Mrdthree

I guess the problem I have with the statement "races make societies" is that it isnt historically true. The EU is about the closest thing to that claim. In general languages make societies.

Most agree that the brain has a functional input output structure with genetically preferred paths but the brain does not have a fixed architecture ( https://youtu.be/eMfw3rGOkCQ?t=44). The Brain has an adaptive architecture so that after learning, consolidation, or recovery from injury completely different brain regions can end up solving the same task ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aqwhr4vJIW4 http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms4602). Most computational scientists believe that your video card's massively parallel GPU is better analogy for how the brain works than a CPU ( silly link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P28LKWTzrI https://youtu.be/EhPpxsK2Ia0?t=73 ) Many think the core units of parallel computation are neurons or networks that engage in the equivalent of Bayesian inference https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/are-brains-bayesian/ that can be repurposed for function approximation.

The website is interesting. Its written as a Gallilean dialogue I think in 2007. The blogger writes under the name "La Griffe du Lion". He took down his contact information from the website in 2011, last internet archive with email can be seen here: https://web.archive.org/web/20110308071227/http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/ Accusations are that the blogger is a retired John Hopkins sociologist, "Robert A Gordon". Robert Gordon is now 82. https://entitledtoanopinion.wordpress.com/2008/08/20/la-griffe-du-lion-robert-gordon/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A._Gordon Robert Gordon has a controversial past in so far as the left wing hates him. More so when Murray's book came out. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1995-04-03/features/1995093125_1_intelligence-tests-race-and-intelligence-bell-curve He was funded by the Pioneer Fund which is on the SPLC list. Robert Gordon's bio is interesting: His parents separated when he was 11, and he was brought up in two homes for orphans in the Bronx, N.Y., first at Leake & Watts Home School and then at the American Female Guardian Society and Home for the Friendless. He has no posted pictures in the internet archive. His status was changed from professor to research professor sometime between Jan-Aug 2006. https://web.archive.org/web/20060816083251/http://www.soc.jhu.edu/faculty.html Local correlate: 2 new assistant professor hires He was delisted from the JHU faculty page in jan 2007 last available: https://web.archive.org/web/20070129010209/http://www.soc.jhu.edu/faculty.html His faculty page remained on servers at JHU until sometime between 2012-2016 (his jhu email is likely active) https://web.archive.org/web/20120204123415/http://www.soc.jhu.edu/people/gordon/index.html A 2013 article claims he was emeritus (but this is not acknowledged at JHU webpage) http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2013/07/a-tale-of-two-trials-what-the-zimmerman-and-o-j-simpson-verdicts-reveal-about-racial-denial/ While it is impossible to know the state of the man or his present thoughts, Robert Gordon might make an interesting guest and be willing to talk openly now that he is older.

Alot of what Stefan mentioned and I was thinking about is already captured here http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/g.htm.

The idea was to measure how certain we should be when making generalizations from individuals to groups or classes of people. I think the model experiment is to sample people in a given IQ range and then ask how many people I need to sample to be be sure the proportion of people in that IQ class is reflective of a demographic hypothesis. If we assume all groups in a population have the same IQ distribution ( N(mu,sigma) ) then we would expect that the overall population IQ distribution is a simple linear sum of these component distributions (weighted by proportion). Because the overall population is a linear sum of weighted isoparametric distributions, we can expect as a null hypothesis that any IQ range we look into will have the same linear proportion of minority groups. Alternatively we would assume that the groups in a population might have different IQ distributions with different parameters (mu, sigma) and the overall population IQ distribution was a sum of these distributions. Because the normal distribution is nonlinear, it does not preserve proportions and one will find there are different proportions of minorities groups in different IQ ranges, relative to the overall mean population proportions. This was the point Stefan made that I liked. Just because the US is 70% caucausoid doesnt mean that every IQ range under examination will be 70% caucausoid. That only holds true if one assumes that all census defined ethnic groups have the same IQ distribution. If you assume the distributions have the same variance but different means, it will make huge and increasing differences at the tails (owing to nonlinearity of the bell curve). Still problems here to debug in terms of applications Does this make it easier to prove group differences? Not sure-- it may be hard to do demographically fair random samples of IQ. If you could randomly sample a class of high IQ populations it would be easier to demonstrate a difference in the proportions of group composition relative to the overall population demographics-- this proves a IQ distributions have different parameters for the two groups. Can you employ that observation in a reasonable way as an individual actor?-- Not sure. A smaller sample is needed to prove a larger effect but encountering smart people is rare so whether group differences are useful at the high IQ end depends on whether they out weigh the risk of infrequent encounters. But one could use the size of the sample needed to be say 95% confident as a proxy for how certain you should feel that you observation is due to group differences.

I wanted to thank and congratulate Stefan Molyneaux for his dogged investigation of the career killing topic: Race, Sex and IQ. I think he has finally proposed a hypothesis that is worth researching and is provable and scientific. The hypothesis I see as valid is: (1) There are differences in mean IQ by race and gender. (2) owing to the shape of the normal distribution, the proportion of people occupying a given interval of IQ scores will vary with distance from mean. (example: the interval of IQ 100-115 contains 34% of people but the interval of 130-145 contains 2% of people) (3) TO BE PROVEN: When dealing with the middle 68% of individuals (+/- 1 std, the people you most often interact with) there is less confidence that racial/sex differences in IQ will be observed owing to variations in and between groups. (This can be shown with a power calculation) (4) MOLYNEAUX'S INSIGHT: For an equal size IQ interval on the tails of a normal distribution, the confidence about IQ increases nonlinearly. SO given some prior knowledge, (e.g. that a person has an IQ>115, i.e. a so called 'elite') once can be more confident of observing bias in race/sex proportions. At the very least statistical tests can be done to prove that one needs a larger sample of people from IQ[85,115] interval to be confident of a race/sex difference than one would need from an IQ[130,160] interval. It needs some clean up but it seems like a good paper if it hasnt already been published. If the work has been done I would be interested in a citation.

For what its worth I started introducing the video of lapps as herdsman as an example of early human culture. I dont do much commentary except to introduce it as part of human evolution and as an example of what precedes agriculture and modernity. However even in this limited form it burns into the minds of people (reindeer castration is a big hit). I think this term I may illustrate cultural progression with communities in Africa (Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia) that have domesticated animals and agriculture. Perhaps end it with types of civilizations ala Star Trek (lol).

Wikileaks has released cyberwarfare toolsfrom CIA. He needs to reverse course and use this information to destroy Apple Google and Facebook. Rather than helping these companies he should be helping only the open source and third party software makers. This is an opportunity to break burgeoning monopolies and shame the CIA. He needs to upsell the insecurity of windows android apple IOS. Solve the vulnerabilities of Linux unix Solaris etc.

Words like tax revolt and state secession are up in the news again! They are being examined by 'serious' people. It has been along while since the Democratic party pushed a neoconfederate ideology. But it appears they are ready to take up the battle. This is a tough battle. At any moment we should expect the Southern Poverty Law Center to list them as hate groups and antigovernment militia types. Should we help them in their battle for a tax revolt and state secession? How can we help them? should we give money? tax revolt: http://time.com/4590994/popular-vote-tax-pledge/?xid=time_socialflow_twitter secession: http://ntknetwork.com/disgruntled-democrats-want-a-constitutional-convention-to-leave-the-union

I just listened to Stefan explain what he believes Richard Spencer means by white nationalism. I then read what the New York Times said Richard Spencer said and did http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/us/alt-right-salutes-donald-trump.html?_r=0&referer=http://m.huffpost.com/us There is a huge chasm between these two reports. Stefan should interview the man to verify his thought processes to resolve rather than popularize him by projecting his belief system onto Mr. Spencer

Its sloppy. There is no clear dates provided on when the offenses took place. Timeline: Maxine Brown applies and is rejected 1963 Donald Trump Age 17 living in New York Maxine Brown gets house 1964 Donald Trump Age 18 attending Fordham University Complaints of discrimination by Ellis James at Fred Trump prop mid-1960s Donald Trump 18-21 State investigators show racial inequality in (Fred) Trump properties 1966 Donald Trump Age 20 attending Fordham University Donald Trump graduates Wharton 1968 Donald Trump Age 22 transferred from Fordham Tester/Wolper housing discrimination 1969 Donald Trump Age 23 D.Trump takes over Trump properties 1971 Donald Trump Age 25 Justice Department sues Trump properties 1973 Donald Trump Age 27 president, Trump properties Complaints continue until 1978 Donald Trump Age 32 Cases closed 1983 Donald Trump Age 37

I dont see how it could be worse. We gerrymander districts into bizarre shapes why not gerrymander disproportionate immigration as part of regular party negotiations.

Well have to remind them of medical science, that courts are as yet better than rulings by clan heads, and that factories that make snowmobiles require certain institutions and etc.

Democrats are very happy with the voting record of new immigrants and want to encourage a continued policy favoring current demographics. New legislation needs to be implemented in immigration with an understanding that current immigration policy is simply being used as a way to gerrymander. As such immigration policy should be subject to continual review and new immigrant voting patterns should be a strong determinant on the number and types of immigrants approved for citizenship. Specifically there should be identified demographic groups that are likely going to vote Republican and demographic groups identified as likely to vote Democrat and have immigration rolls weighted so that no particular party can hijack immigration policy for sake of gerrymandering elections.

Perhaps this will change your mind. Lapp girl. There was a time when southern europeans were considered not to be white by some. Better be nice to her though... https://youtu.be/fftnExG-WFg?t=38 in case the link is dropped for not being fair use. In the American context, are these white or non-white people... https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/3NorwSamiPresidents.jpg

Its an attempt to sneak past the politically incorrect issue of cultural superiority by disentangling it from race. I am curious if students would be happy to feel cultural superiority towards white people.

I teach a biology class where I get a moment to talk about the evolutionary origins of humans from hunter-gatherer societies. I was thinking of showing my ethnically diverse class the following video (and some others of laplanders). here an out of place white guy from wild kingdom steps in and talks about them being a handsome and colorful people https://youtu.be/jta8I0XdJ-M?t=239 here the laplanders act like primitives in a way that will offend the sensibilities of civilized people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fftnExG-WFg These videos are examples of laplanders acting like primitives in a way that would offend the sensibilities of most civilized people. They are a nomadic herdsman type of tribal people whose life isnt much different from those of peoples in Africa. I am thinking.... (1) to ask people in my class whether they think their society is better than the laplanders? or equal and distinct. (2) to ask them whether their systems of tribal councils are direct comparable to congress and government in America or more primitive? (3) to accuse them of racism if they deny the equality. So is this too politically incorrect?

The media is rightfully angry at Trump. Any other candidate would have a billion dollar war chest to buy advertising with. The networks were counting on this advertising money. Now they have to make due with Hillary's billion dollar war chest and Trumps $300 million. They are on a budget and they arent happy.

The only flaw is to apply it to Stefan's presentation. (1) Stefan is educated on racism ("If you have a critique for our resistance, then you’d better have an established record of critique of our oppression") and (2) Stefan shares the goal of equal rights for black people (If you have no interest in equal rights for Black people, then do not make suggestions to those who do)

SUMMARY: The notion of "Economies of scale" is used to justify the consolidation of industry into a few large corporations. The efficiency gains theorized to result from economies of scale are used to justify the trend of the destruction of small business by chain restaurants and shops. However the fact is that as organizations grow, they become more complex to manage and more risky for an owner. Owners have used grants of limited liability from the government to shield their wealth from this increasing risk the net result has been the consolidation of industry into fewer hands. The consequence of eliminating corporations in the service industries will be greater equity and overall wealth. Economies of scale are constrained by risks of managing complexity Any coder knows the principle that as the number of lines code grows in a program, debugging time grows exponentially. This problem in managing complexity occurs because the moving parts of code on average interact with all the other moving parts in a code. However this is a general problem when an organization increases in size-- moving parts or people potentially interact with all other moving parts or people inside and outside the organization. For example, when a company increases the number of truck drivers, it increases the risk the company will be sued as each accident makes both the business and the driver defendants. In service industries, hiring more staff will exponentially increases the number of interactions between staff. If there is a fixed risk of business or personal injury with every transaction, then that risk will scale exponentially with organization size. Businesses petition the government for grants of limited liability to shield their wealth from this risk. Corporations are the remnant of feudal power and are not UPB rights Limited liability corporations are not based in individual rights, they are government grants of rights beyond ordinary private property rights. An individual has the power to make contracts with customers. These agreements can limit liability (e,g. a software agreement) and be an important strategy for protecting an individual's wealth. However an individual can never be protected from the injury he causes to people with whom they have made no contract; this is known as third party liability. However, the government will grant individuals this power of immunity from accidental damage to third parties in return for annual fees of around $1000-$5000. However this is not a right that is universalizable; what would happen in a society if no one was liable for accidental damage to third parties? you could outsource your risk onto other people with no fear of penalty. The corporation was born in feudal times and was given a grant of continuity into the age of capitalism and individual rights so that the aristocracy could protect wealth from risky behavior (trusts, corporations, etc). Corporations and trusts are state grants of power, repackaged holdovers of feudalism, that allow business owners to shield their wealth from the risk inherent in larger businesses. Service industry scales risk faster The more humans you add to an organizations, the number of human to human interactions will increase exponentially and the opportunities for business and personal injury likewise increase. In recognition of this risk, corporations use franchises and other limited liability structures. Some of these maybe viable UBP contractual structures, but is a franchise inherently more risky than an independent business? Yes: franchises are often vertical monopolies and only legal fictions insulate the overall organization from the damage it might cause to third parties (in road accidents, pollution, property manangement). This legal fiction prevents a lawsuit from seeing all the assets of the organization which the owners claim to hold. Whereas independent businesses are rarely vertical monopolies of this sort and risk is distributed among different owners. As a first step to restoring individual property rights and ending the feudalistic protection of old wealth, the ability of service industries to form corporations should be halted followed by legal fictions such as trusts. It is needed now because automation risks greater consolidation of wealth than ever before with no commensurate increase in risk.

Tell them you dont think immigrants should be banned. At least as long as the immigrants speak decent english, dont want to ban guns, respect the constitution, and believe in capitalism.

perhaps someone can do the community a service, study the difference between real conspiracies and falsified conspiracies. In evidence based medicine the veracity of claims is usually given a scale like. (1) randomized double blind, metanalysis confirmation; (2) randomized double blind controlled single study (3) controlled, large number single study (4) small number controlled study (5) mixed evidence (6) observational evidence (7) theoretical support no evidence (8) no evidence. Might be a good wiki project.... But I suppose it should have a legal scale of evidence. maybe a first project is to use the above scale and mine wikileaks. Is it a conspiracy to tell a world leader one thing and internally say/do/plan another? does wikileaks support the existence of such conspiracies? If not, what is the degree required? was abu gharaib a conspiracy? Id do it but I would need 80K/year

I watched about 10 minutes of highlights and to me it looked like Cenk cleaned Dnesh's clock. Cenk's thesis was that Nixon made the GOP the party of the South (racism) Dnesh was unfamiliar with the idea and unable to attack it. Cenk's thesis was Nixon made Powell a supreme court justice to get corporate money. Dnesh was unfamiliar with the idea and unable to attack it. Worse, for Dnesh, Cenk is right on corporations-- they are legal fictions. Dnesh fell apart trying to defend why corporations should have any rights; he invented a scenario involving TYT protestors blocking his movie that Cenk tore apart. Dnesh tried to claim slavery in america wasnt a racist institution. Cenk destroyed the thesis. Cenk made Dnesh look like a flawed messenger on election money; Dnesh was unable to turn the tables and claim selective prosecution. Dnesh conceded to Cenk Trump and Bernie issues. Cenk didnt need to defend Clinton. I didnt see a single point that Dnesh raised that was of any value. Cenk is good entertainment. He is politically incorrect and doesnt shy away from trigger words. It makes his presentation exciting. Though I disagree with it. Cenk's philosophy is a little challenging to understand but the way I see him is that he has dropped the American perspective when he analyzes American politics. In other words he has a perspective on government that leans towards European center democrat ideas. I say that because I sense similarities in his thoughts with other people I know who are Turkish. When these people consider issues in American politics they dissect American institutions from a cultural anthropology point of view and then map them onto Turkish and European cultural institutions and then reason about them in that frame of context before applying the results to American politics. The result is unconventional syntheses of problems. That unconventional synthesis probably makes sense in Europe as center democrat. Dnesh understands globalists from the colonial/anti-colonial frame, which is the history of India. Turks are sort of a parallel universe to that frame. They werent colonies of Europe and their historical institutions were not colonial so much as integrative (or eliminative); they didnt want outposts, they wanted more muslim citizens.

Its the bedrock principle of the justice system: An aggrieved individual goes to court presents a complaint describing what another individual did. Then a judgment on facts and equity is made that holds the individuals accountable for specific actions and proposes a specific remedy. Same in criminal court. The whole social justice idea is about looking past the individual to the society and to engage in collective punishment and reward. It is incompatible with individual justice.

According to science, a chair is a social construct,