No High IQ kid Left Behind

Free access to scriptures religious leaders try to censor

I have a biz idea where no high IQ kid will be left behind. All can get free education and get a degree at a cheap price no matter how poor they are.

College gives education and degree.

I would say, most of the cost in college is in the degree.

The “education” itself can be very cheap. We don’t really need college for “education”. So most of the “value” of college, namely the actual education, can be obtained much more cheaply.

The degree itself can be cheap. All we need are graders to grade tests and projects.

I can take graduate-level math class straight without prerequisite and learn the course in a day. I got A.

My friends that took programming classes ask me for help. In one case, I help them finish a programming project that’s due in 2 hours.

They took the damn class. The project should be done in 3 weeks. Within those 2 hours, I studied a textbook, learn java, learn to use the debugger, and help the other kid code. I think the other student got A too.

Another friend was so impressed that he taught me my first business 20 years ago. He still thinks I am a good programmer 15 years after. At that time, I am already a businessman far more than just a programmer.

If I have the money and the team and the leadership (I can put my capital on this but I need a team). I always want some truly free-market education.

Something where high IQ kids can get a basic college degree quickly.

We KNOW that the high IQ kid is more competent than a typical college graduate. We know competency is mostly IQ. In Math and computer science at least.

All we need to do is to certify it say by tests or cheap projects.

If the governments do not want to acknowledge our “degree”, we go ahead anyway. Slowly some of our fellow businessmen will honor our “degree” because well, the kid can code.

Then we make money and unlike other greedy capitalists, I think we’ll expand instead of raising the price.

One such implementation is the university of people. I am looking at their model.

Of course, any reasonable accreditation won’t hurt.

Voluntary Compliance

2 IRS agents visit Irwin Schiff asking for his tax return. In front of many reporters, Irwin asks, is filing my tax return is voluntary or mandatory?

The IRS agents said, “it’s voluntary.”Irwin said, “I am not volunteering anymore.

“The IRS agents left.

Irwin was arrested. He tried to bring the agents as a witness but blocked. He is jailed for not filing his “voluntary” tax return, pretty much for life.

People that claim that because filing tax return is voluntary means they can choose not to volunteer to get $50k fine for filing a “frivolous” argument in court.

That book, Federal Mafia, is one of the books that leads me to libertarianism. Governments are mafias. A more humane and reasonable one, a mafia nevertheless. And we should see it as such.

Why Governments are often a Jerk

I think governments are not evil because it can use force or because it uses a monopoly. I too have a monopoly of power on my own house and my own software and use forces to maintain it. Most of us have some power and monopoly too.

If anything libertarianism demands absolute power over ones’ own self.
Governments are evil simply because they’re too big.

If our globe is divided into 10k local governments that somehow don’t fight each other but compete with one another, then we will expect the kind of benefit we get from private sector even from governments too.

It’s often too difficult to go to another government because some countries are too large. Dubai government is good and Singapore one is good too. They can’t be evil no matter what they do because if they are, you simply don’t go there. Even the North Korea government isn’t evil to me. I just don’t go there.

Libertarianism will be very achievable. Not perfectly, but close enough.
We just need NAP between states and we’ll have close to NAP between individuals.

Irwin Schiff Went to Jail for This?

I still don’t understand how requiring individuals to file tax return doesn’t violate the 5th amendment.

The info can be used against you in court.

Irwin Schiff actually went to jail for this. Anyone trying to pull the fifth will be fined about $50k for frivolous argument in court. I tried to ask my professor about this 20 years ago and the answer doesn’t even make sense.

It seems that it actually violates the 5th amendment but the supreme court simply refuses to hear that.

Of course, what do I know? I am just an Indonesian.

Any american?

Know the Truth

What do I really want?

What has been useful to me in the past is trying to change myself. The easiest thing I can do to improve myself is to change my beliefs.

Know the truth, and the truth will set me free, get me laid, and earn me more money.

How to know the truth? Say I am offered information that doesn’t make sense that doesn’t add up. I should discuss this. I should point out, this theory doesn’t fit observation.

That’s why I talked about bible, America, politics, and a lot. Things don’t add up. Something just doesn’t feel right.

Most of the issue is pretty much duplicated in Indonesia. However, you wouldn’t understand Indonesian’s issue. Also we don’t have an Indonesian firehouse.

We have a political group and an obscure SIG in Indonesia to questions those things. I created those 2 groups. Even there people are still mad at me.

When I graduated from elementary school (about 10 years old I guess), I asked my teachers publicly, how Matthew can repay 4 times the amount of money he cheated?

Everyone just screamed to me. Through corruption. I asked if he cheated X dollar (or talents/drachma/whatever) and he returned 4 X, how did he get the 3X? If he’s such a good businessman he can quadruple his capital, he doesn’t need to cheat. Everyone, the teachers, the other students, just scream, “Through corruption”. And I was like, what?

Most can’t see those not adding up.

In US, we have this affirmative action to “correct” past oppression. If those are true, we will see a very strong correlation between perceived past oppression and the benefit of affirmative action. We would expect Asian men to benefit from affirmative action than say, white women.

No. The correlation is always predictable. Ethnic or groups that perform poorly are always the one benefited from affirmative action irrelevant of past oppressions. Things don’t add up.

It’s like someone rolling dices and seeing number 6 shows up 2/3rd of the time. Our assumption that it’s a fair dice simply doesn’t reflect the experimental results. There is another theory, namely that the dice is rigged, that fit the dots more.

And yet, it’s like a very big pink elephant everyone ignores.

And that bothers me.

I think one of the reasons why I like math is that I went through the proof of every single theorem and formula in school. Most don’t bother. I went the extra mile of convincing my self yap it’s true. I don’t understand why most others do not bother. I am so good at going through proofs I got A in graduate group theory classes after learning for a day before the exam while helping a C student to get A too.

I am just obsessed with opening the hood and wanting to know what’s inside. I am obsessed with knowing and unmasking what I perceived as lies and misdirection. Why are people wrong and why they keep doing it.

I do not know what I really want. I think the best benefit I can get is knowing more about truth. I am just obsessed with being correct.

How would the free market solve this? You have a method that works 98 percent of the time, would you have to bend over backward to accommodate those who don’t fit in your social strategy?

If I have a trading strategy that works 70% of the time, I’ll stick with it. The purpose is not to be correct all the time. The purpose is to be correct enough time that on average I profit.

Picking a Mate is Like Picking Investment

I think picking a mate is like picking investments.

Picking the prettiest most perfect girl is like picking bluechip stocks.
It’s a good company. However, the market has taken that into account. So the price is already high, and hence the investment won’t have very high expected value of return (assuming you don’t know anything else).

Picking bluechip stocks is like falling in love with Natalie Portman. She’s off the scale and that’s the problem.

So what happens is through evolution, we sort of pick gems in bargain bins. We pick someone with flaws.

A girl that’s a bit crazy. A girl with a bit dental problem. A girl in hijab. A sugar baby. A prostitute. A stripper. A smart girl. A stupid girl that sells her porn for money, risking getting caught and have her whole life destroyed.
Everyone wants the pretty. You look at traits that you like relatively more than others.

You can aim for a perfect girl and you’ll die childless.

Same with girls. Aim for someone super-rich and smart that wants to marry her in life long monogamous marriage. She’ll die childless too.

And I think this is how “fall in love” works. We are attracted at high-quality mates that we can somehow get. You look at a niche. Certain flaws make the person more attractive.

Because to be frank, without those flaws, she won’t choose you. And I think it’s just like a business.

Should we reward Genes or Individuals?

Rewarding the genes that are productive will motivate more people to be productive than simply rewarding individuals.

One of the curious things about evolutionary psychology is the idea that the genes, rather than the individuals, are the one that’s selfish. What is one of the natural implication? Plenty. Would you sacrifice your time and risk your life to save your own family members.

You will. Why? They share the same genes with you. Genes that say, “Risk your life to save family members” will more successfully reproduce than genes that say, fuck family members. What are other samples? Inheritance.

From individualist points of view, inheritance doesn’t make sense. In fact, an ideology, called a meritocracy, tries to eliminate inheritance as it’s main selling points.

Democracy is a bit like that too. Basically, all voters are presumed to be “equal” irrelevant to their parents’ contributions. A child of a welfare parasite or a terrorist deserves as much chance to be successful as a child of a war hero. Many people think it’s ideal.

From genetic points of view, inheritance makes perfect sense. Your child is just You 2.0. Your children are just yourself in the next generation. I would bet countries that allow inheritance to be more successful than countries that disallow it.