LOL, LOL, xolxolAlthough I do intend to respond to a few issues raised on this thread since my last post here, I have been meanwhile ignoring the topic (and mostly ignoring Reputation) due to ENOTIME for nonsense.
This, however, is too funny for me to miss the moment:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5221450.msg53759995#msg53759995
Quote from: TMAN on Today at 07:16:19 PM
>
>Quote from: xolxol on Today at 06:48:15 PM
>
>>The OLD nullius wont care about these people,something is fishy he might
>>not be the same person this new personality is like a cunt protecting
>>Lauda ang friends.
>
>PGP do you even know what that is you stupid little shitnugget
I agree that xolxol is a stupid little shitnugget, and doubly forking
stupid for somehow having missed in my history the numerous posts that
I made defending Lauda from twisted, illogical attacks in early 2018.
(Including attacks that have been retracted, with courteous apologies
that Lauda graciously accepted.)
SIGNED,
nullius
2020-02-02
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iHUEARYKAB0WIQSNOMR84IlYpr/EF5vEJ5MVn575SQUCXjcrJwAKCRDEJ5MVn575
SeEpAQCpu8hU0PM/68YJWEuoNIW2STYysMQVOTyqSkv21MhgPwEArcy/slvJokFn
7n6Cj8AtiieGblRbVlSx8O7SdBMr3wc=
=LxyV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I included the quotation of today’s messages in my signed statement, for reasons similar to why Satoshi embedded a current news headline in the Genesis Block. Plus, lulz.
Now, with my thus having easily
passed the threshold with my widely-known PGP identity key...
[N.b., it took me awhile to gather all the below quotes. Check the PGP signature timestamp on the above message to see when I started searching for all those classic Nullian posts which I remembered.]
I have also noticed significant discrepancies in speech patterns. Some of the original mannerisms (particularly in terms of text formatting) have been duplicated (or more accurately, exaggerated) but upon deeper inspection, discrepancies begin to emerge.
Vague FUD. Setting aside “text formatting”, find me even one person on this forum who could duplicate my prose style, and you may have an argument. Find me one person
in the world who could consistently mimic my
ideas on a conceptual level, and you may have a case.
I am the same
Nietzsche-
quoting,
Bitcoin-worshipping,
Lauda-loving,
spam-hating,
Cloudflare-distrusting curmudgeon always I was—with the same inimitable style, a personal characteristic which, by the way, I could not just switch off if I were to want a sock account like you’re using.
(
N.b., none of the posts that I just linked were in Dev & Tech.)
And I repeat: If my linguistic
form would be difficult to simulate, could it be but impossible to fake my conceptual
substance?
What’s left is to secure yourself, take care of your own, live by honour alone whereas law is meaningless, keep busy with something productive, and try to have some fun.
Mine is... the anarchy of those who love order, and impose order first on themselves: They who live by honour and not law. They must become laws unto themselves. [...] For those whose honour is pride and whose pride is self-honour, law is at best superfluous; and the law of the mob must be explicitly rejected.
My wording was correct because I was making a prediction. I believe nullius has a more optimistic view of the future than I do.
To the contrary! You have it backwards. I wish I had just pushed through the post which comprises the first part above. I kept having to pause and go add replies to additional posts. This happens to me all too often.
“Optimism is cowardice.” — Spengler (writing most of a hundred years ago)
To rule out the possibility of compromised or relinquished keys, I'm waiting to see how nullius performs in technical discussions. [...] Instead he is injecting himself into all manner of petty reputation disputes, which seems sort of beneath him.
Did you fail also fail to notice my significant Meta/Reputation involvement in early 2018?
Even before that, here are some excerpts from the first thread in which I sort of, almost, approximately crossed paths with Lauda in public. The thread was in Meta; and my anti-Btrash posts quoted below were my fourth and fifth posts, respectively (not counting an anti-Google CAPTCHA Meta post that mods apparently deleted as duplicative).
From lurking, I already knew who Lauda was; but I doubt that she noticed me. At that point, as a Newbie who had been actively posting for less than 48 hours, I was just happy to incinerate the left-over pieces after the cat had gotten bored with tearing up Btashers.
Anyone who intentionally tries to deceive newbies that an altcoin is Bitcoin just because it stole the "Bitcoin" name, is an untrustworthy and malicious entity that can't be trusted.
Boldface mine:I would consider it if it became a widespread, spammy problem, but I don't think that many people are confusing Bitcoin with Bcash on this forum. If someone is fraudulently passing off Bcash as Bitcoin, the most appropriate response is probably to give that person negative trust.
I consider the name "Bitcoin Cash" to be deceptive, but that's on the people behind it: I don't consider it deceptive/fraudulent for people to merely refer to that cryptocurrency as Bitcoin Cash.
If someone is fraudulently passing off Bcash as Bitcoin, the most appropriate response is probably to give that person negative trust.
I fully agree.
So Bitcoin Cash is not alt coin.
It is a scam altcoin.
So-called “Bitcoin Cash” is neither Bitcoin, nor cash, in the sense that it has neither the unlinkability nor the fungibility of cash. It and its ilk are also generically different from honest altcoins, which at least have the decency to make their own names. I don’t even know what to properly call it—other than a scam, of course; and anybody who does not realize it’s a scam must be one or more of ill-informed, malicious, or incurably stupid.
[...]
I hope that helps. As for myself, I am still having trouble deciding what I should call Roger Ver’s little abortion. Perhaps ASICBOOSTCOIN. Any better ideas? “We’re-not-engineers-don’t-know-much-about-scaling-and-don’t-care-Coin” is too long.
I wouldn’t trust Roger Ver to distribute car wash tokens;
Forking hell, I just realized that I somehow never yet
red-tagged MemoryDealers! /* XXX TODO */ This is a special case: It will require a considerable effort to squeeze my judgment of Roger Ver into the new, absurdly low feedback length limits.
He seemed quite at home in Development & Technical Discussion originally, yet he has not made a single post there since returning to the forum a month ago.
I do intend to return to Development & Technology, my
first forum love (
n.b. that that was my ninth post on the forum, defending Segwit in D&T
after the above-quoted Meta posts against Btrashers); but my plans, desires, choices, and the reasons therefor are really none of your business, just as long as my
PGP key is the only one paying for my signature.
Exhibits
Lest there be any doubt: Because my identity has been called into question on the basis of alleged discrepancies between my past and present posts, I will take the liberty of an extended review with quotes at length from
just a few of past and present posts involving me and/or Lauda, which discuss unpopular ideas outside the technical forum. It is evidence against the accusation that I am not me—not that I particularly mind this walk down memory lane. ;-)
Merited by Lauda (10)You need to read a lot of Nietzsche's writing[1] to understand why he thought the way that he did.
[...]
[1] It is also on my TODO list.
It’s good to see that some people still believe in reading books, rather than simply Googling for unfamiliar words:
Let's fuck some weird Neitzschie foolishness in there as well, so that the easily-intimidated will back off in the face of your overpowering intellectualism.
[...]
and if you need any more pseudo-philosophical theories to throw around (with associated almost-german words), here's a link:
https://www.pinterest.ie/fiveatheart59/philosophical-bullshit/ Have fun!
I myself have not yet made it through all of his sixteen books. That takes awhile, together with comprehending the nineteenth-century social-historical context against which
e.g. he prefaced
The Will to Power, “What I am now going to relate is the history of the next two centuries. I shall describe what will happen, what must necessarily happen: the triumph of nihilism.”
Also apropos hereof, with boldface supplied:
I reduce a principle to a formula. Every naturalism in morality—that is, every healthy morality—is dominated by an instinct of life, some commandment of life is fulfilled by a determinate canon of “shalt” and “shalt not”; some inhibition and hostile element on the path of life is thus removed. Anti-natural morality—that is, almost every morality which has so far been taught, revered, and preached—turns, conversely, against the instincts of life: it is condemnation of these instincts, now secret, now outspoken and impudent. When it says, “God looks at the heart,” it says No to both the lowest and the highest desires of life, and posits God as the enemy of life. The saint in whom God delights is the ideal eunuch. Life has come to an end where the “kingdom of God” begins.
The thread diverged to the point where it could be split into a Politics and Society thread though.
I intended to do exactly that, yesterday, with my reply to johhnyUA. The greatest substance thereof was written immediately; but I decided to gather some supporting pictures, so as to aid comprehension by those who don’t read. Will do, and link from here.
P.S.—
If nature have no pity on the degenerate, it is not therefore immoral: the growth of physiological and moral evils in the human race, is rather the result of morbid and unnatural morality. The sensitiveness of the majority of men is both morbid and unnatural. Why is it that mankind is corrupt in a moral and physiological respect? The body degenerates if one organ is unsound. The right of altruism cannot be traced to physiology, neither can the right to help and to the equality of fate: these are all premiums for degenerates and failures. There can be no solidarity in a society containing unfruitful, unproductive, and destructive members, who, by the bye, are bound to have offspring even more degenerate than they are themselves.
Edit, P.P.S.—I missed this on an initial skim over foolishness:
I guess this is what happens when Randian and Rothbardian ideas are overwhelmingly pushed as dogma without discourse.
I was waiting for some thoughtless nitwit to accuse me of following the pseudointellectual pretender known as “Ayn Rand”. No, I do not. I pass that judgment after having read
all of her published works, and then regretting the waste of my time.
I’ve never read Rothbard. Thus, I can’t very well be advocating for his ideas, much less pushing them as “dogma”.
Once upon a time, I seduced a beauteous lady of arts and letters with a running erotic joke about commas, interspersed with intercourse on Byron. Thence ensued a story more appropriate for /r/GirlsGoneBitcoin than here, wherein she confirmed my reputation as “mad, bad, and dangerous to know”. Thus, I do understand why you’re jealous of my way with words; you should be.
Discourse, you fucking cretin, DISCOURSE.
Do you seriously think that response had anything useful in it? A little "intercourse" (DISCOURSE YOU PRICK) about your own stats?
I enjoy being hypercorrected by pretentious morons who neither grasp (not-so-)subtle
double entendre, nor even know the definitions of basic English words:
intercoursenoun
1. dealings or communication between individuals, groups, countries, etc.
2.
interchange of thoughts, feelings, etc.3. sexual relations or a sexual coupling, especially coitus.
(Aside: The sense of sexual coupling is actually a euphemism; the denotations of “dealings, communication; interchange of thoughts” are original. Source: My own knowledge of etymology. Go get your own education, you degenerate anti-intellectual.)
(with associated almost-german words)
Actually, it
is German. Per the mighty
Duden:
Sklavenmoral, die
Wortart: Substantiv, feminin
Gebrauch: Philosophie
[...]
Herkunft
nach dem deutschen Philosophen F. Nietzsche (1844–1900)
Let's fuck some weird Neitzschie foolishness in there as well, so that the easily-intimidated will back off in the face of your overpowering intellectualism.
The correct spelling is “Nietzsche”. And what did I say about the vulgarity meter? It shows that
I hit where it hurts: Directly upon your own sense of jealous inferiority. The
Sklavenmoral does suit you, after all. No wonder you are such a zealot for empathy. You need it, and also its incestuous twin: Pity.
[...]
The foregoing is merely the application of a principle which grade-α philologist Nietzsche had laid when he wooed Truth’s virgin sister, Wisdom, in his previous book,
Also sprach Zarathustra:Muthig, unbekümmert, spöttisch, gewaltthätig — so will uns die Weisheit: sie ist ein Weib und liebt immer nur einen Kriegsmann.
[‘Courageous, unconcerned, scornful, coercive—so wisdom wisheth us; she is a woman, and ever loveth only a warrior.’]
Athena Pallas: Virgin goddess of War and WisdomNietzsche: She and her sister Truth have rejected the advances of the philosophers philosophasters.
Photo: Jürgen Howaldt The great truths of this world are oft concealed in the twisting of language. A warrior-philologist is armed with the sword to slice through this Gordian knot; and in the famous
Beyond Good and Evil aphorism that later gave the starting point for his
Zur Genealogie der Moral, Nietzsche discovered two separate moral dichotomies:
- The dichotomy between “good” and “bad” (“gut” and “schlecht”) in the sense of “noble” versus “despicable”; this, he termed the Master-Morality (Herren-Moral), which he exemplified in the self-glorifying pride of ancient aristocrats: “...it is a fundamental belief of all aristocrats that the common people are untruthful. ‘We truthful ones’ [‘Wir Wahrhaftigen’] the nobility in ancient Greece called themselves.” I observe that whereas the Homeric heroes may merrily invade Troy, seize its treasures and women, and burn it to the ground, they would never scam you. Scamming would be despicable, schlecht, bad. (Cf. Zur Genealogie der Moral, pp. 21–22.)
- The dichotomy between “good” and “evil” (“gut” and “böse”) in the sense of “sympathetic” versus “dangerous”, which he termed the Slave-Morality (Sklaven-Moral). It is the morality of resentment by persons of inferior quality, by which they demand that those stronger than themselves must abandon their strength for humility. In Bitcoin Forum terms, it is the morality of those who demand empathy for “please Sir give merits or my whole family will starve to death” types—or those who are so enraged about being denied “lucrative bounties” that they develop paranoid ideations about a “DT Chipmixer mafia”.
He further observes that “good” in the Master-Morality is
“evil” in the Slave-Morality, and “good” in the Slave-Morality is “bad” in the Master-Morality (
e.g., liberals and Christians). In my own words, the former is a morality of pride, and the latter is a morality of utility: A morality of ability serving needs, thus that “the meek shall inherit the earth”.
Empathy is a weakness. All it does is cloud your judgement, thus severely impacting your ability to think rationally.
I'm actually hating that this thread is still going. But that's my issue. I've quoted a post by a person I don't like much. This isn't secret.
Shame on you for cherry-picking a quote, and leveraging that to take a holier-than-thou attitude toward someone who has freely given extraordinary amounts of time to helping newbies, squashing predatory scammers, and fighting spam. I don’t wonder why your reply picked on that, instead of this:
...I won't forget that he took on his own time to help with empathy someone he didn't know.
I have helped thousands of users here over the years, and felt no empathy towards any case. You do
not need empathy to help someone. You were saying?
I am also unsurprised that you argued with one line out of a discussion, whilst conveniently avoiding all I said in my own
far more detailed substantive response.
Disgusting attitude.
Yours is. Moreover, the whole notion of “empathy” is disgusting. It is nothing more than an emotional blank cheque demanded by the weak and incompetent on those who are not so. It is the distilled essence of the
Sklavenmoral. But as all such things, it is a poison which acts only against those who choose to drink it. Repudiate the concept, and it is as powerless as its preachers.
Reflecting on the foregoing quoted posts, I must remark that Lauda is one of the most sincerely caring people whom I have ever had the privilege of knowing. But from what I have seen, she reserves that caring for those whom she judges to be good and do good, to the exclusion of those whom she judges to be bad and do bad. Thus, doing bad things and then self-righteously whining about “empathy” will indeed get short shrift from her. Amidst the resultant shrieks, few care to notice the exquisite devotion with which she expends boundless energy doing thankless chores for causes she deems noble, and for people she deems good.
If more people had such wise judgment, the world would be a better place.
I have helped thousands of users here over the years, and felt no empathy towards any case. You do not need empathy to help someone. You were saying?
I attest that she has helped me—gratuitously so, with zero expectation of any reward or even thanks. Whereas if she were to insult me with “empathy” (
i.e., pity), I would tag her bleeding red!
Original Nullian ThinkingCould anyone else have written this exactly as I did?
Am I mistaken? Look around you! Look with open eyes, an iron heart, and a freethinking mind which ruthlessly questions all unexamined premises it has been told are categorically unquestionable.
[...]
Sheep can no more be taught to think than dogs can be taught to sing opera.[...]
Wherefore “anarchy”
as to the masses and their so-called “governments”, which are in truth no more than the largest, most well-armed organized criminal gangs. Don’t reject authority:
Be your own authority.
My 1000th post.
Quotable. Original. Nullian.
