/lit/ - Literature

>>22804745
*counter-rapes you in an unforeseen way*

How is he so fucking based?

>>22020518
>>22020521
>>22020647
>>22020722
>>22020757
Let's just reduce the genetic diversity related to the most desirable traits! What can possibly go wrong?

Is he the smartest person alive right now?

>>20909256
Imbecile

>>20828531
Of course I have. Antifragile and The Black Swan is the work of a very based sand nigger.

what sort of books should a real man with a superhuman virility gigachad iq of 160+ (me) read?

>>19689872
Take the Incerto Pill you IMBECILE.

>>19464943
>Libertarian
No, PHOENICIAN you IMEBICILE.

>>19107453
Some might say he's turning into a kook but The Black Swan and Antifragile are brilliant.

>>18311805
NNT

>>16810741
unironically find better friends

unironically real wealth is freedom (money does not buy you freedom, it only buys you financial freedom)

>>16811835
>I think rich people want you to think about them to divert your brain power.
no, rich people want you to toil for them. in fact NNT says this in his book bed of procrustes: "work destroys your soul by stealthily invading your brain during the hours not officially spent working..." i'd add that work also steals your /fit/ body too.

>>16812318
no, you go balls deep inside lindy, then deadlift to grandma's wisdom

>>16811858
yes, acquiring wealth is not simply having initiative; acquiring wealth is multivariate. i wrote some shitty life /sig/ mathematics in /fit/ around a month ago. the money section went something like this:

money = businesses + assets
>businesses = natural talent + society needs that you can provide + specific knowledge + technical skills + people skills + capital + asymmetrical leverage
>assets = stocks + pieces of ownership of other businesses + angel investing + land + real estate

there are more variables to this, but those are the main points.

but for the case of OP's faggotness, his lack of initiative is spit-worthy because he would rather ask frog anons how to attain wealth than to dive deeper into the knowledge of attaining wealth

>>16749852
all the books from this based mediterranean

>>16652954
>BTFO IYI
>deadlifts all economic books in one set
>knows more about grandma's wisdom than economists

>"The left holds that because markets are stupid, models should be smart; the right believes that because models are stupid, markets should be smart. Alas, it never hit both sides that both markets and models are very stupid."

>"Suckers think that you cure greed with money, addiction with substances, expert problems with experts, banking with bankers, economics with economists, and debt crises with debt spending."

>"It is easier to macrobullshit than to micro bullshit."

>" At a panel in Moscow, I watched an economist who got the 'Nobel' for writings no one reads, theories no one uses, and lectures no one understands."

>"An economist is a mixture of 1) a businessman without common sense, 2) a physicist without brains, and 3) a speculator without balls."

>"Those with brains and no balls become mathematicians, those with balls and no brains join the Mafia, those with no balls and no brains become economists."

>>16067690
IQ is a fraud. It cannot be called science.
https://medium.com/incerto/iq-is-largely-a-pseudoscientific-swindle-f131c101ba39

>>16063264
>Phoenician alphabet
Based

>The Black Nigger

>>16026676
>IQ
Refuted by Taleb (pbuh)

>>15975700
Taleb refuted IQ here:
https://medium.com/incerto/iq-is-largely-a-pseudoscientific-swindle-f131c101ba39

Taleb

Incerto covers Talebian aesthetics.

>skin in the game
>barbell strategy
>psychology as pseudoscientific garbage

All of Taleb's work

The Bible gets human nature down better than evolutionary psychology:
>If you hear advice from a grandmother or elders, odds are that it works 90 percent of the time. On the other hand, in part because of scientism and academic prostitution, in part because the world is hard, if you read anything by psychologists and behavioral scientists, odds are that it works at less than 10 percent, unless it is has also been covered by the grandmother and the classics, in which case why would you need a psychologist? Consider that a recent effort to replicate the hundred psychology papers in “prestigious” journals of 2008 found that, out of a hundred, only thirty-nine replicated. Of these thirty-nine, I believe that fewer than ten are actually robust and transfer outside the narrowness of the experiment. Similar defects have been found in medicine and neuroscience; more on those later.
— N. N. Taleb