Chaos Patch (#99)

(Open thread + links)

Call it the Deep Right? Tick war. Salami tactics. Mises and fascism. Ethnomasochism. Questions of organization. Economic links. Reflections on the Alt-Right (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Something new. The weekly round.

The Hell that is Pakistan. Trapped by the Saudis. The chaos to come. America’s opportunity. China troubles (1, 2, 3), and related. Commercialization of hard security. The demographic dimension. Skyscraper index in space and time. Tax crisis? “Democracy …”

Shale 2.0. “A new mall hasn’t been built in the US since 2006.” Against ‘welfare for all’. A dead cowboy. The F-35 catastrophe. Radical tech-deflation. Shadow power. Hyperthyroidism in American politics.

Trumpenführer panic report — confusion and mad, terrified shrieking (1, 2, 3, 4 (see)). Riding the pendulum. Conservative breakdown (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). Acceptance (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). “On 4chan’s My Little Pony board … support for Trump is unanimous …” (and other lunacy). Fox left in the lurch (1, 2, 3).

Cologne after-shocks (1, 2, 3, 4. 5, 6) and other related outrages. Assimilation failed. Honesty about Islam and homosexuality. Islamization of America.

The Duck versus Twitter (1, 2, 3, 4), also notable. Facebook and moral universalism. Dawkins disinvitation. The SJW mind. Blacklist.

Coates on the take, in context. Whitening of the Left (UK version). The Ferguson effect.

Human achievement database online (see also). Brightened by diversity. Thompson on Hive Mind. Intelligence and longevity. Where civilization breaks down. American Eugenics 1.0. Ridley on The Selfish Gene. A sermon on scientism. Science is annoying.

Apocalypse Corner. Preparation time. It’s on. AngloAmerican angles. The world economy is toast. America Alone (10 years on), and The Clash of Civilizations (20 years on).

Go is gone (1, 2, 3). Yudkowsky sounds the alarm. Some skepticism from the AI Guild, and from Go types. AI is our friend. Clarifications. Memristors hit the mainstream media. Retail automation. Notes on the blocksize limit (also 1, 2). DIY neurotronics. Distributed ‘democracy‘.

Climate obstreperousness from Spencer and Briggs.

Elusive space. Fungi in space. Water on Pluto.

Personal productivity heuristics. Tim Powers speaks.

January 31, 2016admin 31 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , , , , , , , , , ,

31 Responses to this entry

  • Chaos Patch (#99) | Neoreactive Says:

    […] Chaos Patch (#99) […]

    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 9:01 am Reply | Quote
  • grey enlightenment Says:

    Capitalism will eat democracy — unless we speak up

    Good. that’s why NRx should embrace technology and capitalism

    Why Robots Mean Interest Rates Could Go Even Lower In The Future

    also good news


    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    One of the many ways Whine Nationalists keep a firm grip on their slave morality is by being anti-capitalists – maybe whites who can’t compete with illiterates from the 3rd world should starve? Just saying.


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 2:26 pm Reply | Quote
  • Mircea Popescu Says:

    Would you consider adding the javascript to allow me to reference specific points in your article when I quote you ?


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 2:52 pm Reply | Quote
  • Different T Says:

    Regarding the “organization” link:

    While all of the above would be useful in creating valuable information for sale and also in creating contacts with Deep State-types, the next step is to ask how to truly capture the value of the information created by the Truth Agency. Rather than sell it to others, why not act on it and make much more in profit?

    The obvious way to do this is through the financial markets … or the Bain Capital way

    Having thought about similar plans, the largest problem is an utter lack of any empirical evidence that NRx produces what financial markets would term “valuable information.”

    The maxim of investing for alpha is that 1) you must have different expectations than the market and 2) the market must converge to your expectations over your investing horizon.

    Most NRx types steadfastly refuse to understand the current expectations because they are considered what would best be termed as “Cathedral inspired myth.”

    How many Austrian economists have “good” track records on prediction (serious question). I know of exactly zero. Even guys like Peter Schiff who have their fortunes, also have awful prediction records and it isn’t absurd to say they have their fortunes in spite of their economic theory. If someone like Bob Murphy is light years ahead of orthodox economists, why aren’t he or those who follow his analysis able to profit?


    Hurlock Reply:

    Have you heard of Mark Spitznagel?


    grey enlightenment Reply:

    one success out of many losers who used an option trading method that no longer works


    Hurlock Reply:

    Who are the losers?

    And wasn’t the question about predictions? Spitznagel has a very good track record of predictions.

    grey enlightenment Reply:

    due to the mathematics of derivative pricing, most predictions are losers for the people who trade them. Making a correct prediction doesn’t mean you will make money.

    The losers are people who took Schiff and others advice to buy gold, sell stocks, etc. I imagine there are many of them given his large exposure.

    Different T Reply:

    who used an option trading method that no longer works

    Is this referencing Spitznagel? From his wiki, his fund’s strategy simplistically seems to be making small, highly asymmetrical bets on mispriced risks (by definition, otherwise the bets would have higher cost). What are you referring to with this “method that no longer works”?

    frank Reply:

    Isn’t Michael Burry from the Big Short an austrian? Btw, there’s a hilarious article by Noah Smith on why he’s wrong this time. A sample:

    Why does Burry buy into discredited theories of the crisis and embrace dubious criticisms of the Fed? It isn’t clear, but the reason might be an anti-government, libertarian ideology. Burry says:

    “Government policies and regulations in the postcrisis era have aided the hollowing-out of middle America far more than anything the private sector has done…Capitalism is on trial.”

    In fact, this idea pervades Burry’s arguments — government is always a villain. Libertarianism is fine and good, but ideology can distort reality and prevent people from efficiently assimilating the available evidence. Unfortunately, that happens too often on Wall Street. When we ask why even the most brilliant and competent investors can succumb to bad ideas outside of their area of expertise, ideology too often is the culprit.

    They will never listen gentlemen. Even if we predict everything in exact order, they’ll still say “this time is different”.

    Different T Reply:

    Burry doesn’t appear Austrian, just more “libertarian” than most. He certainly does blame the Fed; but also deregulation, fraud, and bank greed. Most importantly, in the interview I watched, he said more regulation is needed (a new Glass-Steagal), taxes raised/spending cut, etc.

    Different T Reply:

    Nope, thanks.

    Just read his wiki. Any other links to learn more about his past?


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 3:29 pm Reply | Quote
  • Hurlock Says:

    @grey enlightenment

    You are dodging the issue.

    Has Spitznagel been mostly right in his predictions? Yes he has.
    Has Spitznagel made a large net profit in the past decade? Yes, he has.
    I mean, the guy is a billionaire, what else do you want?

    As for Schiff, ok he was wrong in his main predictions, specifically about inflation. So was Murphy. And? Does that disprove austrian theory? Are you unaware that there were in fact a lot of austrians who disagreed with the inflation predictions?

    Just because some austrian economists made wrong predictions doesn’t mean that Austrian theory is wrong – that’s just silly and sloppy thinking, especially when you have several counter-examples.


    grey enlightenment Reply:

    I’m not going down the rabbit hole of debating the merits or lack thereof of Austrian economics, a debate that is utterly unwinnable. I’m just talking about these gurus and forecasters who have been wrong most of the time. Betting on econ collapse, treasury market collapse, dollar collapse, etc…all have been a losing trades since 2008.

    Spitznagel’s hedge fund Universa Investments “made one of the biggest profits on Wall Street during the 2008 financial crisis” (according to CNBC),[42] scoring returns of over 100% as the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index lost over a third of its value,[5][7][8][10][18][19][20][43][44] and making him “a fortune” according to The Wall Street Journal.[5] Despite being “one of Wall Street’s most bearish investors” (and even “the world’s most bearish investor”[45]), Spitznagel has “produced consistent gains since then, including a 30 percent return” in 2013 and 10 percent in 2014 (and has “been up every year since 2008”), according to The New York Times.[14] Spitznagel produced gains of 20% (or over $1 billion) in the 2015 stock market selloff.[46]

    That’s just one successful person out of many losers. Mathematically, betting against the market is a losing game, and one of two people who do it successfully doesn’t change that fact.


    Ahote Reply:

    Mark Skousen is an independent Austrian critic of “doomsayers.” There are also many Mises Institute affiliated critics of “doomsayers.” Note that Schiff isn’t, strictly speaking, an Austrian. Murphy always struck me as a nerd.


    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    He struck you as a nerd? The dude pretty much defines ‘Nerd’, other than being gifted with more verbal talent than many nerds are. Tom Woods is pretty nerdy, too. Re: Doomsayers, I think Austrians sometimes overlook how much some things (productivity) are the products of basic research and human capital, thus they see a market nexus failure as more serious than it is. Really, what anti-capitalism does in Western societies is a lot less than the damage caused by having tons of people who have an IQ under 90.


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 4:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • Different T Says:

    Just because some austrian economists made wrong predictions doesn’t mean that Austrian theory is wrong – that’s just silly and sloppy thinking, especially when you have several counter-examples.

    But did the Austrians who disagreed profit? Making a prediction in writing or disagreeing with a written prediction mean little to nothing. If Austrians do not even have access to meaningful capital to wager on their theories, does that tell you anything?

    Any other guys besides Spitznagel? Any links to the Austrians who disagreed about inflation?


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 4:27 pm Reply | Quote
  • grey enlightenment Says:

    who used an option trading method that no longer works

    Is this referencing Spitznagel? From his wiki, his fund’s strategy simplistically seems to be making small, highly asymmetrical bets on mispriced risks (by definition, otherwise the bets would have higher cost). What are you referring to with this “method that no longer works”?

    The method is taking advantage of high interest rates to buy OTM (out of money) puts on index funds. You put 95% of capital in risk-free interest bearing accounts and the rest in OTM puts. The interest is enough to compensate for the losers, since these options will expire worthless most of the time. Now with risk-free rates permanently close to zero, obviously this does not work. Eventually your bankroll will be depleted by these tiny bets.

    There are other reasons. In accordance to Black Scholes , put options are cheaper when interest rates are high. Also, the market has a tendency to crash more often when rates are high. This is partially because high interest rates makes stock less attractive to less riskier assets.


    Different T Reply:


    Mathematically, betting against the market is a losing game

    It seems timing asset bubble bursts is a very difficult game that can occasionally be overcome when the cost of a long position is low enough (ie, Spitznagel’s strategy).


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 4:42 pm Reply | Quote
  • accelerate autism Says:

    8/pol/ thread 404d, here is an archive link:


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 6:16 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    Other than moralism, what on earth is possibly bad about sterilizing 60,000 incapable people?

    Under democracy, we sterilize the capable by making them work to support the incapable. Reverse that and we might have health again.

    Great list of links that went well with Sumatra and maduro.


    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    Eugenics against ones own children used to be de rigeur in European societies before the Dead Jew religion started getting McFeels about it, it’s total bullshit. This is one of my big annoyances with Evangelicals, as macho as they try to act they’re still race-denying anti-eugenicist nuts who think Jesus hates chlorinating gene pools.


    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    Actually I think the Black Plague was far more eugenic. And monogamy was standard practice among Latins, some Greeks, many Celts and most Germans long before some bored Gnostic made Jesus up. Now that’s not to say Churchianity didn’t have some positive eugenic effects, but it also disrupted infanticide and the ruthless treatment of criminals, which is clearly dysgenic. Christopher Clark’s “A Farewell to Alms” is the most convincing case I’ve read for short-duration ultra-eugenics (the aristocrats, who are better people, survived and replaced the proles to a large extent) and at least a partial explanation of the industrial revolution (which was a much longer process than is typically depicted).


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 7:33 pm Reply | Quote
  • Augustus Pugin Says:

    Jumping on the Duck twitter censorship bandwagon, I’m noticing more and more discussion from Brahmin-y types about shutting down comments sections for good in the name of abuse management. I think he might be onto something.


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 10:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • 4candles Says:

    99 n.o.

    Batting for the best part of two years, congrats – and with a stick of rhubarb too! (Boycott would be dead impressed). Surrounding chaoz has certainly increased (bitchez). NRx has increasingly repeated itself. Dark Enlightenment? I call for a Chaos Patch to discuss the state of disunion (i.e. shedding skin from here on out (i.e. in this chaos patch here)).

    It is, after all, almost the current Year of the Monkey.


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 11:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • Skilluminati Says:

    “…there’s no difference between being early and being wrong.” – Barton Biggs


    Posted on January 31st, 2016 at 11:48 pm Reply | Quote
  • Grotesque Body Says:

    That Pakistan/India article brings to mind the UR analysis of Israeli/Hamas relations.

    The war with Israel/India is Palestine/Pakistan’s national industry. Peace would be disastrous.

    Funny how the alliteration lines up too.


    Posted on February 1st, 2016 at 2:48 am Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    Spinning buckets, eh?

    Rotation is absolute because it requires acceleration, acceleration is absolute because it requires transfer of energy, and energy is absolute because A: it’s one of the foundational properties of existence itself or B: it’s conserved.

    Centrifugal force is really centripetal force. We say the water’s being thrown up against the sides, but really the sides are throwing the water inward, but imperfectly, and there’s a reaction force. The water is thrown toward the middle, but its existing velocity is not middleward, so it still hits the wall against slightly farther on. Anyway, in short, we discover again that science journalists know literally less than nothing about e.g. physics. (Tell: they again said the Higgs boson gives mass.)

    So what’s the real difference between Newtonian background space and Einsteinian relational space? Nothing, because of the law of non-contradiction.

    Yes, in pairwise comparisons, all we can really say is observer A sees space/velocity relation B, and this is different between various observers. However, the relations are not only pairwise. If A is related to B and B is related to C, then A also has a relation to C. As you may be aware from polygons, the number of interrelated relations (or meta-relations) grows exponentially. And they all have to be logically consistent.

    The journalist’s* point about spacetime is almost true. What they mean to say is there’s an underlying absolute framework. While A disagrees with C about where B is and how fast it’s going, A can use what A sees of C’s location and velocity to work out what C is seeing. That is, the Kolmogorov complexity of both observers is exactly equivalent – they ‘see’ different things but they know all the same things.

    *(Eww, journalist.)

    It’s almost impossible to make three or four things or ideas consistent without having the ideas be the truth – the number of ways they can mutually vary is too constrained, so there’s only one possible solution. The constraints from 10^80 or so things which all have to be consistent is frankly divine in strictness. For almost all practical purposes, it is the same as an absolute external framework.


    Posted on February 1st, 2016 at 11:58 am Reply | Quote
  • R. J. Moore II Says:

    Most libertarians are using the same fake-history and a-priori story on fascism that comes from Commies and WW2 liberals. Maybe they should try reading a book or shutting their mouths? Jeffrey Cucker is particularly egregious in this. Paul Gottfried just put out two new books on Fascism. It’s not a particularly glorious movement, but of the three (Democracy, Communism, Fascism) fascism is clearly the least retarded and manliest of them all, and also the most friendly to reality-centric science and art. Nietzschean libertarianism > Catholic pacifist LARPing.


    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    This plays also to anti-left libertarianism, mainstream conservatives and libertarians are still largely liberal-leftists in their sentiments, and that shit needs to be Zyklon-B’d out of the ‘movement’ before it’s going to get anywhere.


    Posted on February 3rd, 2016 at 8:52 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment