Bird Larry

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    155

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bird Larry

  1. Posted · Edited by Bird Larry

    I feel like an idiot.... 

    For example, people out on the world will not show their shadow sides so easily to people. But through online, it seems safe because usually we are anonymous. 

    Even if we aren't anonymous, we blindly believe the internet isn't the "physical" world, we feel free to do anything we want. So we do not put any responsibility through the internet. 

    One funny example, games. I used to play the sims 2. I know that this isn't just me.... I used to enjoy torturing the sims with my computer. I don't know why. I would never do this in real life. Not even on my toys, I would not torture anything. But on the sims, I would enjoy doing it. Every person who played this game have done this. 

    If we play counter strike, the users in the game wear outlandish often perverted clothes to express themselves. Children and adults alike love to kill, torture, and play with corpses in games. Not that we ever do this in real life.We do this on software. Software is just as "physical" as real life, you know? 

    Observing everyone who has social media, including myself, we often post things that are unspeakable in real life.

    I really feel like an idiot for truly understanding this now about people. 

    So it's so easy to treat other people as another "sims character" to torture, kill, and play with their corpses. Only, our attitude towards others exemplifies through software.

    But in reality, software and hardware aren't at all different. I used to think software and hardware are sheer opposites. No, it's not at all.

     It's the same logic as this: We think all kinds of ugly things with our minds, but we never display them with our bodies. Also, we have all sorts of ugly things in our computer software, hard-drive, and online, but we never display them in real life 

  2. Posted

    Maybe, I would like an explanation of what knowledge truly is in its essence, not its practicality or use. 

    I'm trying to observe what knowledge is in my mind, but it's hard to investigate. We can't see what knowledge looks like. Is it neurons? In a way, we can see neurons, but that doesn't mean "nuerons" = "knowledge". 

    How does knowledge function within the relationship with the universe

  5. Posted · Edited by Bird Larry

    I don't understand what the hell the guy is saying. But it feels like he's trying to explain everything that I've been searching for in terms of learning. The problem is how am I supposed to understand this man? Maybe I should read the text even more carefully or there are other resources I'm not aware of that I should have read before reading Hume.

  9. Posted · Edited by Bird Larry

    @Leo Gura Is it important to tell those people of "All" the ambitions and visions we have so as to get it accomplished. 

    I've heard both sides to this story. 

    • It's better to hide our ambitions so as to not arouse envy or violence from others. 
    • It's important to communicate our ambitions so as to attract people to the cause

    I've found both of these true, although, the latter seems more optimistic, heart warming. It's hard to balance these two to know when to hide or when to show. 

    I've struggled balancing these two for a long time. We obviously do not want to show and communicate our ideas to pigs. 

  10. Posted

    @JosephKnecht Leo hasn't put a category with his books for leadership, but he has one book about Akio Morita, head of Sony company. I enjoyed it. Got me to understand the mindsets needed for work.

    I don't think any book can teach us directly what leadership is. Leadership isn't something we can cultivate through books. Some leaders haven't read a book in their life. 

    One of the most common things I've seen through the best leaders of the century was that they all had one or two heroes in mind of the past. Churchill cared for Napoleon. Napoleon cared for Julius Caesar. Julius Caesar on Alexander the Great.  

  11. Posted · Edited by Bird Larry

    39 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    Bottom line: don't live in the same house with your employees. And don't get too emotionally close to your employees. The boundaries between personal life and work life exist for good reason. It shouldn't matter who your employees are fucking. The fact that this matters to Teal is a problem.

    Although I'm not completely aware of the situation, if she truly cared for her employees "emotionally", she would have set boundaries, and wouldn't have asked such questions. @Leo Gurawe could also think like this. 

     

  12. Posted · Edited by Bird Larry

    @itsnutsandbolts that's what I did usually. There's nothing better about texts more than phone calls or real life interactions, nor are phone calls or real life interactions better than texts. Maybe women or people think that way somehow. Or maybe that's how I've thought of it until now. What @Rainy Sparkle said made me think differently 

  13. Posted · Edited by Bird Larry

    Any advice on identifying people to work with you, for you, above you? It doesn't matter. If they truly care, that really matters. Talent of course has to be valued too with caring for service.

    The problem is identifying them, and then convincing them. With all my reading, I don't think money makes people "care" about helping with a cause. I know that myself. Genghis Khan's subordinates, no matter how cruel their leader was, was loyal to him like a rock, not because of money. The Mongols were the most unloyal bunch in those days. They swore oaths as brothers, not because they are loyal, but because betrayals were too common for the nomads. It probably was the mix of his charisma, showmanship, and lastly his respect for talent, meritocracy above family. He didn't care where you came from, whether you were Christian, it didn't matter to him. LOL. He didn't care if you tried to kill him. If he saw you had an iron heart, even sworn to kill him, he would respect that and help you with your talent. Most leaders I know and respect most didn't really recruit in the conventional sense of the word. 

    If you have any experience, please help me. 

  14. Posted · Edited by Bird Larry

    @itsnutsandbolts I can handle shit tests in every other way. Especially with guys, when they can't challenge me in person, they challenge not with calls, but with texts, I lose respect for them. Not that I can't banter, but with women doing that it's different because women tend not to confront me in person, in which I understand a little bit, but nonetheless I lose respect. If any of my friends did that, I would immediately block him, deem him stupid. But when every other girl does that... do I tolerate it? I don't know

    Believe it or not, I had a few times cut out a few people because of this. 

  17. Posted

    I've heard people who play "Go" say they immediately understand someone's personality and their whole life philosophy just by playing with that person. I heard a programmer say he knows what the programmer will look, feel, and be like just by reading their code. I heard a history professor say to me he's turns into Sherlock when he reads someone's research paper. He can deduce everything, his appearance, philosophy, and life just by reading his text. 

    Could this be the same with online profiles. Facebook profiles. Dating sites. 

    Recently, I've met someone online. She seemed nice. Had a nice profile. She spoke well. I've met her in her apartment, and she looked nothing like her picture. I was shunned. Was it my stupidity? Was I stupid enough to be lied to? 

    I've also had experiences meeting a nice girl, nice picture, never met her for a year. For a year, I've never seen her face (just getting by with her nice profile pic) but just called and texted her online. After a year, I met her, and she looked nicer than her pictures.

    Experiencing both, I don't know if I'm just experiencing what everyone else is experiencing, or if I'm the only who was dumb enough to be deceived. 

    I guess my question is: can you spot a fake online? And is it possible to develop real relationship just by texting online, interacting far off? Or can a relationship only be formed after meeting in person? 

  18. Posted · Edited by Bird Larry

    I don't understand. What's so good about text? I understand good speaking, nice appearance, good photos, good social status, but I never understood good texting. Why? 

    If I were anybody, I would take a guy who has good appearance, good speaking, athletic, charismatic, and a good social status above a person whose good at texting. 

    I'm not making fun of this here. On the contrary, I've seen men get by just with texting. I've also seen men who are good with texting, but are horrible in real life interactions. I've also seen men who are good in real life, but not so good online. 

    I may have to hold myself as the latter, though I don't know if I'm good in real life also. 

    Anyway, I want to get better texting. But I still do not understand why women like men who are good at texting. I'd rather take a guy who is good in bed but who never writes to me, than a guy who is bad in bed but who writes nice letters.

     

  19. Posted

    @Raptorsin7 It seems like you've studied him quite much. 

    6 hours ago, Raptorsin7 said:

    He was a human being seeking happiness and love, but it just so happens he had a brilliant military mind in a chaotic time in history.

    I never saw him that way. 

    I do wonder if social media will reflect both are boy/girlish behavior as well as wise ones. I think at an earlier time I'd categorize people who had press or a little bit of fame as either stupid or wise. In fact, just like the real world, our essays, letters, our books, and photos show even the most talented person to show their boyish side. 

  20. Posted

    I advise not to depend on "self help" books.

    They can be good starting points.

    Ultimately, even the classics that are regarded as "good" aren't really that good. For example, learning politics, one might say Machiavelli's books are good. No. 

    You've got to read a wide range of books and videos to really get an understanding. I don't know if schools succeed in helping students do exactly this. 

    Anyway, critical thinking needs to take place for you to really understand business, finances, or money. And no one person, even like a Warren Buffet, will know what business, money really is. Everybody has their own strengths and weaknesses in understanding what those really are, even a Warren Buffet. 

  21. Posted · Edited by Bird Larry

    I've been reading about Napoleon lately. When he was 19 years old, it was said he would write cringey novels, since he was ousted from the military, he didn't know what to do but write. In a funny way, these novel writings weren't a waste of time at all. One might think, when reading those novels, he wasted his time on romanticism. But the main building block for Napoleon's success in the military and politics was his writing, because one Aristocrat recruited Napoleon to be positioned in the military and a political position after reading one of his essays. The essay wasn't a novela, but it was his thoughts on what he believed the French Revolution meant for the future of France.

    Napoleon was kind of a child in front of women. Josephine Napoleon comes to mind for this account. A woman soon to be his wife, she wasn't a typical beauty, and she was 6 years older than Napoleon; she had terrible black teeth. She would cheat on Napoleon from the very start of their relationship. She even cheated and made a display of meeting other men when he became Emperor. But he didn't make a show of jealousy for his pride, though. He simply had exiled Josephine's new lover to another faction.

    Yet, when we think of political propaganda, none did this well other than Napoleon Bonaparte. He made excellent news stories and writing for journalists. Often portraits and paintings of him really made him look grandeur. But on the side, if we see his little letters written to Josephine, he seems like a child again. We often might think, how on Earth is this the same man? We might think one person like Napoleon, who had numerous affairs as emperor, had the public worship him, had people believe in his cause for revolution (he was a great politician, reformer, and lover of the arts), had the greatest propaganda maybe even greater than German Nazis/Stalin...etc would never be so childish with his letters.

    We think social media took us by storm, and teenagers these days write and post stupid things on their accounts. No. We're wrong to think this. Social media had always existed for centuries since drawings, sheets, and writings were well-distributed. People wrote stupid things maybe not on their phones, but maybe on cave walls. One of the first drawings ever that accounts Jesus Christ was drawn by a person trying to mock people who worshipped a Jesus. 

  25. Posted

    Zen Buddhists say Buddha was the greatest liar. Lao Tzu says Tao cannot be fathomed and its basically a hide and seek game. Lao tzu said "it is my understanding that rich men pretend to be poor, and geniuses pretend to be dumb. So stop trying to be virtuous!" 

    In the beginning of my journey, I hated anybody who didn't tell the truth, or was denying facts. But i came to grow that Truth in the right sense of the word has nothing to do with 'facts' or ... whatever. Am I wrong about this? Hypocrisy can be a virtue? IT only depends on how you use hypocrisy, right?