Ask @curi42:

Be advised: anonymous questions on ask.fm are not fully anonymous. This is a major security glitch.

Elliot Temple
ask.fm has an internal blacklist. If an anonymous question-asker is on the blacklist then your answer doesn't get tweeted out; otherwise it does. This gives you information about whether an asker is on the blacklist or not, which lets you figure out that multiple questions come from the same blacklisted guy (since being blacklisted is uncommon) rather than from new people.

View more

Why don't you give a Ted talk? or a Defcon talk (you seem to like defcon).

the purpose of doing those conventions in person is for people to socialize. i'm not interested in trying to meet and persuade people via IRL socializing/networking. i'm not very good at it, and i think it's a bad approach. i focus on truth, not charisma, and especially not non-verbal charisma at real-time speed.
online does communication better. youtube videos are better than IRL talks, e.g. because they're asynchronous (you can watch at a different time than I talk) and has pause/rewind and playback speed controls. and you can't watch from home instead of traveling.
i know they make youtube videos out of convention talks, but you can skip the convention and just make a youtube video and also optimize the video (like do video editing and put in helpful illustrations and Keynote slide images, rather than just a video of IRL. also doing multiple takes of some or all of it can help with quality but that isn't done with convention videos. these methods of improving videos are well known and commonplace in general, they just aren't done with convention talk videos because with conventions the video is secondary and tacked on).
and video isn't even the main format i use. writing is the best overall format. video has some advantages and i think it's good to make a variety of stuff, but writing is the best for clarity and precision.
i also don't respect TED and TED would not invite me.
i also don't see the point of more focus on outreach without a message that actually would persuade and reach many people. what would i say in the talk that would be effective? i have a lot of great points which people don't want to hear... i have not solved that problem.

View more

Is receiving kidney transplant from a living donor against objectivism? The person donating is sacrificing for no benefit in return.

a variety of benefits for the donor are possible such as wanting their family member to be alive and healthy longer or being paid (maybe paying the donor is illegal in the US currently? i don't know. but if so it'd be that law, not the medical procedure, which clashes with Objectivism).

View more

What would I get by becoming a greater philosopher than Ayn Rand? Does someone need to be the greatest philosopher to be happy or rich? Don't most people get successful even by solving problems mediocrely. I also don't want to be hated a lot.. being disliked is fine but not hated.

being vastly wiser would let you make much better decisions in your life about everything, and give you much better ability to solve problems you face.
of course some people get rich in other ways.
the happiness of bad thinkers is questionable, though. their lives are full of unsolved problems and evasions. and they are stuck in a lot of ways, rather than making unbounded beginning-of-infinity style progress about whatever they choose to work on.
your desire not to be hated is one of the many, many flaws you could fix if you were much wiser.

View more

Was the rape scene necessary in Fountainhead? I am an extreme anti-feminist but I still feel it was unnecessary. Did Ayn Rand add that scene to trigger the feminists and make them understand the complexity of consent and sex? (that consent can be given non-verbally for sex)

it wasn't a rape scene. rape is a violent crime. they flirted and then eventually banged. they like rough sex and roleplay.
Rand understates/underestimates the amount of verbal communication that it takes for people to understand each other well. in general, not just in this part of the book. she doesn't present a lot of minor misunderstandings getting cleared up. admittedly i think it's typical to omit those in fiction because they'd just be minor distractions (kinda like scenes where people go to the bathroom -- that's realistic but why put it in?), so that makes it harder to tell what she really thinks. but it's not purely a matter of omission, she also has comments about people judging/understanding others by their appearance and does some things to present some stuff as actually being low communication including the Roark/Dominique early phase relationship.
necessary is a strong word. i don't think it was *necessary*. i don't think the scene is a big deal which is enough to make it unnecessary.
I think Rand put the scene in because sex is part of life and she was sharing ideas about it rather than dodging the issue. I consider her comments about sex to be mixed -- I agree with some points (e.g. pro-happiness attitude), but Rand is more inclined towards traditional gender role kinda stuff than I agree with. she also made a comment against female Presidents. https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=ayn+rand+female+president

View more

Next