Kevin Beal
-
Posts
2,319 -
Joined
-
Days Won
101
Everything posted by Kevin Beal
-
I see what you mean. In this case, it was not a bug with the player, it wasn't incorrect meta data. The actual podcast duration of that particular podcast is 59m 9s. (The second number - the total duration is pulled from the podcast feed meta data, which I've now updated). So you should see the problem fixed now. Thanks for alerting me! P.S. That is one of the best podcasts, nice choice
-
This is a distinction without a difference. And it's at least three different incidents that I'm referring to. You told Mike that you would not stop writing open letters to Stef because it would mean you were not thinking for yourself. And you tacitly agreed with someone who said the community were sheep explicitly. Both instances in the "against me" thread.
-
I honestly have no idea what the hell you are talking about...
-
Can UPB be made clearer and more concise?
Kevin Beal replied to labmath2's topic in General Messages
"Sloppy" is not an argument. Are they erroneous in any way? If they are, Stef is sure to listen. Your criticism is sloppy. -
...and also, you made general statements about people in the community as sheep / blind followers. And you did it with lots of smiley emoticons, too. And then you feigned surprise and confusion without taking the time to actually reflect on the question, putting the onus on everyone else.
-
Because you don't listen. People tell you why they don't like your posts.
-
Can UPB be made clearer and more concise?
Kevin Beal replied to labmath2's topic in General Messages
You are the common denominator in all of those interactions. I had a hard time understanding it and then in researching and thinking about it more, it became much more clear to me. You don't strike me as unintelligent. Maybe it's not the logic that is the issue for you? Just a thought. -
I think that if you're certain, the best option is to automatically mark them as read and archive them (if not auto-delete). All these exchanges are going to serve to do is to trigger you. And I don't think you want continue to get triggered after you've stopped associating with your parents. That would sort of defeat the point, I think. That is just my opinion. I would attempt a translation, except I think a lot is lost in the literal language translation. So much of people's passive aggression is in the subtle phrasings they use and choice of words. And we kinda lose that running it thru google translate. I'm curious though. Why did you respond at all?
-
Haha. I wish I hadn't just run out of upvotes today...
-
I don't actually know if this is true, but that's a stereotype I've heard repeatedly. Maybe they are generally hard working people, but the whole anti-capitalism / no jobs thing attracts a certain kind of person that I've noticed is not always the most self aware of people. I don't know who the first paragraph is directed at. I think it's me, except that I didn't even mention TYT. My personal opinion of TYT is very similar to Ryan's. I really dislike that show. That Cenk guy really bothers me. I'm not entirely sure why, except that he's a blowhard, but so are a lot of other people.
-
In terms of listeners to the show (for want of a better word), quality matters a lot more than quantity. In my humble opinion, credibility is HUGE. Stef and Mike have done a shit load to establish credibility in terms of getting speaking engagements, doing interviews with experts, doing lots of debates, the shear number of shows and all the other cool stuff that's been happening. Two ways that we can help out is to donate time and money (as Ryan rightly points out) and also to demonstrate the value of philosophy in our own lives by committing ourselves to virtue and attracting the right kind of people. The people most involved in a movement like TZM tend to be isolated and conspiratorial and give off a "weirdo" vibe. It's important for people to associate FDR with listeners who are virtuous and have self knowledge. And that's the way I see it already, to a good degree, but obviously, the more the merrier. And it's important that people do that for their own sakes. There's an opportunity presented here in becoming a philosopher. Philosophy will change your life if you let it. Relevant podcast: FDR920 What's Next
-
The problem is not inflation per se. The problem is a violent monopoly on currency. And a monopoly on an inflationary currency is the worst of all worlds, for all the reasons I'm sure you're already aware of. One solution to the problem you presented is not to have an hourly wage and instead have other methods of compensation (like as a percentage of a budget or a per project basis). Also, you could develop your own internal crypto-share currency that you get paid in that is redeemable for whatever currency people are using at the latest exchange rate. And there is a flipside to the problem you presented, as well: you don't have to give people raises since their compensation is worth more. Also, maybe I've just missed something, but inflation hits business owners just as much (if not more) than their employees, doesn't it? So, while they may be paying less in employee compensation, they have less money to go toward that compensation. You could be pro-inflation and pro-bitcoin. Strictly speaking, bitcoin won't be deflationary until 2140. That's assuming some better currency technology doesn't take it's place by that time. The vast majority of all technological innovation in the known universe will happen in that time. And that's insane.
-
An example of a place the mp3 flash embeddy thingies is here: https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/36592-what-future-fdr-presentations-would-you-like-to-see/?p=366732 And in typing this, I'm testing the emoticon hypothesis :S Nevermind about the emoticons...
-
Certain files loaded into the page like youtube embeds, emoticons (sometimes), mp3 embeds, and other resources are never loaded into the page since the new security certificate (https) was added. (You have to click the shield icon in the browser's omnibar in order to load this content.) I think the emoticons that don't work are added after the page has loaded (like posting or editing in a thread). The youtube and mp3 embeds never work without clicking the shield.
-
Makes sense to me I think I remember the context of one time that principle was expressed being in reference to the ostensible goals of government programs. Like using violence to bring people out of poverty and that sort of thing. But I think something worth noting is that Stef has said that he doesn't actually believe the goal of these sorts of social programs is to bring people out of poverty, but rather to grow the dependent classes. But, obviously, the nationalist patriotic voting population isn't going to be rallying themselves behind a goal like that. So from the perspective of the ruling class, it is achieving it's goals, but not from the perspective of the, ... less intelligent masses (am I being too nice? haha). At least, that was my recollection. And pretty much everyone turns their immorality into some kind of virtue. I'm sure the ruling classes have their own grandiose vision of things that paints them as good guys. I think your addition is good since it matters whether or not it's actually a moral good rather than the grandiose hallucinations of narcissists and sociopaths.
-
Well, I can't argue with that. I have a lot of personal information about myself online which is not hard to find. Some of it embarrassing, but I still use my real name anyway. Despite it being public, I'd still feel a little creeped out by someone who knew a bunch about me by putting a bunch of disparate pieces of information together they found online.
-
...which is why anxiety manifests itself as a conflict. The double bind of wanting to live your life according to your own interests / values and wanting to avoid attack. (I totally agree) And that's a case you need to make It's not as if having an emotional defense (for want of a better term) develop in childhood means it's pathological in adulthood. Assholes are everywhere. The false self is forgetting the threat and the adaptation. Pathologizing anxiety could actually be the false self. Especially since pathologizing something doesn't make it go away. And if you're not careful, you could provoking your own anxiety in other people.
-
So decent human beings assume the worst of you and invade your privacy? Haha. What twisted logic is that?
-
Is this a good reply to a pro spanking Facebook comment?
Kevin Beal replied to ThisisJoe's topic in Peaceful Parenting
Then you've misunderstood it. Stef has stated that On Truth is about the past, UPB, the present, and RTR, the future. The reason that UPB is about the present is because it's used to evaluate the propositions (implicit or otherwise) involved in acting, according to the standards of universality and logical consistency. UPB reveals whether or not the proposition pertains to the moral good, vice & virtue or the morally neutral. And from there you can determine if it is in fact good or virtuous (or what you'd subjectively prefer). This is really just another way of saying that it's a guide for how one ought to act. It would be pretty silly to imagine that a theory of ethics / aesthetics would not guide how people act. -
Free Talk Live School Sucks Let's Talk Bitcoin Porc Therapy The Voluntary Life
-
"When life begins with needles and pins, it ends with swords and knives"
-
Do you mean the definition of preferable that isn't about people's subjective desires? The one more synonymous with "suitable" or "apt"? Yes. Or do I agree with TDB's characterization of UPB? It's close enough, I think. I don't think UPB is about determining hypocrisy though. Rather, that rejection is the analytical rejection that Stef talks about. At first glance, they look very similar, but technically, a person who's a hypocrite can still be right. Like a smoker who warns kids not to smoke. The same way that there is an implicit proposition in the act of murdering a person, and how praxeology is, like, a thing, is how the way that people act exposes certain logical propositions that can be evaluated. If a person demonstrates an incapacity to act / reason from their own stated position, they aren't even wrong. So, it's not exactly hypocrisy that is the standard even if it is the result.
-
Wait. No. You made a categorical error demonstrating that you in fact do not understand what UPB is. Before correcting me, please acknowledge that. I'm not sure it makes much sense for you to continue criticizing UPB given that. Rather I would suggest slowing down, maybe do some more reading, that sort of thing. Especially considering your equivocation between both senses of "preferable" at the end there. You clearly did not understand my definition.
-
If you want to go to Spain from the U.S. it's preferable to go by plane than by boat. This is not some term Stef made up. The definition is "more desirable or suitable". In this case, it's the second one. You are free to suggest alternate words to use, but the choice of words you provided don't describe what UPB actually is. Murder is not universally prohibited, nor is it necessarily about consent. It might be about glitzmorph, though. I don't know about that one.
-
Not everything is true or false. Some things have different conditions of satisfaction. The condition of satisfaction for a desire is that the desire gets carried out. The condition of satisfaction for a belief is that the belief conforms to empirical reality. "Murder is not UPB" is true in what sense? It's true in that it's conditions of satisfaction are satisfied if the proposition is universalizable. Preferable is just another way of saying the condition is satisfied. In the same way it's true that my belief conforms to reality is the way that it's true that murder is not UPB. But there are conditions of satisfaction that are also involved. If that makes sense.