Killology 101
I
had another course starting last night. This one was great, since the
class was small and teaching sure is fun and easy when the audience
pretty much consists of the A-list of the students of your past courses
for the last couple of semesters. Sure can't much complain about my
life in general.
After the long day of yesterday, I don't have any real work to do today, so I can just goof off and perhaps prepare material for the oncoming weeks, even though for some reason, the theme song of the 90's sitcom "The Mommies" was playing in my head as an earworm. Earlier today around the lunchtime I took a stroll down to the local area that I have jokingly dubbed "Ethnictown" (as in that one episode of The Simpsons), and noticed that a brand new Hakka Chinese restaurant had opened there. The interiors were still looking pretty unfinished, but their five-dollar lunch special drew me in. For this measly five dollars, they brought me this whole big plate heaping full of rice, vegetables and spicy beef. Definitely a place that I will keep frequenting in the future.
Of course, what Ethnictown is for me in the culinary sense, the Internet is the same in the intellectual sense, an endless all-you-can-eat buffet of pleasurable engorging. First, as Stephen Wolfram argues in his tome "A New Kind of Science" (now available online for free), iteration of simple rules can generate tremendous complexity. The post "Automatic Sayings Generator" at "Let the Finder Beware" in a way illustrates this important principle.
Professor Peter Kurgman is the foremost progressive thinker of the Internet. I would say that he is a true renaissance man, but that would be blatant phallogocentrism that worships dead white males. In the post "The Charter of Progressive Politics: What We Demand", the good professor outlines and summarizes the demands of the modern progressive movement. On the other side of the fence, Lawrence Auster offers a succinct analysis of liberalism in his post "How liberals sustain their liberalism".
The news article "Colombian gangsters face sex ban" is comical in many levels at once. A bunch of women who date those exciting and dangerous criminals are now complaining that these men use violent means to fight over their turfs. I guess that this one also pretty definitively answers the question which sex is the sexual gatekeeper so that it wields the power to influence the actions of the opposite sex by threatening to withhold sexual interest. We'll see how well this lockout will work with those hardened macho gangsters who I'm sure won't mind at all coming up looking like they are pussy-whipped. I'm personally a bit skeptical about the prospects of this "strike", but hey, surely anything could happen.
Another news article "'Men cleverer than women' claim" that reports that men have slightly higher average IQ than women has raised heated objections all over the blogosphere. I can't help but wonder if those very same people would object so much or perhaps even gloat a little if, instead of men and women, a similar IQ differences had been reported to exist between certain other groups. For example, progressives and conservatives. At least I seem to recall the former group gloating and coasting (heh) quite a lot when that famous fake table that listed the U.S. States sorted by average IQ. As Steve Sailer often likes to point out, liberals are superior of the bunch because they have a higher IQ, and unlike those bigoted conservatives, they also believe that IQ is meaningless.
Speaking of the devil, I noticed that Steve has finally turned his eye to questions of human mate seeking, in style of The Danimal or The Bulletproof Pimp, but in that distinctive manner that he uses to approach other issues by connecting them to wider statistical realities. The post "Lonelyguy15million" explains why marriages between white men and Asian women are significantly more common in America than marriages between Asian men and white women. No wonder that websites such as "Bitter Asian Men" exist. In all societies women tend to distribute their sexual attention and favours far less equitably and in a more discriminatory fashion compared to the way that capitalists distribute their paychecks, which is something to remember the next time some lefty complains about the unfairness of capitalism.
The post "Is early admission a good idea?" at Marginal Revolution draws an interesting analogy between the "early admissions" in American universities and how young adults pair for marriages in the marriage market. When people get to freely choose who they associate with and they can't force anybody to pal up with them, the market reality necessarily follows, even with the sacred notion of love which leads to assortative mating, the undesirables of both sexes having to settle for each other or remain alone.
In our cold and hard world of ruthless competition many loser men fall out of society altogether. Some of them, such as the infamous bomber Petri Gerdt, are mad as hell and are not going to take it anymore. And as the news article "NYPD Boom: Bomb Shock" tells us, their job is not going to be very expensive difficult. The liberal society with its individual freedoms will probably find it rather difficult to adapt to situation when anybody can build a literal blockbuster.
Or you can just take a gun and vote from the rooftops. Now that there is clearer information of what exactly happened in that Montreal "apeshit" (for example, where did that whole idea of three gunmen come from?), what I really can't understand is how a man who is seriously intent on going on a murderous rampage to kill as many people as possible with an assault rifle manages to kill only one person while he seriously wounds nineteen, since a seriously wounded person is not going to be running away. I guess that killing just doesn't work in real life the way it works on television and video games. Or maybe this little video game freak seriously believed that once they are hit and lying down, they will simply disappear after a few seconds and turn to food, medipacks and extra ammo. The post "Online Communities And Incitement To Murder" at "Ace of Spades HQ" examines the issue of potential killers and the participants on the online forums who nurture and encourage them.
Since this apeshitter chose to end it with a suicide by cop, there are no thorny questions of sentencing him. As the news article "Justice at the click of a mouse in China", this difficult task is more suited for impersonal and cold computers rather than emotional and vindictive humans. The implementation of this system is probably what in the AI community is called "case-based reasoning". The link was provided by the combination service Diggdot that also informs us that Wikipedia now has a page about the famous "Stormtrooper effect", which might explain the inept shooting that Kimveer exhibited.
Many other students die violently without their fates gaining national attention and filling several pages of national newspapers. I noticed that the local student newspaper features a story "A tragic end to a promising life" of a tragedy closer to home, a lovely young female student whose promising life was cut short by a violent ex-boyfriend's knife.
After the long day of yesterday, I don't have any real work to do today, so I can just goof off and perhaps prepare material for the oncoming weeks, even though for some reason, the theme song of the 90's sitcom "The Mommies" was playing in my head as an earworm. Earlier today around the lunchtime I took a stroll down to the local area that I have jokingly dubbed "Ethnictown" (as in that one episode of The Simpsons), and noticed that a brand new Hakka Chinese restaurant had opened there. The interiors were still looking pretty unfinished, but their five-dollar lunch special drew me in. For this measly five dollars, they brought me this whole big plate heaping full of rice, vegetables and spicy beef. Definitely a place that I will keep frequenting in the future.
Of course, what Ethnictown is for me in the culinary sense, the Internet is the same in the intellectual sense, an endless all-you-can-eat buffet of pleasurable engorging. First, as Stephen Wolfram argues in his tome "A New Kind of Science" (now available online for free), iteration of simple rules can generate tremendous complexity. The post "Automatic Sayings Generator" at "Let the Finder Beware" in a way illustrates this important principle.
Professor Peter Kurgman is the foremost progressive thinker of the Internet. I would say that he is a true renaissance man, but that would be blatant phallogocentrism that worships dead white males. In the post "The Charter of Progressive Politics: What We Demand", the good professor outlines and summarizes the demands of the modern progressive movement. On the other side of the fence, Lawrence Auster offers a succinct analysis of liberalism in his post "How liberals sustain their liberalism".
The news article "Colombian gangsters face sex ban" is comical in many levels at once. A bunch of women who date those exciting and dangerous criminals are now complaining that these men use violent means to fight over their turfs. I guess that this one also pretty definitively answers the question which sex is the sexual gatekeeper so that it wields the power to influence the actions of the opposite sex by threatening to withhold sexual interest. We'll see how well this lockout will work with those hardened macho gangsters who I'm sure won't mind at all coming up looking like they are pussy-whipped. I'm personally a bit skeptical about the prospects of this "strike", but hey, surely anything could happen.
Another news article "'Men cleverer than women' claim" that reports that men have slightly higher average IQ than women has raised heated objections all over the blogosphere. I can't help but wonder if those very same people would object so much or perhaps even gloat a little if, instead of men and women, a similar IQ differences had been reported to exist between certain other groups. For example, progressives and conservatives. At least I seem to recall the former group gloating and coasting (heh) quite a lot when that famous fake table that listed the U.S. States sorted by average IQ. As Steve Sailer often likes to point out, liberals are superior of the bunch because they have a higher IQ, and unlike those bigoted conservatives, they also believe that IQ is meaningless.
Speaking of the devil, I noticed that Steve has finally turned his eye to questions of human mate seeking, in style of The Danimal or The Bulletproof Pimp, but in that distinctive manner that he uses to approach other issues by connecting them to wider statistical realities. The post "Lonelyguy15million" explains why marriages between white men and Asian women are significantly more common in America than marriages between Asian men and white women. No wonder that websites such as "Bitter Asian Men" exist. In all societies women tend to distribute their sexual attention and favours far less equitably and in a more discriminatory fashion compared to the way that capitalists distribute their paychecks, which is something to remember the next time some lefty complains about the unfairness of capitalism.
The post "Is early admission a good idea?" at Marginal Revolution draws an interesting analogy between the "early admissions" in American universities and how young adults pair for marriages in the marriage market. When people get to freely choose who they associate with and they can't force anybody to pal up with them, the market reality necessarily follows, even with the sacred notion of love which leads to assortative mating, the undesirables of both sexes having to settle for each other or remain alone.
In our cold and hard world of ruthless competition many loser men fall out of society altogether. Some of them, such as the infamous bomber Petri Gerdt, are mad as hell and are not going to take it anymore. And as the news article "NYPD Boom: Bomb Shock" tells us, their job is not going to be very expensive difficult. The liberal society with its individual freedoms will probably find it rather difficult to adapt to situation when anybody can build a literal blockbuster.
Or you can just take a gun and vote from the rooftops. Now that there is clearer information of what exactly happened in that Montreal "apeshit" (for example, where did that whole idea of three gunmen come from?), what I really can't understand is how a man who is seriously intent on going on a murderous rampage to kill as many people as possible with an assault rifle manages to kill only one person while he seriously wounds nineteen, since a seriously wounded person is not going to be running away. I guess that killing just doesn't work in real life the way it works on television and video games. Or maybe this little video game freak seriously believed that once they are hit and lying down, they will simply disappear after a few seconds and turn to food, medipacks and extra ammo. The post "Online Communities And Incitement To Murder" at "Ace of Spades HQ" examines the issue of potential killers and the participants on the online forums who nurture and encourage them.
Since this apeshitter chose to end it with a suicide by cop, there are no thorny questions of sentencing him. As the news article "Justice at the click of a mouse in China", this difficult task is more suited for impersonal and cold computers rather than emotional and vindictive humans. The implementation of this system is probably what in the AI community is called "case-based reasoning". The link was provided by the combination service Diggdot that also informs us that Wikipedia now has a page about the famous "Stormtrooper effect", which might explain the inept shooting that Kimveer exhibited.
Many other students die violently without their fates gaining national attention and filling several pages of national newspapers. I noticed that the local student newspaper features a story "A tragic end to a promising life" of a tragedy closer to home, a lovely young female student whose promising life was cut short by a violent ex-boyfriend's knife.
"Besides his own demise, the detonation left six dead, including women and a child..."
I just wonder what makes guys like Petri Gerdt blow themselves up. It can't be that the society actually cared less about their lives.
Posted by Anonymous | 9:53 PM
The gangsters beaus aren't complaining about violence in itself, if you look at what they are saying. Rather, they are worried that their exciting bad boy man might get killed by another of his ilk, which would deprive them of their easy lifestyle. Not once are the negative consequences to others mentioned.
This phrase is quite illustrative:
"As women we are worth a lot. We don't want to fall for violent men because with them we lose too much."
Of course, the feminist and pro-feminist responses I have seen to this have been pathetically predictable: Pro-feminist men have their panties in a twist because "this reinforces the false notion that men want sex more than women, and thus have to compete to prove their superiority to other males in order to have sex" and feminists are simply unable to see the complicity of those women in gang violence, and pretend that "they didn't know that man was a gangster" (sure...) or "they didn't have a chance" (even better).
Posted by Tuomas | 11:20 PM