Chaos Patch (#93)

(Open thread + sparse links) — Hazy edition

Weimerica weekly (1, 2, 3 …) Prophetic elites. The weekly round.

What money is made of.

Trumpenführer panic update (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). Citadel on Trump. The Trump rabbit hole.

Islam’s Protestant future? Lethal piety. “The message I took from the novel Submission is that it is already too late. Western civilization has lost its core beliefs, and its will to survive. It is over. Fact or fiction? I think we are about to find out.” Waiting for God-0. Random news points (1, 2).

Academic decay.

Pinker’s questionable bet.

Leftist chaos.

Graphic PKD religious chaos. Age of CRISPR. Art and compression.

The Go challenge. Synth-bio in space. Behind the face of facebook.

John Conway interviewed (pdf). Groups.

December 20, 2015admin 41 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , , ,

41 Responses to this entry

  • grey enlightenment Says:

    interesting article

    The marketplace is devaluing GPAs, both high school and college, due to grade inflation.

    Dr. Ron Srigley teaches classical political philosophy and religion and literature at the University of Prince Edward Island. He is the author of Albert Camus’ Critique of Modernity and the translator of Camus’s Christian Metaphysics and Neoplatonism

    I can see some potential conflict of interest in his opposition to online courses. His job depends on parents writing those large checks.

    Online learning allows motivated autodidacts to save money and time by not having to go though the university process. College has become the equivalent of an overpriced daycare for overgrown children. And that’s why online learning is going to continue to thrive, by eliminating most or all of the waste and indoctrination of the typical college experience.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    How do I learn how to perform open-heart surgery in an online course? How do I learn how to weld in an online course?


    admin Reply:

    How do I learn to compete for robot jobs on an online course?


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    I love robots. They do the jobs white people don’t want to do.

    Posted on December 20th, 2015 at 10:52 am Reply | Quote
  • William M Briggs Says:

    Damn, but that Academic decay article is good. Mandatory reading. The university is as dead as the Republican party.


    Kgaard Reply:

    Yeah that’s the one I flagged as well. I was shocked by the ratio of “support” staff to faculty: 2 to 1!

    I keep thinking there must be a business opportunity in the retardation and en-miserable-ization of the masses, in the sense that the rebels and holdouts will want something better. But really that niche is already being filled by online right-wing intellectual blogs.

    Creating that same sort of engagement in real life will be a logical next extension. I see Roosh is starting down precisely that path. That makes sense. The university used to be the gathering place of people interested in ideas. Now it’s basically dead. Or hijacked. So something must/should rise in its place.

    I had this idea over the summer of starting a seminar called “Forbidden Knowledge” that would basically just teach all the stuff you are not allowed to know. But then somehow I let it drop …


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    I have something similar, it’s an interactive learning experience called “Politically Incorrect”.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    Civilization can’t advance until all of the universities and libraries are razed to the ground.


    vxxc2014 Reply:



    Grotesque Body Reply:

    I’m glad someone agrees with me.

    GC Reply:

    A simple purge would do.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    No, because universities themselves are the source of decay.

    Posted on December 20th, 2015 at 12:43 pm Reply | Quote
  • Hattori Says:

    If you didnt know, SpaceX will launch their upgraded Falcon 9 to space and attempt a relanding later today.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    Excellent news on Space-X


    Hattori Reply:

    An update on spaceX, they will be launching today at 8:30pm due to better weather. The first stage landing will be attempted on actual land for the first time and not on the boat platform.


    Posted on December 20th, 2015 at 1:31 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chaos Patch (#93) | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on December 20th, 2015 at 2:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • pyrrhus Says:

    When I read about space colonization in an article, it tells me that some social scientist is writing the article….We aren’t even remotely close to colonizing the Moon, and anyone who knows something about physics can see that there is no current path to such colonization….like fusion power, it is just a money sink for billionaires and governments…


    Posted on December 20th, 2015 at 4:45 pm Reply | Quote
  • pyrrhus Says:

    Pinker is transparently right about humanity, at least the western version, becoming more peaceful….But I don’t see how that is relevant to extinction events. Even a nuclear war would leave populations in out of the way places, and some would survive. Dispersed humanity is very “anti fragile ” to human action. But AI’s or cosmic events operate on a different scale, so there is unquantifiable risk in dabbling with potentially runaway technologies…


    Ripper Reply:

    Re Space and fusion we have capable pulse spaceship engines and pulse disposable fusion reactors but our primative desire for steady output holds us back.


    Posted on December 20th, 2015 at 4:54 pm Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    How’s my Debt/Derivatives Zero wipeout look now Bitchez?

    Your link.

    It’s all nonsense anyway. What is notional can be wished away.

    Tough on Finance but better than a firing squad.


    Posted on December 20th, 2015 at 11:13 pm Reply | Quote
  • sobl Says:

    Thanks you for the links to Weimerica Weekly. I may reach out for a possible discussion of the Outsideness Strategy


    Irving Reply:

    Sadly admin doesn’t seem interested in doing podcasts but hopefully you can get him to make an exception.


    SVErshov Reply:

    here is nice one


    Posted on December 20th, 2015 at 11:30 pm Reply | Quote
  • Harold Says:

    According to Edsger W. Dijkstra,

    “In the Western world, 66 institutions have enjoyed a continuously visible identity since 1530. Among those 66 are the Roman Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church and the Parliaments of Iceland and the Isle of Man. What makes these 66 so interesting—and I owe the knowledge of this fact to our President Dr. Berdahl—is that the remaining 62 are all universities!”


    Anomaly UK Reply:

    Hmmm. I was going to throw the Corporation of London in there, but of course it was not continuous. Quo Warranto and all that.


    Posted on December 21st, 2015 at 2:58 am Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    Western civilization has lost its core beliefs, and its will to survive.

    I’ll have to disagree with that summary, but he got half of it right. Review coming soon; this is a book not to miss.


    Kgaard Reply:

    There is a big revival going on in catholic theology which may help things. Dudes like Father Robert Barron and George Weigel are writing popular apologias, and Barron is brawling with Internet atheists (and basically smoking them). The Internet is allowing people to see and understand the failure of the enlightenment project. The Catholics stand to be big winners from that.

    So, in theory, the Catholics could parlay their newfound cultural sway into real political sway. The way to do this would be to emphasize the best and subtlest of the historical catholic political writings. Catholicism is the original big tent organization. They could go into the archives and whip up a powerful agenda for beating back the A-rabs, female barrenness and secular solipsism all in one go.


    Posted on December 21st, 2015 at 3:15 am Reply | Quote
  • Different T Says:

    Just read MM and LA’s “debate” here

    MM said some strange things I never would have expected, notably “So when I advise you not to struggle against this, I am not taking a Richard Hoste line in which Washington is an inanimate force, like lightning, to be endured. It is not an inanimate force, it is a human force, and if you can get 51% of Americans on the same day to snap their fingers and say, “Washington, go away,” it will disappear instantly & for good. Just like the Soviet Union. Just like it! And after that day, lightning and other natural misfortunes will still be with us. But Washington won’t.”

    Granted it strikes me as strange precisely because MM is talking about restoring America.

    Also of note was “Your parody of my remedy is: to repair government, first heal society. My remedy is: to heal society, first repair government.” Considering I haven’t read a tremendous amount of MM because like XS, it is a systems (or as another poster stated, “structural”) argument, I do wonder how many here agree with MM’s “prescription.”

    But here is the most pertinent analogy he offered:

    The natural order of government is not a secret. Aristotle knew it. It is natural for children to respect and obey their parents. It is natural for parents to guide and support their children. It is natural for the poor, weak, and ignorant to respect and obey the wealthy, strong and powerful. It is natural for the wealthy, strong and powerful to guide and support the poor, weak and ignorant.

    These things do not appear so “naturally.” Even the concept of “parents” nearly certainly did not have a referent prior to the invention of property and male-led households. Therefore, if the type of government MM considers “natural” (really, it is what he considers “good”) couldn’t have existed prior to the existence of said referents, it seems a natural starting point (and perhaps the most crucial).

    And this leads to the REAL conundrum for all the restoration-ists. Even if changing the structure of Western government is possible, could it lead to restoring the health of the society (the “natural order”)? Who are the males going to make their wives? Who is going to teach their daughters to be “good” future wives so that the “natural” (good) order of government can continue? To avoid the obfuscation charge, can you have MM’s “natural order of government” without the “natural order of family/society”?

    Granted this whole line of thought presupposes you are not in support of Capital gradually turning humans into highly specialized and identity-less (apart from their specialty, LDO) ants. And that certainly cannot be taken for granted at this place.


    Steve Johnson Reply:

    “And this leads to the REAL conundrum for all the restoration-ists. Even if changing the structure of Western government is possible, could it lead to restoring the health of the society (the “natural order”)? ”

    How is that a conundrum? The population of the United States isn’t the population of Nigeria – absent the constant grinding force of progressivism the natural order that MM is talking about is quite natural to the people of the United States – or to be more accurate – absent progressivism populations will gain in wealth and power directly in proportion to the degree to which they are traditional and will, if not restrained, enforce order and work to suppress disorder in their areas.

    To put it crudely, the Kardashians don’t have a corrosive effect on your city if you hang any cable provider who carries the show – repeat for all cities.


    Different T Reply:

    Again, Who are the males going to make their wives? Who is going to teach their daughters to be “good” future wives so that the “natural” (good) order of government can continue?

    There is no talk of the “Kardashians,” only the female population of the West. Are the males supposed to become “MID-LIFE BLANK SLATISTS?” Or we can put a religious spin that they should trust the “BORN AGAIN VIRGINS.”

    Or are you of the opinion that sexual histories do not affect familial outcomes?

    This isn’t a problem if you want to talk about CREATION, it is a major problem if you want to talk about RESTORATION of the West.

    absent the constant grinding force of progressivism the natural order that MM is talking about is quite natural to the people of the United States



    Different T Reply:

    To clarify “Creation vs. Restoration”

    If you want to speak about creation, there is no requirement for a scale of hundreds of millions of people. As MM repeatedly made clear, restoration requires whole-sale, one-step “conversion.” Hence the necessary belief in the “born-again,” to say nothing of the likely actual outcome.

    Posted on December 21st, 2015 at 3:41 am Reply | Quote
  • ivvenalis Says:

    All this talk of “Protestant Islam” is nothing more or less than progressives of various stripes hoping that the Islamic Question will just resolve itself favorably without any effort or sacrifice or even thought on their part.


    admin Reply:

    On the other hand, it might lead to a realistic expectation of Thirty Years’ War-scale conflict.


    Posted on December 21st, 2015 at 6:52 am Reply | Quote
  • Kwisatz Haderach Says:


    I don’t see how a derivatives wipeout is just. Lots of honest folk, rich and poor, would be destroyed by that.

    I wonder if a credit economy is inevitable given progress of financial technology. I don’t see a way to stop it.


    Posted on December 21st, 2015 at 3:07 pm Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    Art and compression

    thanks for the link. very ineteresting. but I’m having hard time to digure out who is this Gabe is.


    Posted on December 21st, 2015 at 3:42 pm Reply | Quote
  • haishan Says:

    “The Ministry of Land and Resources said the landslide that destroyed at least 33 buildings on Sunday was caused by the collapse not of a hillside but of a sodden mountain of dirt and construction debris in an industrial area.”

    This seemed like a remarkably XS-type story.


    Posted on December 21st, 2015 at 4:29 pm Reply | Quote
  • Izak Says:

    I feel like every “academic decay” article I’ve read completely misses the point.

    Don’t get me wrong; it’s amusing to read the complaints of aging professors who are upset that the institution is a joke. I’m sure their tears taste salty and delicious. But they just strike me as people who once deeply believed in the system and are now disillusioned with it, even though it’s doing exactly what you’d expect it to do if you were around at any point after the 1950s (and probably even before then, if you were astute and paid attention). In the article linked above, the professor is very upset about declining standards. He’s especially mad that so many of the humanities/liberal arts instructors are adjuncts who *don’t even have PhDs*. I’ve spent some time in academia, and I can tell you that those adjuncts are the best teachers in the whole school, and it’s the tenured professors who suck. Why? Because the tenured profs all got their PhDs in social justice horse-malarky, and they incorporate their goofy nonsense into their lectures. Or, if they didn’t do that, they got their PhDs in either A) a study of a tiny, miniscule, itsy-bitsy issue (that no normal person would ever think to ask about) in the work of a major thinker, or B) a big overview study of some obscure thinker whom no one knows about and wouldn’t ever care to learn. So when they talk about the big thinker who matters, they focus down on whatever pointless minutiae they’re doing research on. Or they’ll spend the class droning on about the nobody they do their research on instead of the important guy. In other words, they incorporate their shitty and irrelevant research into their teaching, and it’s dumb and no one cares. The adjuncts, on the other hand, know how to be general, give the necessary info, and share other information that your average intelligent person would care about. They have teaching down to a science.

    My point in bringing that up is that the stupidity of the system is baked into the cake. If you’re a “serious researcher” in the humanities, your job is to create books exclusively for other “serious researchers” which will be sold at outrageous prices that will ensure your audience can only be those “serious researchers” and no one else. They’re sold at outrageous prices because the publishers know that the only customers will be University libraries. To suggest that any normal, cultivated individual with a high IQ would ever be interested in the average humanities research book is remarkably naive, and everyone knows this. So if you’re doing that kinda research, you’re not going to need to worry about educating students, since you’ve got your research to take care of. And in fact you can be a flat-out sperg, barely capable of coherent communication. You were hired to write books that no one wants to read. And if you’re that kind of guy, doing that kind of research, why on earth would you care about the standards for your students, unless you’re a real True Believer? Intellectually, you’ve been placed upon a nice and fun hamster wheel that you can run on forever. If you have even the slightest amount of realism still left in your head, the “why” of your research must become totally irrelevant, because the answer is “because someone else with that precise career choice would be able to pretend to find it interesting, because it might help him get tenure in his totally pointless research that others might pretend to care about as well when they want to pursue that exact career.”

    The goon who wrote the latest outrage piece doesn’t get the real issue. He thinks his work is tremendously important, and he thinks the humanities is filled with important work that really benefits society. In other words, he’s a True Believer. If the admins don’t agree with him, it’s not because they’re a bunch of sociopaths who value science over everything because they don’t have souls and resemble cyborgs. It’s because they’re smart, understand that humanities research is dumb — it prides itself on novelty for novelty’s sake and originality over truth — and the admins know they can use the humanities as a nice selling point for the middle-class students who are either A) too dumb to do anything else, or B) trying to please their clueless boomer parents who wanted them to go to college even though the students didn’t want to (but still wanted to live for free). The researchers who have spent their life’s work trying to analyze the various images of hats in Southern Literature (or whatever inane subject) should really be thankful that their goofy nonsense is funded by the system in the first place. But somehow, I think part of the reason they might be mad is because they’ve had to throw away their dreams of writing something important in order be a part of the system, and now they must accommodate the boredom of stoned 19-year-olds. So we’ve got this latest outrage piece, where the author concludes that the real tragedy of the college system is that because of its declining standards (and nothing else, of course!), it has failed to give the students “something to live for.” I wonder: do these people have anything to live for? And, more pertinently, is this complaint not a complete and total affirmation of Moldbug’s decision to label academia “The Cathedral”?

    It would be refreshing if one of these complainers actually spent some time examining the system structurally rather than superficially, flailing his arms about declining standards or whatever. I think he’d realize, after a bit of reflection, that the University system is doing what it’s supposed to do, and he has been embarrassingly naive in his assessment of why it’s there.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    The notion that universities being cucked and pervasive mediocrity in the humanities is a FEATURE rather than a BUG is one of the most potent redpills out.


    SVErshov Reply:

    wait till curren autistic generation will produce some professors.


    Posted on December 22nd, 2015 at 12:29 am Reply | Quote
  • Kwisatz Haderach Says:

    Trump is still trading below Rubio and Cruz for the Republican nomination. (

    I bought Trump at $0.26.


    Kwisatz Haderach Reply:

    The prediction markets say Trump is more electable than Rubio in the general.

    Trump is .25 to win nom, .16 to win general.
    Rubio is .33, .14.

    Bayes’ Theorem says:

    P(Gen | Nom) = P(Gen) / P(Nom) * P(Nom | Gen)

    Assume you have to have won the nom to win the gen. Therefore if the candidate has won the Gen, the probability they won the nom ~= 1. There is a tail risk of this not being true for Trump going independent, but it’s negligible.

    P(Nom | Gen) = 1

    Substitute into Bayes’ Theorem

    P(Gen | Nom) = P(Gen) / P(Nom)

    Trump’s P(Gen | Nom) = .16/.25 = .64
    Rubio = .14/.33 = .42


    Posted on December 22nd, 2015 at 10:40 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment