6 ms·

To riff on the risque, I advertise [if forex, SPJ is allowed these days to be remembered for idealizing the shitting of pants..] the idea of experts’ pants

To riff on the risque, I advertise [if forex, SPJ is allowed these days to be remembered for idealizing the shitting of pants..] the idea of experts’ pants as a a commodity to die metaphorically for (With the caveat that some might enjoy seeing instead what the experts are hiding when the tide [of fashion] goes out) (& one can e.g. with this explain, with mauvaise foi, Hipour’s smile)

aebtebeten 2y ago
Shirts are topologically indistinguishable from crotchless pants; do we have a metric here? https://www.thepsmiths.com/p/review-scaling-people-by-claire-hughes https://www.thepsmiths.com/p/review-scaling-people-by-claire... goes into the differences between (in 1984 terms) inner- and outer-party expertise (aka foxes and lions? psychopaths and clueless? morlocks and eloi?). Yeah, when you've already known since ever to discount the wandering ones, what're a few more transients* to ignore? :) Lagniappe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molniya_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molniya_orbit [could a signifyin' fox pass for a lion? someday I need to track down RvRG, Ich, Claudius, Kaiser und Gott] * but if you can control transients, mode switching is an excellent way to rummage around under the noise floorboards for signal. (somewhere there's an XKCD about limitations of earth observation that was way too optimistic, and already had been for however long we'd had structured shutters)
- gradschoolfail 2y ago
  Below the waterline? (Waistline if less charitable) Ah havent read this article yet but anticipating “insider” as a more distinguishing term than “experts” should cover their edge cases (Which secrets are shameful to share vs merely uh inconvenient, e.g. for waistline, depends on how you draw the party lines, some do it at type ii “zahlungsfaehig” vs “proleten” as nsdap apparently another eg, for waterline) [do you have a fictional character for each of sigfox & lion?] So, where is the line for YC?
  - aebtebeten 2y ago
    My bad: I got the fox and lion analogy wrong. (NdBdM apparently said the prince ought to be able to be both fox and lion; like HKH had both Knecht and Designori? What about Tito? "The lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves." [not yet checked for context/translation]) Sorry, I'd been too quick to assume it fit nicely in with our early tripartitions, based on some blogiating that I'm not finding in my verlauf at the moment. So I'd been imagining TCCAG (in Graves' telling), d-d-disguising himself as one of the clueless, in order to survive the machinations of the psychopaths that had killed off every other male in his family: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julio-Claudian_family_tree#Simplified https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julio-Claudian_family_tree#Sim... Found it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circulation_of_elites#Governing_elite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circulation_of_elites#Governin... ; it must've been the Burnham connection that set me off on 1984 and then to Rao. Note that here the foxes and lions are distinct people; hence my confusion. EDIT: Pareto definitely thinks of foxes and lions as distinct, but he must've introduced them somewhat earlier than §2178 (The Mind and Society/The General Form of Society/Force and Class-circulation): https://archive.org/details/ParetoTheMindAndSocietyVol4TheGeneralFormOfSociety/Pareto%20-%20The%20Mind%20and%20Society%20Vol%204%3B%20The%20General%20Form%20of%20Society/page/n96/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/ParetoTheMindAndSocietyVol4TheGe...
    - gradschoolfail 2y ago
      As to Rao-fox-lion quadrantology.. how to classify pear AI problem? (We can say nang et al were barbarians promoted to founders but that is cheap*. Otoh 1 o the more interesting facts from that case is some partners attempting to empirically price their social media marketing thesis) JPsmith on JCScott Against the Grain has another take on Rao, proweird being the barbarians trading with the State Tfound the crucial clause on pants from the Psmith-on-Stripe-Clueless that you pointed at *>derives much of [][] moral and affective sympathies from the claim that [][] is smarter and better and more efficient [s/_/effective] than anybody else Insert insider,expert,Feynman,YC,lion,officer,peer,etc & Whatever is the Other’s (prole,designor,founder,funder,clueless,loser,customer,peer)’s fave metric!

aebtebeten 2y ago

Shirts are topologically indistinguishable from crotchless pants; do we have a metric here? https://www.thepsmiths.com/p/review-scaling-people-by-claire-hughes https://www.thepsmiths.com/p/review-scaling-people-by-claire... goes into the differences between (in 1984 terms) inner- and outer-party expertise (aka foxes and lions? psychopaths and clueless? morlocks and eloi?). Yeah, when you've already known since ever to discount the wandering ones, what're a few more transients* to ignore? :) Lagniappe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molniya_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molniya_orbit [could a signifyin' fox pass for a lion? someday I need to track down RvRG, Ich, Claudius, Kaiser und Gott] * but if you can control transients, mode switching is an excellent way to rummage around under the noise floorboards for signal. (somewhere there's an XKCD about limitations of earth observation that was way too optimistic, and already had been for however long we'd had structured shutters)

gradschoolfail 2y ago
Below the waterline? (Waistline if less charitable) Ah havent read this article yet but anticipating “insider” as a more distinguishing term than “experts” should cover their edge cases (Which secrets are shameful to share vs merely uh inconvenient, e.g. for waistline, depends on how you draw the party lines, some do it at type ii “zahlungsfaehig” vs “proleten” as nsdap apparently another eg, for waterline) [do you have a fictional character for each of sigfox & lion?] So, where is the line for YC?
- aebtebeten 2y ago
  My bad: I got the fox and lion analogy wrong. (NdBdM apparently said the prince ought to be able to be both fox and lion; like HKH had both Knecht and Designori? What about Tito? "The lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves." [not yet checked for context/translation]) Sorry, I'd been too quick to assume it fit nicely in with our early tripartitions, based on some blogiating that I'm not finding in my verlauf at the moment. So I'd been imagining TCCAG (in Graves' telling), d-d-disguising himself as one of the clueless, in order to survive the machinations of the psychopaths that had killed off every other male in his family: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julio-Claudian_family_tree#Simplified https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julio-Claudian_family_tree#Sim... Found it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circulation_of_elites#Governing_elite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circulation_of_elites#Governin... ; it must've been the Burnham connection that set me off on 1984 and then to Rao. Note that here the foxes and lions are distinct people; hence my confusion. EDIT: Pareto definitely thinks of foxes and lions as distinct, but he must've introduced them somewhat earlier than §2178 (The Mind and Society/The General Form of Society/Force and Class-circulation): https://archive.org/details/ParetoTheMindAndSocietyVol4TheGeneralFormOfSociety/Pareto%20-%20The%20Mind%20and%20Society%20Vol%204%3B%20The%20General%20Form%20of%20Society/page/n96/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/ParetoTheMindAndSocietyVol4TheGe...
  - gradschoolfail 2y ago
    As to Rao-fox-lion quadrantology.. how to classify pear AI problem? (We can say nang et al were barbarians promoted to founders but that is cheap*. Otoh 1 o the more interesting facts from that case is some partners attempting to empirically price their social media marketing thesis) JPsmith on JCScott Against the Grain has another take on Rao, proweird being the barbarians trading with the State Tfound the crucial clause on pants from the Psmith-on-Stripe-Clueless that you pointed at *>derives much of [][] moral and affective sympathies from the claim that [][] is smarter and better and more efficient [s/_/effective] than anybody else Insert insider,expert,Feynman,YC,lion,officer,peer,etc & Whatever is the Other’s (prole,designor,founder,funder,clueless,loser,customer,peer)’s fave metric!