Sam Assis

Apolo CΞO 🇵🇦 //. @penn. mwi physics. crypto

[Sam Assis @samassis]

Saved from doom by specious ones also.

[David Deutsch @DavidDeutschOxf]

@KonstantinKisin It is also the most fundamental mistake of Marxism. In reality 'classes' (to the extent that they even exist) don't know what their 'interests' are either, and can be lured to their doom by specious arguments – or saved from doom by good ones.

[Prof. Feynman @ProfFeynman]

If you're not having fun, you're not learning. There's a pleasure in finding things out.

[Sam Assis @samassis]

Not getting this is similar to not getting relativity. Reality check

[nic carter @nic_carter]

just a quick reminder before the leftists wake up

- there is no "rules-based international order"
- international law is fake
- no supranational bodies have any authority over the US
- at the state level there is anarchy. only interests matter

[David Deutsch @DavidDeutschOxf]

@RabbiPoupko Not everyone. Some in the world stand up and forthrightly contradict the libels. Yes, very few, proportionately. But as far as I know there has never been such a movement as theirs in all the millennia of the Pattern.

[Sam Assis @samassis]

Base metals can be transmuted into gold by stars, and by intelligent beings who understand the processes that power stars, but by nothing else in the universe. – BoI

[Sam Assis @samassis]

@MichaelAArouet @wealthpotion The real reason progress stopped after antiquity is that the traditions of criticism died. (Only Athens ever had it)

It wasn’t only Christianity, all of the world didn’t have open-ended error correcting mechanisms. All were bound to the same fate.

[David Deutsch @DavidDeutschOxf]

Both those explanations are too low-level. Many problems must have contributed. Rather than try to disentangle them, it's better to wonder why they weren't solved. The fundamental thing was lack of innovation. If the Romans had had the Maxim Gun, all those other factors would not be relevant. Same for Byzantium. None of the ancient empires had what it takes to last: an Enlightenment.

[Sam Assis @samassis]

Nada mide mejor la estupidez gubernamental que la guerra contra los carrizos plásticos.

[Prof. Feynman @ProfFeynman]

Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.

[Sam Assis @samassis]

It’s the culture, condensed in the artist, encoded in the art.

[Naval @naval]

It’s not the art we fall in love with - it’s the artist.

[Mike Hanono @0xgmike]

Was there today and saw it live — definitely a step in the right direction 🇵🇦

But real crypto adoption in Panama (and LatAm) will happen when it’s actually accessible. Right now, banks still make it hard. Even @towerbankintl has work to do.

Apps like @lulubitapp are pushing things forward—consumer-first UX, real crypto payments, and education in one place. Their crypto card is fire and already live.

Next step? Let’s get municipalities holding crypto and SMBs accepting it natively, with real incentives for usage.

That’s when adoption gets real.

Happy to help with this Mr @mayer and connect you with the top blockchain platforms/services to make this happen.

[Naval @naval]

A second clip from my recent podcast with @ChrisWillx . Full episode releases Monday.

[Sam Assis @samassis]

Eat sugar
Don’t recycle
Burn the rainforest
Microwave your food
Patriarchy doesn’t exist
Organic food sucks Oreos dont
Humans don’t cause extinctions
Scientific studies aren’t that reliable
Believing ppl are npcs makes you one

[Riva @rivatez]

the goal of state-run education is to keep intelligence and self-efficacy low

it’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s an obvious incentive mechanism- keep the herd dumb to maximize the number of welfare-recipients and uninformed voters, who then further enlarge the state

democracy doesn’t die in darkness, it dies when everyone’s retarded

[Paul Graham @paulg]

I found this hard to believe, but it's really true. The movement against plastic straws began with a mistaken statistic in a 9 year old boy's school project that went viral. How can plastic straws still be banned anywhere?

[Arjun Khemani @arjunkhemani]

People often ask me why they should read this book.

@homsiT said it best: “This book is a force multiplier for personal agency.”

If you read it, you’ll realize that pessimists and doomers of all kinds are simply wrong.

People who seek to curtail your freedom to pursue the ends they consider “good” are also just wrong.

Progress is neither guaranteed nor automatic—so blind “optimists” are also wrong.

You will leave with a robust understanding of why the future depends on the choices people make today—and ultimately, why you, as an individual, matter in the cosmic scheme of things because you possess the agency to create the future you want for yourself.

“Every human is a lottery ticket bet on the future of the species.” — @naval

If we continue to solve problems, we will come to dominate the entire cosmos.

All you need to do is take nothing on faith, question every piece of knowledge, and remain open to having your own ideas criticized and improved upon. That’s the only way to make an unending stream of progress and ensure that anything good can ever happen.

[Elad Mallel ⌐◨-◨ @eladmallel]

Moving to a surf town in Panama changed my life. It made me & my family 10x healthier and happier.

Now I am building a village here so more families can take part in this amazing place.

Here’s my story >>

[Sam Assis @samassis]

ChatGPT mas anuente q la mayoría

[Sam Assis @samassis]

Mostly true

[Deutsch Explains @DeutschExplains]

.@krysboydthink: You disagree with the notion, made popular by Stephen Hawking and others, that free will is, in fact, a sort of illusion. Can you talk about that?

@DavidDeutschOxf: Yes, this is the idea that because we are made of atoms, and atoms are subject to laws of motion that don't allow any wiggle room, therefore everything we do also doesn't allow any wiggle room, and therefore our free will must be an illusion.

Now, I think that's called reductionism, and it is simply a mistake. It's sort of assuming that the laws of physics are a kind of a person; they're a kind of a supernatural being that makes us do things, but it's not true. The laws of physics are simply a description of what we do. It's not the laws of physics that make atoms move around; laws of physics are simply a description of what they do.

The thing about what we see about the world is that there are levels of description: there are descriptions at the atomic level and descriptions at the molecular level and the biological level, and then there are descriptions and explanations at the level of human thought. There's no reason to expect that just because there's a low-level description, there isn't also a high-level explanation and description.

In the book [The Beginning of Infinity], I give some arguments, both due to me and due to people like Douglas Hofstadter, that the high-level description is sometimes the only reasonable explanation of what is happening. So, for example, if you play a game of chess against a computer, then it's not the silicon that has beaten you; it's the program. The program in the computer, and that program, is an abstraction. The program doesn't consist of atoms; the program is an abstraction over the atoms, just like human thought is an abstraction over our atoms. It is the programs that have beaten you. When I make a decision, it's I who have made it, not my atoms and not the laws of physics.

@krysboydthink: So, we get really unnecessarily and detrimentally hung up on this sense that we can get to the absolute foundation of anything.

@DavidDeutschOxf: That's true as well. The idea that there's an absolute foundation is a formula for stagnation in science and for tyranny in politics and so on. There will never be an absolute foundation for knowledge because there will always be the question, once we have got a particular fundamental theory, of why it is that way and not some other way.