> "because our young are vulnerable after birth, require a fairly large energy investment, and are few in number"
I call bullshit. Let's say that the probability of a child surviving drops fourfold if the father does not remain in the relationship for a length for, say, beyond one year after birth. Note that then the father simply needs to impregnate at least four women instead of sticking around with one long-term in order to make up, genetically, for his absence during child-rearing. For more attractive men (better genetically), or more powerful ones, impregnating four women as opposed to one is far from a tall order.
The real threat is the quantum computer, if it exists in a practical form. If that is the case, there is one complete solution -- The awkward 'one-time pad'.
Nonsense. There are many quantum-resistant encryption algorithms (such as most of the symmetric encryption ones).
If I had to recommend a single one, it would be Swinggcat's ebook, "Real World Seduction".
Also worth checking out are Franco's "Manual of Seduction" and Robert Greene's "The Art of Seduction" (not a PUA guide but a historical survey of the great seductors of the past that I think provides an important perspective). The various Grant Adams and Zan Perrion stuff is also good and goes beyond the simplistic pick up tricks that seem to be popular (and I think to an extent a fad, training wheels). Don't get too reliant on routines--they'll go the way of the pick up lines of yore. Concentrate on core principles and inner game, and if you go out and do interesting things instead of playing games and watching TV only, you'll have plenty of your own stories to tell (of course how you tell them makes much of the difference, but that eventually becomes automatic as well).
Finally, I'm biased but my friend is the best seductor I know of and he's working on a book of his own, don't know when it's coming out LOL but I've seen this guy in action and my jaw has dropped more times than I can count.
Reading is just one part. Find wings in your area (look up city lairs or just use the PAIR database) and go out. Make sure you're having fun when doing it, otherwise your vibe will betray you. The written stuff is just a guide; in the end it's you that has to make connection with women, not some routine. Good luck;)
The info's out there on the Web and torrents. That's part A in the mix. Part B is the willpower to push yourself into putting it into practice. There is no part C. In the end it comes down to how much you want it.
You can present no successful argument that the brain is also not brute-forcing it, albeit in a way more fit to the special-purpose computations the brain is good at (i.e. pattern recognition, etc.).
It even goes beyond that. The computer was given a significant handicap in this game. We're not yet at the point where a computer will beat a top human player without handicap.
The difference is that cat shit coffee actually has significant value in terms of the most salient feature of a coffee--taste. The point of that coffee is not that a cat shit it, but that its digestive system changed the chemistry of the coffee, resulting in something that most people find tastes better.
Yet at the same time, it is largely unnecessary. I'm reasonably wealthy but when I go to pick up girls, I find it makes little difference whether I'm wearing a Rolex and one of the outfits a fashion consultant helped me put together, or a pair of jeans and a t-shirt. You can _always_ compensate with personality and PUA skill. I've even seen an ugly guy in a wheelchair get decent girls.
>"The alternatives to nuclear energy are superior because they are clean and renewable and there are several different truly viable choices."
Pipe dream != viable choice.
>"many perfectly valid, non-panicky, non-paranoid reasons against its use"
Really? You only listed one reason, and that is danger from waste. But that danger is very much manageable, and thus your alarmism is very much panicky and paranoid.
>"Nuclear power is not safe."
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that, or even if you make it bold or apply other fancy typeface enhancements. It won't make it any less false.
Dude, how old are you? Why're you repeating old FUD and propaganda that's been discredited over and over by sensible people? Since you sound like a teenage hotshot and I'm guessing you're at most in undergraduate university, I recommend you take an elective in critical thinking, conveniently offered in the philosophy department.
Slashdot Mirror
> "because our young are vulnerable after birth, require a fairly large energy investment, and are few in number"
I call bullshit. Let's say that the probability of a child surviving drops fourfold if the father does not remain in the relationship for a length for, say, beyond one year after birth. Note that then the father simply needs to impregnate at least four women instead of sticking around with one long-term in order to make up, genetically, for his absence during child-rearing. For more attractive men (better genetically), or more powerful ones, impregnating four women as opposed to one is far from a tall order.
Regarding your signature: "Russia" should be in accusative declension, thus "Russiam". Ceterum censeo Russiam esse delendam.
Thank you! Moderators, please mod the idiotic grandparent down!
Know of any others that can do significantly better?
The real threat is the quantum computer, if it exists in a practical form. If that is the case, there is one complete solution -- The awkward 'one-time pad'.
Nonsense. There are many quantum-resistant encryption algorithms (such as most of the symmetric encryption ones).
On the other hand, a fusor derivative, the polywell, is expected to be a power source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell
Canada (the CBC) ranks them the same way as the US.
Take a look at this extension: http://www.opengl.org/registry/specs/EXT/direct_state_access.txt This is actually quite significant. I think it could form the basis of the object system that was promised but not delivered.
I think Bush is a good person, just incompetent.
If I had to recommend a single one, it would be Swinggcat's ebook, "Real World Seduction".
;)
Also worth checking out are Franco's "Manual of Seduction" and Robert Greene's "The Art of Seduction" (not a PUA guide but a historical survey of the great seductors of the past that I think provides an important perspective). The various Grant Adams and Zan Perrion stuff is also good and goes beyond the simplistic pick up tricks that seem to be popular (and I think to an extent a fad, training wheels). Don't get too reliant on routines--they'll go the way of the pick up lines of yore. Concentrate on core principles and inner game, and if you go out and do interesting things instead of playing games and watching TV only, you'll have plenty of your own stories to tell (of course how you tell them makes much of the difference, but that eventually becomes automatic as well).
Finally, I'm biased but my friend is the best seductor I know of and he's working on a book of his own, don't know when it's coming out LOL but I've seen this guy in action and my jaw has dropped more times than I can count.
Reading is just one part. Find wings in your area (look up city lairs or just use the PAIR database) and go out. Make sure you're having fun when doing it, otherwise your vibe will betray you. The written stuff is just a guide; in the end it's you that has to make connection with women, not some routine. Good luck
The info's out there on the Web and torrents. That's part A in the mix. Part B is the willpower to push yourself into putting it into practice. There is no part C. In the end it comes down to how much you want it.
I don't get it :?
You can present no successful argument that the brain is also not brute-forcing it, albeit in a way more fit to the special-purpose computations the brain is good at (i.e. pattern recognition, etc.).
Your argument fails because inductive logic is not valid.
It even goes beyond that. The computer was given a significant handicap in this game. We're not yet at the point where a computer will beat a top human player without handicap.
The difference is that cat shit coffee actually has significant value in terms of the most salient feature of a coffee--taste. The point of that coffee is not that a cat shit it, but that its digestive system changed the chemistry of the coffee, resulting in something that most people find tastes better.
Yet at the same time, it is largely unnecessary. I'm reasonably wealthy but when I go to pick up girls, I find it makes little difference whether I'm wearing a Rolex and one of the outfits a fashion consultant helped me put together, or a pair of jeans and a t-shirt. You can _always_ compensate with personality and PUA skill. I've even seen an ugly guy in a wheelchair get decent girls.
I don't understand what it means to have "twittered".
I don't get it :?
Unlike dielectrics, metals tend to have wide band reflectivity.
It's been able to track on its own since around 2001 or 2002. This is mentioned on one of the wikipedia pages.
This is a deuterium fluoride chemical laser. Indeed, in one of the infrared segments you can see the heated exhaust behind the unit.
The moderators have shown who the troll is here. You can fool some of the slashdotters some of the time...
You better get your act together, kid, or else you're contributing to the problem.
So if I use LyX and xetex, there's some way to get accurate preview in LyX that will match the xetex-created PDF?
>"The alternatives to nuclear energy are superior because they are clean and renewable and there are several different truly viable choices."
Pipe dream != viable choice.
>"many perfectly valid, non-panicky, non-paranoid reasons against its use"
Really? You only listed one reason, and that is danger from waste. But that danger is very much manageable, and thus your alarmism is very much panicky and paranoid.
>"Nuclear power is not safe."
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that, or even if you make it bold or apply other fancy typeface enhancements. It won't make it any less false.
Dude, how old are you? Why're you repeating old FUD and propaganda that's been discredited over and over by sensible people? Since you sound like a teenage hotshot and I'm guessing you're at most in undergraduate university, I recommend you take an elective in critical thinking, conveniently offered in the philosophy department.