ClaytonB
Member

Here's an account of law that I wrote back in 2012-ish: A Praxeological Account of Law. It needs some edits/tweaks but I still think the basic argument I make in this text is sound. Law is ultimately praxeological in nature. Law has a lot more to do with betting than it does with administration procedures. I'm not completely a David Friedman-ite, but I think he's one of the closest out there to presenting a thoroughly robust foundation for what law is. Law is not rules. Not even rules passed by a government. Law is basically right-and-wrong with extra steps. In the vast majority of cases, it is more or less obvious what is right and wrong. What makes law difficult is that the guilty party frequently snows the issue with confounding information to cover up their guilt, or other "game-theoretic" antics. This is why law has more to do with betting than administrative procedures. Rules are just sentences written on paper and they may or may not have any actual meaning/significance. The law, however, is just right-and-wrong. It just is. It's like a statue hidden within a block of self-chiseling marble... all that must be done to discover it is to chisel at it and the marble will break away and magically reveal the statue hidden within it. Everyone knows they have a right to defend themselves, even if they deny it with their lips. This is praxeologically verified when they themselves are actually confronted with a self-defense scenario and they instinctively, without thought, react in defense of themselves, their property and/or other innocents. Words are cheap, actions tell the real truth. People will grand-stand and virtue-signal and spout all kinds of BS slogans, perhaps even so completely deluding themselves as to believe their own lies. But when reality comes crashing onto their doorstep without warning, the real truth about what they believe is instantly revealed... ---

Update (a lot has happened in a year and a half of AI changes)... The best uncensored model I've used is Dolphin 2.9 (based on open-source LLaMa). It's free and open-source, meaning, you can run it locally on your own machine for free. Any decent laptop or desktop can run it (don't even need a GPU) using Ollama or a similar tool (I use llama.cpp but it's command-line based). Dolphin is absolutely uncensored, it will write an essay on all the reasons why puppies should be kicked for sport, something you could never eke out of a censored model no matter how hard you tried. In addition, I highly recommend HuggingChat which is free, you just have to sign up. This allows you to access much bigger models that perform on par with GPT4, or very close to it. Mixtral, LLaMa and many more. They are not uncensored, but some of them are less censored than GPT4. For fully uncensored, of course, you have to run local. The point is not to get the AI to write your dictionary for you, it's to get yourself a "working draft" which you can then chisel away. Throw out the unnecessary words, prompt for missing words, and hone the definitions down, either manually or interactively with the AI. It's a good idea, just needs doing...

Yeah, I'm not sure how much he believes that particular part or maybe he's just flattering his hosts who are giving him a platform. Lots of solid points made, and not just rhetorical fluff. For that reason, I'm inclined to believe this is the real Assange and not a body-double as some were speculating upon his release...

//

To be fair, Mondrain's style did have a point, and has been influential on art. Rothko is pretty abstract, but there's still something there in some of his work. I'm OK with abstraction. Where I think we lost track of the narrative is absurdism and anti-art. The point of art is, obviously, to be artistic, to make something that people actually want to look at because it's beautiful or genuinely interesting. I might not like your style, and I might not understand the point your work is trying to make, but at least have a style and some kind of objective or purpose to your art, particularly in respect to the intended viewer/audience. Slicing up a human-shaped, skin-color-frosted velvet cake is not "art", it's disturbing, performative, group psychopathy. Installing a common toilet in an art display is not a work of art... it's just an insult to the viewers. Taping a banana to a wall is not deep, it's "I'm 14 and this is deep". I can even track with a certain amount of absurdism, where it is leaning toward the satirical or comical, but self-eating absurdism is pointless. If everything is absurd, what's the point of being absurd? Why should it matter that everything is absurd, if it is absurd? If you were trapped in a lucid dream, what would be the point of protesting it? It's a dream, who cares.

But how would you really know? That's the real question. Dispositionally, ChatGPT is the ultimate bureaucrat, and it comes perfectly natural. One is tempted to wonder if bureaucrats were always AI...

:up:

... and put Musk in charge of executive budget cuts per department. Just because Congress allocated it doesn't mean POTUS is obligated to spend it. Just sayin'... pic-tax (careful, this meme is known to cause involuntary convulsive epileptic seizure in blue-haired lefties...):

Damn ants on my screen. Gonna have to get some ant-bait...

It just got real... :tears:

Not even close. Here is a photo of Jennifer Lopez performing in 1999, which is 19 years before the release of the iPhone XR (used to take the "selfie" above): Not to mention, the photo you posted looks doctored by an IG filter (or equivalent).

It's double-plus ungood crimethink. Put it out of your mind immediately. Let's hope that no Party officials have noticed this thread...

It's really not complicated, I don't know why people make it complicated. Let's say you have $5,000 of "bug-out money". That might be a bit high for some people, but it's just for purposes of illustration. One way you could divide it is as follows: $1000 USD $1000 Silver coins $1000 Gold coin (1/2 oz or whatever) $1000 BTC $1000 Gift cards (prepaid Visa/whatever) That last one is for urban preppers who might be stuck in a situation where the grid is "mostly" down, and urban shops refuse to accept physical cash but still have operating Visa-card terminals. For urban preppers, I think this is an under-prepared scenario. Banks down, cash refused, but Visa-payments system still operating I consider to be a highly probable scenario.

"It's time we put a bullseye on Trump" - Joseph R. Biden, 46th President of the United States (allegedly)