|
Normy posted:
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2023 23:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 05:19 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/MNateShyamalan/status/1615449784592076800
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 00:19
|
|
|
zoux posted:Oh so you have read it Lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 00:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/trashwithab/status/1614571034879078400?s=46&t=dJD_X5pXF4ySxfdUTchCUg
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 01:47
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/poisonjr/status/1613955119229304846
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 02:11
|
|
|
Marcus Aurelius ended the era of the good emperors by being a poo poo father. I will not be taking advice from him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 02:21
|
|
|
Art of War is mostly obvious to anyone who's played a strategy game, even if very badly (ie, me). And that's literally all it is - the very basics on how to fight a war. It's beyond me why it's touted as this great insightful work one can apply to all aspects of their life. Unless you see it all as metaphorical or something (which it wasn't, to the best of my knowledge).
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 02:24
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:Art of War is mostly obvious to anyone who's played a strategy game, even if very badly (ie, me). And that's literally all it is - the very basics on how to fight a war. It's beyond me why it's touted as this great insightful work one can apply to all aspects of their life. Unless you see it all as metaphorical or something (which it wasn't, to the best of my knowledge). There is a poo poo ton of common knowledge that we just take for granted that had to be figured out the hard way at some point. Some hundreds of years ago, "don't run your troops directly into their front lines, the flanks are a lot more vulnerable" wasn't common knowledge. Hell, the British were still lining troops up shoulder-to-shoulder wearing bright red in the US Revolutionary War because their commanders were dumb stupid idiots. The Continental Army fought to win using things like 'raiding the enemy camps while they sleep' and 'shooting the enemy from ambush'. Nowadays it's coasting on clout
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 03:05
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:Art of War is mostly obvious to anyone who's played a strategy game, even if very badly (ie, me). And that's literally all it is - the very basics on how to fight a war. It's beyond me why it's touted as this great insightful work one can apply to all aspects of their life. Unless you see it all as metaphorical or something (which it wasn't, to the best of my knowledge). IIRC, it was primarily targeted at aristocratic fail-sons who'd never done anything but write crappy poetry but end up in charge of an army because their dad was a high-ranking politician. Rather than deep and profound strategy advice, think of it more as "this is what you need to know to not lose the entire army instantly so that someone competent can come and bail you out."
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 03:11
|
|
|
Evilreaver posted:There is a poo poo ton of common knowledge that we just take for granted that had to be figured out the hard way at some point. Some hundreds of years ago, "don't run your troops directly into their front lines, the flanks are a lot more vulnerable" wasn't common knowledge. Hell, the British were still lining troops up shoulder-to-shoulder wearing bright red in the US Revolutionary War because their commanders were dumb stupid idiots. The Continental Army fought to win using things like 'raiding the enemy camps while they sleep' and 'shooting the enemy from ambush'. Also, as with the British, officer positions in those days in China were routinely bought, given out as favors, etc. We're talking the kind of rich failsons who need to be spoonfed the basics in a format that doesn't make them feel like they're being talked down to (they'd throw a hissy if not shown due deference). The Art of War being fairly basic and stating things like Great Truths isn't really a knock against the book. The preceding paragraph contains hints on why business majors, "alpha males," etc think it's profound. Edit: lol beaten
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 03:17
|
|
|
Some vital and innovative advice such as “attack where your enemy is weak” and “try to conceal your troops’ movement”
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 03:18
|
|
|
Karia posted:IIRC, it was primarily targeted at aristocratic fail-sons who'd never done anything but write crappy poetry but end up in charge of an army because their dad was a high-ranking politician. Rather than deep and profound strategy advice, think of it more as "this is what you need to know to not lose the entire army instantly so that someone competent can come and bail you out." Oh, sorry, I don't mean "the Art of War is stupid, it's all obvious stuff that everyone always knew, there was no point in writing it". Yes, certainly it was probably novel and useful at the time! I meant that I've heard about people claiming it's inspirational and wise advice for, like, succeeding in business and such like, and applicable to our modern day way of life, day-to-day, and it's fantastic. When no, it really only is the very basics of warfare and nothing more. Which is fine! It's just that some people seem to treat it like a self-help book or something
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 03:31
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:Oh, sorry, I don't mean "the Art of War is stupid, it's all obvious stuff that everyone always knew, there was no point in writing it". Yes, certainly it was probably novel and useful at the time! You would be shocked at how little the people who run major businesses know about basic loving strategy as it applies to any sort of competitiveness.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 03:32
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:Art of War is mostly obvious to anyone who's played a strategy game, even if very badly (ie, me). And that's literally all it is - the very basics on how to fight a war. It's beyond me why it's touted as this great insightful work one can apply to all aspects of their life. Unless you see it all as metaphorical or something (which it wasn't, to the best of my knowledge). It may not have been written to be metaphorical, but that doesn't mean you can't read it as such.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 03:53
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:Oh, sorry, I don't mean "the Art of War is stupid, it's all obvious stuff that everyone always knew, there was no point in writing it". Yes, certainly it was probably novel and useful at the time! You're absolutely correct on the second bit, but I do just want to expand on this by clarifying that the Art of War wasn't "novel" at the time it was written. There have been really good tacticians (and strategists, for the pedants out there) for literally as long as humanity has been fighting wars. Case in point, since it was brought up a couple posts ago: nowadays we look at stuff like the British army fighting in ranks during the revolutionary war and think they were just making bad decisions, but that was the major doctrine at the time for all sorts of weapon and communication reasons. The americans did it too: most of the war was fought with both sides standing in straight lines, because it really just was the best way to use a large army at the time given the existing technology. When that strategy didn't work, like when the terrain was really rough, they used different strategies. The commanders weren't dumb, they just were doing the best they could with the technology available at the time. Anyway, the point of that rant was to say that the Art of War was certainly useful, but only in that it conveyed stuff that Sun Tzu thought was obvious to people who were woefully unqualified. If you look at some line in that book and think "hey, this is super obvious", then it's a safe bet that it had been understood for at bare minimum hundreds of years when the book was written. I'm no military historian, so somebody who knows WTF they're talking about is welcome to correct me, of course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 03:54
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:You would be shocked at how little the people who run major businesses know about basic loving strategy as it applies to any sort of competitiveness. No, I know, but it's not basic strategy. It's basic military strategy! It's not going to help anybody's business to learn what ground is best to pick for a battle, how best to employ spearmen vs cavalry, that you should send scouts out in advance of your army etc. I'm convinced that business types who recommend it haven't read it. E: weeeell, ok, having flicked though it again there is indeed some basic strategy stuff. But also a lot of things like this Sun Tsu posted:The rule is, not to besiege walled cities if it can possibly be avoided. Hyperlynx has a new favorite as of 04:06 on Jan 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 04:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1268235838208573440 Somehow this tweet is still up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 04:11
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SupremeHakim17/status/1149097354739372032
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 04:12
|
|
|
trapped mouse posted:https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1268235838208573440 I mean, if the state of Israel is saying Jesus was God's son, then it's pretty loving clear that that criticizing Israel is not criticizing Jews or Judaism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 04:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/scumbelievable/status/1615365111593435137?t=LMPpodprLIMFeqscYOWPvg&s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 04:31
|
|
|
grittyreboot posted:https://twitter.com/scumbelievable/status/1615365111593435137?t=LMPpodprLIMFeqscYOWPvg&s=19 They're the best at what they're doin'. But what they're doin' ain't very nice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 04:36
|
|
|
grittyreboot posted:https://twitter.com/scumbelievable/status/1615365111593435137?t=LMPpodprLIMFeqscYOWPvg&s=19 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 05:23
|
|
|
Evilreaver posted:There is a poo poo ton of common knowledge that we just take for granted that had to be figured out the hard way at some point. Some hundreds of years ago, "don't run your troops directly into their front lines, the flanks are a lot more vulnerable" wasn't common knowledge. Hell, the British were still lining troops up shoulder-to-shoulder wearing bright red in the US Revolutionary War because their commanders were dumb stupid idiots. The Continental Army fought to win using things like 'raiding the enemy camps while they sleep' and 'shooting the enemy from ambush'. ok this is probably bait but I'm taking it anyway. you are extremely wrong. the continental army fought the british using the same equipment and tactics as the british, because they were the british. these tactics included skirmishing and flanking, but at the end of the day if you wanted an army to fight with black powder muskets you needed to line up in big blocks and march straight at each other. the continental army won because of the support of the french army, who used the same tactics and equipment, but had more of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 06:12
|
|
|
No way, I've seen the Patriot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 06:21
|
|
|
TotalLossBrain posted:No way, I've seen the Patriot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euAF68ITyzo
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 06:50
|
|
|
Wearing bright colored uniforms, tall silly hats, and standing in an orderly rank and file made a lot of sense on the 18th century battlefield covered in thick white smoke from musket fire. Then the officers could actually see the positions of the infantry blocks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 07:42
|
|
|
oh you think you're smart sun tzu you old rear end bitch well guess what, I've played upwards of three total war games. yeah. meet me on the field if you dare.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 09:33
|
|
|
Hyperlynx posted:No, I know, but it's not basic strategy. It's basic military strategy! You can absolutely read Art of War, in the broad sense, as business strategy. It is several steps removed from the actual intent of the text so you're getting less out of it than a Chinese noble failson with his daddy's army, but picking ground for battle? You don't try to sell [religiously proscribed food] by the [place of worship]. Sending out scouts? Businesses do that, they very much send out advance scouts to take a read on the character of an area and what kind of advertising assault will be most effective. I could probably bullshit something about spearmen vs cavalry and food trucks vs restaurants, but yeah there's a lot in there that's just not going to be immediately obvious or relevant as a business strategy. What you do is you read one of the hundreds of business manuals that have paraphrased the Art of War, and keep a copy of the AoW prominently on your bookshelf in interview photos.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 09:49
|
|
|
I generally think it’d be a good thing if more people read Marcus Aurelius and other Stoics. It’s probably not the optimal philosophy of life (if there could be such a thing) but it’s definitely better than the way people tend to live. A lot of the stuff in it sounds super obvious, but I’d say that’s true of most “wisdom”; we seemingly have a hard time living by obvious wisdom though. zoux posted:Oh so you have read it Idgi?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 10:24
|
|
|
Sun Tzu? I'd say he knows a liittle more about fighting than you do, pal! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h42d0WHRSck&t=13s
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 11:04
|
|
|
I prefer The Art of the Deal
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 11:18
|
|
|
Halisnacks posted:Idgi? Ambitious Spider posted:I've never read it, and don't really have any opinons on it. zoux posted:Oh so you have read it
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 12:30
|
|
cowboy
|
grittyreboot posted:https://twitter.com/scumbelievable/status/1615365111593435137?t=LMPpodprLIMFeqscYOWPvg&s=19 What's the one in the top right
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 13:06
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:What's the one in the top right That's Joaquin Phoenix in You Were Never Really Here. Pretty good film
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 13:21
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:ok this is probably bait but I'm taking it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 14:48
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/michaelleung/status/1615488196175089664 No! Not my face!
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:25
|
|
|
Lol rekt nerds
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:28
|
|
|
Also on the subject of AI and algorithms and understanding human interaction: https://twitter.com/billyperrigo/status/1615682180201447425
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 05:19 |
|
|
zoux posted:Also on the subject of AI and algorithms and understanding human interaction: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2023 15:35
|
|
