The Wickedest Links

1. “[Taleb’s] antifragility not only resembles Game, it describes Game, and to a certain extent, it even explains why Game is so effective.”

2. “At that moment, I wondered if I was the only one of my group who hated with everything in my heart the slimy hypocrites around me.”

3. “The best map ever made of America’s racial segregation libertarian bubbles.”

4. “This threatpoint gives leverage to women in a marriage, giving her unilateral control over the future of the commitment.”

5. Commenter to Amanjaw Marcuntte: “In other words, Massachusetts profiles.”

6. “Brookings, like any not-for-profit organization, survives through contributions. And it is a fact of life that these organizations cannot afford to do many, if any, studies that are counter to the goals of the donors.

7. “and that’s the part that the happy leftists are missing from their thinking [sic] about epigenetics. epigenetics is obviously some sort of adaptation… so it must be coded for in our genes somewhere. that methylation happens to alter the expression of genes isn’t some miracle, however amazing it may be. it’s coded for.”

8. “If she moved into your apartment sans a ring, you’re better off than married folk in the happiness department, new research suggests.”

9. Opt out of global data surveillance programs.

10. “They had every Facebook post I had ever made in a huge file, along with all my wife’s information, and parent’s information,” As Vox says, your two choices when under assault by a power-hungry Big Brother 1984-ish surveillance state are either go dark, or go disinformation. Or, like CH, do both.


  1. get rid of facebook. you will be better for it.


    • aka Friendbook, or Chickbook.

      You know you’re alpha if you don’t have a facebook. If you do have one, it has that blank silhouette profile pic and a lot of unanswered friend requests from girls you’ve been intimate with.

      You know you’re a lesser alpha if your timeline has almost nothing on it… and what few things you do have, contain a lot of likes for no apparent reason, including from stalkers who “like” everything you put up no matter what it is. You friend girls only if you know them really well, and don’t hesitate to unfriend them if they seem blasé about you. You never use Facebook chat, except maybe to set up plans to meet with girls on another continent in real life, and they don’t have Skype.

      You know you’re a greater beta if you put up funny or interesting pics and links, but rarely status updates, unless it’s a major life event. You do friend girls on facebook, but only after getting their numbers. Any girl you get intimate with immediately tries to friend you. You prefer to get girls’ numbers, but have actually managed to get with a girl in real life using Facebook chat.

      You know you’re beta if you friend girls on facebook instead of getting their numbers, and then try to get dates with them on Facebook chat.

      You know you’re a lesser beta if you compliment girls all the time on their stupid photos. You get oneitis on a girl and try to befriend all her friends.

      You know you’re omega if you’re a dude and you write constant statuses about your emotional state, like chicks do. Lesser omega if you’re constantly whining about how you hate your life and you’re such a nice guy and ask why chicks are so mean to you while you give them everything.


      • I set up an FB account as an experiment. I friend requested only men I knew in high school, and I ignored all female requests. The point was to see whether and how much the network would grow with no further actions on my part. I was neither popular nor an outcast in school.

        The ratios of female to male friend requests was something like 10:1.


  2. Number 8 was tackled pretty well by the first comment on that page:

    “I wonder if they adjusted for time together. But that would be hard, and that’s the point:

    Cohabitors are pretty much at the height of fun in their relationship. As soon as things get hard or boring, they leave. Marriage includes lots of hard stuff, so of course they’re less happy than people who live in perpetual puppy love.”


  3. Anti-fragility is garbage, but I understand the appeal to those who lack a background in quantitative finance. The application to game is probably correct but investment strategies that maximize optionallity empirically perform very poorly.


    • How did “quantitative finance” work out for Long-Term Capital Management? Talib eats quant dorks like you for breakfast. He has nothing but contempt for your Bury The Guesswork approach, which is why he gets under your skin, which is why he wins while you are pleasuring your micropeens with slide rules.

      “I understand the appeal” of the false confidence that quantification promises. We can quantify everything! Even risk! We can banish danger forever, no need for courage anymore. Thus Spake Reverse Polish Notation.



      • Are there any investment funds that succeed with Taleb’s approach? Oh sorry, Taleb doesn’t really have an approach. But what he does well is to debunk some faulty statistical and logical aruuments.

        Everything he says is second nature to any decent quant. He’s debunking the sort of wrong arguments that would rightfully get a job candidate booted before even having an office interview.


      • Are there any investment funds that succeed with Taleb’s approach?

        His own. He cashed in with the “black swan” events of the 1987 equities crash and the 2008 housing bubble.

        But that’s not the point. His epistemic humility allows him to go forth boldly and take on insufferable nerds like you with your ipse-dixit pronouncements. His fuck-you attitude alone is worth the price of admission. Of course he makes you pee your pants. The very idea that investment markets are knowable — we just haven’t studied them minutely enough yet — is hubristic. Or can you name a quant “approach” that has solved every market exigency, Myron? Like every other theory that claims to have quantified risk away, you win and lose as often as the dartboard method.

        Quantitative analysis must remain supplementary, not the driving force of “an approach.” Not just in finance, but everywhere. Our biggest intellectual mistake of the 20th century was overstepping the mandate of quantitative analysis, thinking it was the Rosetta Stone to unlock the knowledge of everything.

        In other words, Taleb knows what he does not know, while quants scoff at the very concept of unknowability. Which is why your “decent quant” approach is a fiasco. It works when it works, and when it doesn’t you’re bailed out: Fannie, Freddie, credit default swaps, and LTCM. Because your very brand of false certainty has caused/allowed them to overleverage and ripple the world markets, and suddenly they’re “too big to fail.” What could go wrong? It’s a formula, like 1+1=2!

        In any event, if you are a quant, then you cannot understand the soul of game. Not everything is reducible to a decimal point.



      • What a strong response! Sorry I don’t feel the need to qualify myself in return.

        I don’t recall saying the answer to any particular problem was knowable. In fact the answer to “how can I make my portfolio grow faster than the risk free rate” is unknowable by practically everyone, and people like John Paulson who appear to have it right can subsequently have it wrong as he did.

        Quants are experts in the world of the unknowable, regarding what can be known and what cannot, what can be hedged and what cannot. The most fundamental “quant” activity is the calculation of (risk-neutral) expectations in the presence of uncertainty. You may be right that I am insufferable, in which case I advise you not to suffer because your suffering will do neither of us any good.

        LTCM made a mistake. I think it was mainly in underestimating the market impact of their trading over time, something that’s unknowable, or maybe someone else with more of some sort of “savvy” would have smelled the problem, but they didn’t. Hubris, yes I think so. Many of those guys went on to other jobs in the markets, though of course their reputations and wallets took a hit.


      • +1.

        But that is exactly what is needed to become a successful mainstream author. To sell books, you cannot rely on dramatically alter people’s view of the world. If you try, you’ll just be labeled a crank. Instead, the trick lies in putting into words an idea whose time has come. Which Taleb, like all successful pop sci authors, has shown a good knack for. But of course, by the time the mainstream is ready for an idea, all possible profits have been squeezed out of it a long time ago.


    • Of course, the existence of much of quantitative finance itself, is largely an effect of a society that has long hence stopped evolving along sustainable, antifragile lines……


      • Yes, a good point. There weren’t a lot of arbitrage opportunities among the cavemen, so there was not a profession devoted to identifying them and vacuuming them up.


      • I’m not so sure about that. Chances are, the lack of communication back then provided plenty of arbitrage opportunities. But, aside from in the fairytales told to starry eyed groupies of anyone with a checkbook, arbitrage opportunities account for an infinitesimally small share of the rake enjoyed by quantitative finance practitioners today. The real juice fueling quant shop returns, as well as returns across most of the financial field; is the combination of leverage and inflation. And, back when money was a semi fixed quantity available at equal cost to all, and fractional reservers that were caught ion the act were strung up, that particular juice wasn’t nearly as available to anyone with the requisite connections to the powers that be.


  4. on August 28, 2013 at 11:20 am Lucky White Male

    Antifragile by Taleb is a must-read

    On Page 1 he says “This a book for how to come out on top in life”

    This guy is also a Cathedral attacker – it’s all over the book

    Applies especially to those spheres of life given to “Extremistan” – Winner Take All. This includes human economic affairs, such as business and money making. And yes the activity of picking up women – Game, as Vox seems to agree


  5. I may be in for a security clearance. The “Who’s Uncle Elmer?” phase should be entertaining. Visualize Kramer getting interrogated.


  6. Nassim Nicholas Talib is excellent all around, I recommend him frequently. Not just Antifragile, but his first two books, Fooled by Randomness and The Black Swan (no, it has nothing to do with the Natalie Portman lesbo ballet movie). He isn’t always right, but he has an awesomely aggressive attitude when it comes to truth seeking, and that makes up for it.

    In the academic world of faggy NPR-voiced philosphasters, he comes in like Aristocles (later called “Plato,” or “broad” for his shoulders), and tells the fey chickenmen who hunch and whisper in dusty libraries what’s what. He is a man philosophizing, a rare phenomenon today. He began his life in applied wisdom, of course, as a trader, which has made all the difference.

    He’s swarthy and not religious, but he does come from Christian Lebanon, so he’s not a run-of-the-mill ululating muzzie raghead.



    • on August 28, 2013 at 1:08 pm Lucky White Male

      Yeah you need to deal with his free floating hostility, I find it amusing

      The one flaw in Antifragile I see is his Skin in the Game rule, what he now says he should have called his Neck on the Line rule

      He says the Winners on top in the world right now are people reaping the rewards, but bear none of the harm when the risk goes wrong. Their necks are never on the line when their bets go wrong. They are expensing out the downside to others. He calls out Wall Street since 2008 here, among others

      He says you should have an “ethical obligation” to only take risks when you yourself will share in some of the harm if your risk fails. He argues: this is how it was done in ancient times. The Hammurabi rule: if an ancient builder built a house with faulty foundation, if the house collapsed, the builder would be killed. This will make you think twice about taking advantage of the weaker.

      All true but the glaring problem is that the particular breed of people on top right now could not care less about ethics. They are genetically incapable of morality for anyone but their own kind.

      So this plea, towards the back of the book, will fall on deaf ears. Taleb has pointed out that – he personally has testified before Congress TWICE on the need for a change in regulatory laws. Also millions of people have bought his books, aware of his argument. Still the massive con continues. If this wont change anything that tells you something. The strategy is wrong

      You cannot plead morality to people for whom morality means nothing. It goes nowhere.


      • Likely he knows about the particular breed. In a recent interview he very cadgily made arguments against usury. I’m not far enough into his latest book to know if he does so there as well.


      • Your term “free floating hostility” is precisely formulated, well said.

        It’s also something in Taleb’s attitude with which I deeply empathize. So much feminization all around us — even our philosophy! — one can’t help but sneer and spit.


  7. I’m looking for some advice to help me with my situation:

    I’ve been dating a girl for two and a half years now and recently I’ve noticed her complaining/griping about stupid things and not wanting to have sex as often.

    I recently started reading CH and realized that I’m habitually committing pretty much every beta-blunder there is. I feel bad when I upset her inadvertently and then apologize/beg for forgiveness. I always play it straight when she asks me questions, and I’ve been playing by her rules, not instilling dread, &c.

    Based on the first part of the following post my read of the situation is that she resents me/is no longer attracted to me:
    “Treating her behavior like an extended shit test may actually backfire if you haven’t prepped her for your transformation to a man willing to display his balls.”

    So anyway my question is what is the best way for me to salvage this situation. How do I prep her for this transformation so I can begin gaming my girlfriend to win back her respect and desire for me? (I love her and she meets the “Quality Girl” criteria so I think she’s worth the long-term effort) I realize that there isn’t a quick-fix switch I can flip on–I’m more looking for a general approach or way to proceed in order to re-establish the polarity in our relationship and get her chasing me again.


    • Finding this blog in the middle of an LTR that you began as a blue pill beta is disaster. You will lose her.


      • Goto

        Read the blog, enter the forums.

        You may not be married, but you’ll still learn excellent relationship game


    • Begin with improving your physical appearance. If you aren’t in shape and muscular already, start lifting and eating clean. You want to start conditioning her that you are a desirable guy with options. If she’s not in great shape herself, all the better.

      Stop apologizing. If she misconstrues something you do or say as hurtful or insulting, correct her. If she continues to complain, say “I already told you that’s not what I meant, and I don’t have anything else to say.” Don’t be afraid to tell her she’s being unreasonable.

      Stop initiating calls and texts, or cut them way back. Vary the pattern and timing of your responses to her texts and phone calls.


    • Start busting her balls more and bullshitting with her. Give less of a fuck about her getting pissed. Acquire more friends; when she’s bitchy, have an alternative (preferably social) activity to do. Get busy with your job, neglect her for it more. Last, improve your physical fitness and appearance, as stated.

      Or, as the misc would say:
      Disregard the bish, acquire socials, currency, and aesthetics.


    • Lift weights, eat right, a little cardio won’t kill you either.
      Understand that she does not matter; own your superiority. Treat her accordingly.
      Flirt with other girls, especially ones who are younger/hotter/tighter/lighter.

      But Man reader’s probably right; you’ll lose her. Which is fine, because she really doesn’t matter.


  8. The census map thing, as well as Obama’s push to find segregated neighborhoods, is nothing but a repeat of the data from the 2010 census. Here:

    Lots of great information tnere. Now it’s easy to know where the compatible neighborhoods are, thanks Census!


    • Fantastic, fantastic map. Helps to visualize the spacial component of the counterrevolution.


      • All those towns in the southeast with black and white sections, and in the southwest with black and Hispanic sections, plus the cities which are a big fat mess, makes me think that if the U.S. economy continues to decline into second-world status, there’s a prime setup for a huge Bosnia-type war.


      • on August 28, 2013 at 1:55 pm Hammer of Love

        Don’t, forget the ever expanding Moslem and Asian sections, it will be Bosnia on steroids.


      • In my experience, white and asian are welcome in each others’ neighborhoods or making a mixed neighborhood of the two.


      • In your script, blah blah yadda yadda chenandler bong.


      • I lived for years in a working class southwestern city that was about half&half english/spanish. Most of the spanish speakers were illegals, many of the whites were therefore unemployed. Tons of hostility, occasionally shots would be fired by either side. It was a fun place to live when you’re a young punk, but I didn’t want to be there for too long.
        The only point is, this shit is real. It’s not gonna get better, if today’s trends are any indicator. The western half (or more) of the USA could easily turn into Yugoslavia, and quickly.


  9. I guess anything with links gets moderated. I linked to the cool map and data at the census website. Here’s my post without the links:

    The census map thing, as well as Obama’s push to find segregated neighborhoods, is nothing but a repeat of the data from the 2010 census at census dot gov . Here:

    (links redacted)

    Lots of great information tnere. Now it’s easy to know where the compatible neighborhoods are, thanks Census!


  10. #7 – the proteins/enzymes/etc that influence DNA methylation levels and patterns (methyltransferases, etc) are translated from RNA that was transcribed from your DNA, so yes, epigenetics is “coded” for. and yes, there are gene variants in these enzymes that influence how these enzymes behave, and these variants may have different frequencies in different populations. but it’s not clear how this negates the concept that “dna isn’t your destiny” – the activity of your epigenetic machinery is influenced by environmental factors, so it just means that your epigenetic modifications are the result of an interaction of genetics and environment. it’s still possible that differential expression of a gene between two populations might be explained by an environmental factor that is more prevalent in one population vs. the other.


  11. A comment on the site for article #8. Too funny.

    Peregrine John

    “But if you’ve already tied the knot, you’re not screwed.”
    Indeed. That would be the problem.


  12. Xubuntu is easy to use Ubuntu with all the unity and spyware junk removed. Try installing Openbsd or even Freebsd on a laptop, let alone deal with wifi, flash, mp3s and aacs, etc. with bsd. BSD is great for servers, on laptops they suck.


  13. Re #3: What does this have to do with libertarians? You are aware that libertarians understand that segregation will happen. It reflects people’s natural tendencies.

    I don’t know why you hate so much on libertarians, though I do think it’s funny you take the time to bash Bryan Caplan so often. And while I find it funny, I don’t know why you hate him so much, either


    • I had the same question.

      A core libertarian tenet is the right to associate with, or disassociate from (as in secession), whomever you choose absent coercion. Government-mandated integration (or segregation, for that matter) is a violation of this right. Preferring to live, play, or work with your own kind is normal, natural, and consistent with libertarian thought…as is the right, also infringed by government, of farmers and ranchers along the southern border to defend their property – with lethal force, if necessary – from trespassers, thieves, and rapists.

      Maybe CH’s allusion was inspired by the observation that libertarian commentators usually emphasize judging people as individuals and punctiliously avoid any hint of “racism,” lest they be misperceived as collectivists.

      Or maybe CH was bugged by the issue of open borders and massive immigration, an ongoing topic of debate in libertarian circles, over which disagreements remain sharp.

      Professor Hans- Hermann Hoppe, author of “Democracy, The God That Failed,” argues that in a dangerous, chaotic world a libertarian society would have its best chances of survival and prosperity under a monarchy, which would defend the country’s territory as though it were “private ” property. Also, It is easier to behead a monarch, if government lapses into tyranny, than it is to hold faceless bureaucrats and slippery politicans accountable for their transgressions.


  14. In other news, Sergey Brin of Google has split from his wife (they are both 40) after “becoming involved” with a (younger, hotter) Google employee.

    Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.


  15. Hey Heartisteszze!!!!

    Teens shoot and kill and terrorize people daily in your neighborhood? No problemzz!!!

    Just sue your landlordzzz!!!!



  16. Ahahahaha I’m sure some people will get a kick when the hamster wheel spinning going on by the blogger and the replies, regarding the sexual market status of black women relative to white


  17. Expect Mass to drop its profiling system once everyone realizes that the majority of people they’re following are non-white.


  18. I have just met a girl who was 6ft tall. According to peoples standards she was good looking, but according to mine she was a long haired man. Why are women built like man in vogue nowdays?