of snails, that idea is salt just like to you this idea is going to be unpleasant. Anyway, forward!

Money has two aspects, which are in fact unrelated. On one hand, money is the instrument of ensuring one's survival. You need money to pay the rent, and you need money to bail your idiot kid out of jail. This is all money, and any living being's natural tendency to acquire the means of life guarantees everyone will be forever trying to get money. How much of it ? A lot. How much is a lot ? Shut up and count, Bernie.

On the other hand, money is also the instrument of ensuring a group's survival, so to speak, through allocating resources back and forth. This is substantially different from that, much like cooking and eating are entirely different professions. You wouldn't trust a theatrical critic to write you a play, nor would you trust a playwright to get very far in the newspaper columns with his butthurt ideas, would you ? Same here!

This is what the bezzle is : an attempt to separate the first from the second. Because it makes sense to try and somehow separate them, because they're different things going different ways. Of course, there's also a lot of danger in trying to separate them, because for some abyssal reason nobody groks they don't seem to actually work apart. In that sense, an engine and a chassis are the components of all automobiles, be they cars planes trains submarines or anything else. Yet nobody to date has managed to build better automobiles by separating the chassis from the engine. Even if they are different things, and even if they are going different places.

Whereas the living wage is an attempt to lessen the pressure on the same set of problems going the other way : if nobody actually needs for anything, the theory goes, all sorts of people who aren't capital allocators but merely trying to ensure their own survival would stop getting in the way of things.

Neither of these works, of course, but the fact that they don't work doesn't actually make them or their proponents evil - they're trying something that actually makes sense. Of course, trying something that makes sense but doesn't work does make one wrong, and perseverence in error, especially if doubling down with fraud (pious or otherwise) and the array of sins therein attendant does make one evil. But that's an entirely different story.

To sum it all up, schematically : children have vast potential, which doesn't exist, as per the definition of potential. Society tends to defend itself from the dangers this potential poses through all sort of cognitive absurdities. Children seek money as the simple and obvious avenue to overturn whatever parts of those absurdities that's choking them to death. Society gives children money, because of said absurdities, and also pays a lot of very close attention to them (same reason). Children are thus "forced" to misrepresent themselves and their abilities. This pressure renders them insane and the whole thing blows up, only to be recollected by society, reinflated and... well... it blows up again.

In other words : economic cycles are in no sense economic. They're not actually social, either. They're the net result of specifically puritan idiocy, much like the gaunt, bloodless look of 1800s British girls. Their continuation in the "world" economy is simply a testament to the continued preeminence of puritans up top, which is why Japan could experience economic states that "aren't possible" for lengthy intervals, as a for instance.

The only possible solution to all this would be "decentralisation", after a fashion. Specifically :

• Renounce the heretic belief that children are not ready. They're ready just as soon as they're ready, and if this outlook results in a few sad stories, fuck them.
• Renounce the heretic belief that children are ready. They're ready just as soon as they're ready, and if this outlook results in a few sad stories, fuck them.
• Renounce the heretic belief that acting out a life is just as good as living. Yeah, it's going to be painful. Fuck you.

For as long as the world continues to be dominated by children that magically pop into sexual maturity on their 18th birthday, the abuse of children as "Nobel prize laureates"ⁱⁱⁱ will continue unabated. It's shameful, and sad, and doesn't actually serve anything. For as long as the world continues to be dominated by giving the appearance of success, the complete and utter rape of resources and ruin of productive factors will continue unabated. It's dubious we can long afford this. For as long as people continue insisting they can act with purpose and entertain a privileged relation with the future, instead of sanely proceeding from causes and letting the future be nobody will be able to understand anything, and what's worse, everyone will be able to claim they understood everything, and you'll never know the difference. It's a sickening display, honestly, and getting quite tiresome in its flat recursivity.

Time for a little actual change maybe ?

1. It is the source of all truth, too, because that's how truth is born - openly discussing the mishaps of Jaron Lukasiewicz and the sad fate of his CEO-hopes and founder-aspirations. That's the other triplet, truth, thought and laughter.

   Which is why the culture of "corporate" secrecy - borne of pure narcissism, through the narcissist's desperate efforts to avoid any wound to his ego readily rising to a manic pitch - is detrimental to society generally, to the people involved themselves and a principal cause to business failure. If you live in a context that offers you the guarantee you won't be laughed at in the public square, you therefore also necessarily live in a context that does not allow you to understand anything of any import, and that guarantees your failure.

   Get the fuck out of that swamp already. There are worse things in this world than being laughed at for having been an idiot. Such as for instance being an idiot. [↩]

2. Boy is this going to be a doozy.

   First off, the child sex part : 12 yo girls split open, with posterior fourchette tears and blood everywhere stand today as they stood during countless millennia for a perfectly valid mode of human sexuality.

   Like it or not, "be" or think yourself "ready" to confront the realities of this world or not, whatever you may think you think or think you want aside : not all women are equal. Not all of them work similarly even, let alone homologuously. Women, being people, are not machine parts, and their creator in his mercy did not see fit to standardize them. Consequently, in any population there's going to be a thin sliver of women who are best served by the wilted life among printed paper, daydreaming out the tower window. These mature intellectually much after they mature sexually. There's also going to be a generally thicker sliver of women who mature intellectually before they mature sexually, and are actually quite ready to start their sexual life before they're well equipped to have one. And you should be thankful for their existence rather than try to hide it away as some sort of family secret, on one hand because if we ever meet some major disaster in the future they're going to be the main reason the species survives - which it definitely will - and on the other hand because at numerous junctions in the history of various cultures they're the ones that bridged gaps that'd have otherwise extinguished the flame.

   Equating all of this lengthy, politically inconvenient, complex reality with the abominable is simple, perhaps very convenient, utterly inaccurate splitting. I understand that you, as their father, would be best served by the girls being type wilty rather than type wily. That's fine, but it's about you, not about them. I understand that you, as their employer, alongside the owners of the productive 18th century nunneries in Lowell, would much prefer it if they spent their free time in chant and meditation. Again, your business interest as an in-your-own-mind owner of cuntstock is not really important here. I can see why the phthisic look was the official upper class Victorian icon, but that's scarcely a reason to infect anyone with Koch's germs. And for that matter, note that the insanity is quite specifically puritan, it has little to do with "truth" or "the world" and everything to do with methodism, that most vile, infernal infatuation that proposes salvation through method, as if God were a sort of Stanislavski. Truly, what works to make good actors does not work to make good people, for that very fucking reason : people are not actors. The world may well be a stage, and on it people do play the role of actors, sure, but that's not what they are.

   Moving on to the cultural trend part : there's a preoccupation with youths in the English speaking world that defies reason, and in its patently insane insistence goes far beyond fixation. Consider : if a woman is to be used as a social token, say for instance to impress an assembly with your power, she has got to be young. Small tits or big tits, five degrees or no degrees, what it comes down to is whether she's young (but not too young!!1). Why ? And she has to be virginal, too, which is just meta-youth (another sliver of this same insanity, this meta-trend), you can't show up with a well worked whore and expect to impress anyone. Why not ?

   The common explanation within the English speaking world is that young women are objectively better, somehow. It's offered as such by that frequently self-serving, rationalizing bunch. For all their warts, at least those people are actually trying to give an answer, which is much better than pretending there's no question. In any case : I am not impressed with these same things, to me adolescent women are more of a burden - because they have to be educated - than an asset. But then again I'm not actually of your culture, I'm just visiting here. So is most of the rest of the world, for that matter, and no, young women aren't objectively better. It's a cultural construct.

   Then, everyone's to "use" his youth and "not waste" his youth and so on and so forth, every film made in the past thirty years or so that discusses college pays homage to this point, perhaps best summed up by S W Scott in Road Trip :

   Think about it Josh, you're in college. The window of opportunity to drink and do drugs and take advantage of young girls is getting smaller by the day.

   Which is perhaps a perfectly valid point, but you're blowing it way the fuck out of proportion. For one thing, the wasted youth medieval motifs are broadly misinterpreted, it's not what you pedestrianly think they meant (X is better than Y), but more of a backhand compliment of Y (oh how great Y is that X had to die for it to be). These are common medieval conceits that you aren't familiar with because you're the conceited sort of slob that doesn't read, guessing instead. So no, there's not much intellectual continuity even if the same motifs are more or less employed - a situation typical of, you've guessed it, scavenger worlds.

   Then on top of that all the obnoxious literature as to how "children are the future" and all that. No, they aren't the future, because the future isn't. They will be the future. Do you know when will they be the future ? Once they stop being children, that's fucking when. The future that's still the future is not a thing, it will be a thing, once it becomes present. At which point these children will no longer be children, they'll be adults. And do you know how one becomes an adult ? Why, through shedding all those things that mark him or her as a child. Such as poorly rooted teeth, and poorly rooted ideas.

   Saying that children are the future is like saying that the fairy godmother knows how to draw a circle's cvadrature and then build a perpetuum mobile tricycle to ride around its perimeter. Fuck you, seriously ? What is this, some sort of science or something ? All things that aren't are equal, identical and homomorphisms of each other for the very good reason that the only way for two things to not be equal is for at least one to exist.

   So, yes, it's fucking absurd, and incidentally the nonsense of the second point goes a long way to explain if not justify the nonsense of the first point. You see, the human brain as a cultural construct (no, it's not all physiology, there's a lot to the functioning of the brain that's purely cultural, and thus ethnic, and thus sure black kids immersed into white culture could in principle get the same IQ measurements as white kids while black kids from Africa or the ghetto never will) has some specific mechanisms of defense against the absurd, once the absurd has made its way into the software, as it often happens. You know how various popular depictions of synthetic intelligence present the situation where a contradiction is inserted into its code as a failure mode that allows humans to finally overpower the machine ? There is some truth to that, because humans are not mere computing machines, they're evolved computing machines, having had millennia to distill a complex set of mostly broken code. So yes, it's credible that an AI that was born last month may be brought to its knees by something like that, but it's inconceivable it'd hurt people much.

   Because people have ready solutions to the problem of absurd or self-contradictory priors. Such as splitting, such as why don't you go study some psychology so I don't end up writing whole articles as footnotes ? Thank you. [↩]

3. It is abuse, no question about it. Just like the common rape of a teenager forces upon the girl in question motherhood whether she's into it or not, and arguably too soon for her to be even able to figure out on her own whether she is or she isnt, just so, exactly so, using a teenager to forward your ideological agenda, no matter how "good" you've decided that agenda is, no matter how right and proper and universally valid you hold it to be forces upon the girl in question a status that she's arguably too young to handle.

   What happens to your average lottery winner ? What happens to your average college athlete/star, to your average child moviestar ? What will happen to your teenage Nobel Prize recipient ?

   The only reason you imagine this isn't an outrage and a scandal is because you're one of those people who jack off to pictures of raped babies. You use different instruments and pick different babies, sure, but you're still one of those. It's a rotten culture all through, inasmuch as it can be called a culture at all. And no, you shouldn't "be ashamed of it" now.

   Just get the fuck out. [↩]