Posts by Jack Smith5

Look, I’m not saying everyone needs to go out and gamble their life savings on a meme stock, but you can't just spend your entire existence playing follow-the-leader. You have to take some kind of initiative and actually drive your own life instead of just being a passenger.
They can.

Social challenges?
I’d call them educational ones. Honestly, if you don't adapt to this new era, you’re going to find yourself living on the fringes of society or flirting with the law.
The reality is pretty grim: if you can't find a way to make a legitimate living, you'll end up looking toward crime or those shady gray-market hustles just to keep the lights on.

To me, adaptation means investing in yourself—specifically in your own knowledge and skill set.

I sometimes dream of a world where mindless, soul-crushing grunt work is completely eradicated so no human being ever has to endure it again. But, of course, that would require a massive overhaul of our entire social value system. We'd basically need to strip manufacturing away from massive corporations and move it back into the hands of everyday citizens. Imagine being able to just hit "print" on a 3D printer whenever you need some little gadget or part.

Thanks!

How can I see detailed wireless network data—specifically MAC addresses and signal strength—within a week? Ideally, I'd prefer seeing actual numbers instead of just those little signal bars. Any software recommendations? Thanks.

Maybe this is an OT topic—usually, I’d head to a psychologist or a philosophy professor for this kind of thing—but I actually need a professional opinion. If there are any medical doctors or even veterinarians on this forum, I could use your expertise.

I’ve been chewing on this question for a while now:
It’s inevitable that we’ll be buying pork—specifically pork halves—this year just like we always do, but two specific things have me digging into this research:
1. I can't stand watching anything suffer. Even though I’ve witnessed it many times and have even been involved, I don't think I'll ever get used to the slaughtering process. Using a firearm might be more humane, but for several practical reasons, that isn't an option here. So, we're left with the knife: the squealing, the blood, the choking, and finally, death.
That is the primary reason.

2. Money is a secondary factor; buying a whole live pig is cheaper than buying pre-cut halves.

A few years back, I saw a "device" in a documentary that really got me thinking about whether I could change my approach, and now I want to hear your thoughts.

In some experiment featured in a documentary about the human body, they put a pig in a chamber and, if I recall correctly, they extracted the oxygen (or maybe they pressurized it, I can't quite remember—please correct me if I'm wrong, those of you who know). They wanted to see if the pig would still eat food placed inside that chamber, knowing something was wrong with the environment. Even when the pig realized the conditions were off, it kept eating, almost as if it were experiencing a sense of euphoria.

The same thing happens on planes when there's a loss of cabin pressure at high altitudes; apparently, that lack of oxygen triggers certain mental states—first a decline in cognitive function, then a sort of euphoria, and eventually death.

So, what if we brought a live pig home, put it into a makeshift chamber (something built with a steel frame, wooden sides, and edges sealed with silicone), and simply turned on a pump to vacuum the air out?

Would that be the most humane way to kill it? Would it induce that "euphoria" or at least a sense of indifference toward its surroundings? Would it die "happy"? Would it even realize it was dying?

1. Slaughtering with a knife is, in my opinion, the worst way to handle food production.
2. A bullet is okay, but it presents its own set of problems.
3. Gases are impractical—think about the poisons used to sedate livestock or various injections.
4. Ideally, the animal would pass away happy and unaware of what is happening. What method would achieve that, and how would it even work?

I realize this sounds bizarre, but the problem is very real and happens on a massive scale every single year. That's just talking about individual households; imagine the industrial operations, especially the ones where oversight is lacking.

Kids aren't actually happy. They’re weighed down by more stress and anxiety than most people realize, and honestly, truly happy children are a rare breed—usually because they weren't raised in the middle of a concrete jungle.

What exactly do you mean by denying emotions?

No, it’s more that emotions define who you aren't. You only truly free yourself from fear once you let go of those emotional compulsions. That doesn't imply being a sociopath; rather, it means you stop acting just to chase that daily "hit," much like those extreme thrill-seekers.

To put it this way: a Wall Street banker hungers for money because he’s actually chasing a fix of power, success, and that dopamine rush his brain gets from knowing he just took a chunk out of someone else's pocket to pad his own firm's bottom line.

Or take an extreme big-wave surfer. He’s obsessed with the next drop down some untouched swell because every massive jump triggers a hormonal surge and a sense of ecstasy. But since the high wears off, he needs a bigger wave every single time just to feel the same thing. At the end of the day, he's just a slave to his hormones.

The average person gets their fix by gossiping about the neighbors, playing the stock market, or feeling like they "beat the system" by snagging a deal at a department store while everyone else paid full price. It's why people scramble toward any "Sale" sign like headless chickens, completely blind to the fact that those discounts are often just traps set by clever retailers.

It goes on and on. People are driven by impulse, which is why the world is such a mess. If we were guided by reason—by actually practicing critical thinking and considering how our actions impact the world around us—things would be a lot better for everyone.

You should only give in to your emotions when you're certain that what you're doing won't cause lasting, irreversible harm to others or the environment.

I’m basically trying to stay ahead of the curve here. My goal is to hold the exact same position today that I’ll be holding forty years from now. It’s not about being stubborn or refusing to admit when I'm wrong; it's just about being right from the jump so I don't waste any damn time proving it later.
Yeah, I’ve actually been chewing on that same thought for a while now.
Honestly, I’m already looking back at my past self in certain situations and seeing nothing but a naive fool. It’s not exactly a comforting blueprint for how I'm going to handle things moving forward.

edit:
Haha, I just went back and reread my last post, and I’ve already spotted a mistake. If I’m tripping up this early, imagine how bad things are going to look forty years from now.
Look, sex probably wasn't their only outlet for entertainment. If we’re talking about people living in a tribal society, they had plenty of other ways to pass the time—think campfire dances, flutes, drums, dancers, herbalism, chamomile, all that stuff. It likely wasn't all bad for them; they probably had a decent time. Maybe I didn't phrase my previous point very well, though. For me personally, that kind of thing isn't exactly the pinnacle of fun. Honestly? It sounds pretty boring. That just isn't my idea of a good time.

Look, emotions just end up masking who you actually are. You only really break free from your fears once you stop letting those feelings call the shots. That doesn’t mean you turn into some cold, unfeeling robot—it just means you stop chasing that cheap daily dopamine hit like some adrenaline junkie looking for their next fix. It's about being intentional rather than just reacting to every impulse.

Getting a reward for an experience is all about how it hits your emotions, but if you actually sit down and use your head to analyze what you did, you can figure out if it was actually a good move or not. Take cheating, for example. Right after you pull it off, you might feel like you’re on top of the world—pumped, happy, maybe even a little bit of a rush. But once the adrenaline dies down and you actually use your brain, you realize the downsides far outweigh the perks. If you conclude that being honest provides a better quality of life and is just a more logical way to exist, then you’ve actually made some progress as a person. That's real growth.

People driven by nothing but raw emotion are easily humanity's biggest liability. It’s a fundamental flaw. Emotions act like a direct line to our worst impulses—greed, the desperate need for power, jealousy, envy. Once you let feelings take the wheel, logic just gets tossed out the window.

Honestly, I think I’d be a lot less happy if I had been born before civilization took hold. Having the luxury of comparison changes everything; I can actually look at both sides of the coin. Nowadays, I have the agency to choose. I can opt for a stripped-back, simple life—the kind where nobody bothers you and you just exist—or I can lean into the complexities of modern society. My happiness today is defined by that choice. Back then, it wasn't about preference; it was just about survival. Life was objectively more stressful and unpredictable back then, whereas now, my contentment is a matter of deciding which path I want to walk.

Back then, life was basically just a constant, exhausting search for the next meal. Sex wasn't some romantic thing you planned; it only happened during the spring rut or maybe in the summer when food was actually plentiful and survival wasn't the only thing on your mind. It was pretty much the only entertainment available. And honestly? I’d bet anything it didn't last more than thirty seconds.

Character is what defines a person, but our environment plays a massive role in shaping our genes and our physical makeup. You aren't born the same person whether you're living in the middle of Manhattan or deep in the wilderness. If I had been born into a primitive tribe, I wouldn't be "me"—or rather, I’d be a much less developed version of myself. Civilization provided me with the power of choice, self-awareness, specialized knowledge, and the actual capacity for evolution. Sure, if I were part of a small tribe, evolution would still happen, but it would plateau at a very basic level. People living in those settings might have a much deeper understanding of local flora and fauna than I ever will, but that's about it. True evolutionary progress requires knowing how to manipulate the world around you. And let's be honest: who uses the tools and resources around them better than someone living in modern society?

Let’s be real: tribal societies practice a pretty pathetic, primitive form of resource management. Sure, technically speaking, they are eco-friendly and sustainable, but let's not kid ourselves—it has almost nothing to do with actual evolutionary progress.

I’m not saying we "civilized" folks are inherently better than some primitive tribe—honestly, looking at how we act, it’s probably the other way around. But we do have a massive leg up when it comes to where we're headed evolutionarily. It all comes down to the sheer volume of accumulated knowledge and data we can actually build upon.

It really comes down to a basic choice: do you want to be some civilized, greedy jerk, or do you want to actually use everything modern society has handed you to become a better person? We live in an era where we can leverage all this collective intelligence—everything we’ve picked up in school, through the internet, or even just on the job—to practice selflessness and focus on spiritual growth. You have access to the sum of human knowledge at your fingertips; you can either use that to hoard more for yourself or use it to evolve and actually give something back to the world.

Money basically organized the world and paved the way for peace. Think about it: before currency existed, everything came down to trading land or people. If you wanted something, you had to hand over territory or trade a daughter, work yourself into the ground, or swap out ten slaves just to get by. Once money was invented, that whole barbaric cycle broke. You could finally acquire what you needed without having to sacrifice your family or your soul to settle a debt.
Money has made trading so much easier because we can basically conjure it up whenever we need to. Sure, the government keeps a tight leash on it, but at least we aren't out there bartering animal pelts or livestock just to get things done. We don't have to spend our lives digging through the dirt for gold nuggets or silver veins just to have a medium of exchange. It’s a massive upgrade from the old ways.

I’m all for swapping currency for a direct service-for-service barter system, but let's not pretend money isn't responsible for the "evolution" we’ve experienced. It gave us the ability to establish formal governments, standardized laws, and—most importantly—professionalized police forces and militaries that actually answer to the public rather than just following the whims of a local warlord. Before money became the standard, power was much more personal. You had individual rulers or tyrants who couldn't be questioned, and armies were basically just private muscle for whoever held the biggest sword. Money changed the game. It allowed organized civilizations to scale up and eventually outpace everyone else. We didn't just conquer the world through brute force; we rose to dominance because our systems were objectively more efficient and advanced than any old-school feudal setup could ever dream of being. Performance wins.

Look, at the end of the day, you’re the one in the driver's seat of your own life. You’ve got the entire world sitting right there at your fingertips, and honestly, how you choose to play that hand is entirely on you. Technology and information aren't inherently evil tools; they're just tools. It’s the person behind the screen—the one deciding to weaponize that knowledge against everyone else around them—who’s actually the problem.

Money and banks aren't inherently evil. It’s more about the psychological addiction driving certain people—it hits them like a drug, forcing them to chase that high every single day without ever hitting the pause button.
They just haven't quite grasped where the line is between being reasonable and actually making a decent living. They have no clue what they actually need out of life or what their end goal should be. It’s really that simple.

Logic is what elevates you, not raw emotion. Character is built through reasoning, whereas emotions tend to lead straight to distorted perspectives and deviant behavior.

Samuel Harris10 said:I’ve been chewing on this lately—really dwelling on it. What does a healthy, or even just a "normal," ratio between these two things look like?

Awareness, I suspect, ought to be a state free from judgment, strain, or the constant urge to draw conclusions—just pure experience. Thinking, on the other hand, should ideally be the process that actually facilitates that.

But what is the actual purpose of thinking? Is there a point to it? Would we all be fundamentally happier if we could just *be*—you know, existing purely through awareness, guided by sensation and direct experience rather than mental gymnastics? To me, thinking often feels like nothing more than a byproduct of negative experiences. Sure, it can be useful if applied creatively, but is that really how we were meant to organize our entire world?

Think about a newborn. They just exist, happy and curious, exploring everything. Then we step in and interrupt that flow, forcing them toward specific goals and reasons. We’ve all said it at some point—how much better life was when we didn't have a care in the world or a single nagging thought in our heads. Why do we even need this cognitive overhead? If we assume that individual happiness is the ultimate goal, then I fail to see why we need any of this. All this formalized knowledge... it doesn't seem to serve the human spirit. You're hungry, you eat; you're tired, you sleep; you feel desire, you follow it. Isn't that how we're wired? Just following our basic needs seems like the only path to contentment, yet today everyone is just sprinting toward some hollow, superficial prize.

To be aware of something simply means recognizing its existence. That’s it. It doesn't imply whether that thing is good or bad, right or wrong; it just acknowledges that it exists.

Thinking about that thing then "carves out" your character—essentially, assigning attributes to what you are aware of defines who you are as a person.

What kind of ratio are you looking for? You should be aware of everything, and you should think about everything too, but with the strict limitation that your thinking doesn't turn into an obsession. You need to reach a conclusion; thinking needs to have a goal.

Take money, for example. You're aware it exists and that everyone around you is chasing it for goods and services, but you're equally aware that the world would spin just fine without it. It isn't an absolute necessity in the same way air, water, food, soil, or sunlight are.

Through thinking, you find the balance—you need money, but not at any cost. You set your own terms.

What is the actual role or purpose of thinking? Would people be happier if they could just "be"—meaning, existing purely through awareness, guided by feelings and experiences rather than thought?

Insight. Knowledge. The product or fruit of the two. Progress. Evolution. That is, in a nutshell, the purpose of thinking.

And what is happiness? Is happiness strictly following a biological program—being born, reproducing as much as possible, eating whatever you can catch, and dying?

Or is happiness something else entirely for you? Happiness is whatever you choose it to be.

For me, happiness is my work, which isn't really a "job" but a lifestyle that simultaneously funds that very life. It includes a family that supports me and whom I support, enough material stability to function normally in the modern world—meaning a place to live, a house with some land, a vehicle, tools, access to information, and maybe even a vacation spot, though even my house is in a great enough location to serve as a summer retreat while still being connected to civilization.

When a baby is born, it just "is." It's happy, it explores. Then we step in, interrupt that, and direct them toward certain things and reasons. We all love saying how great life was when we were young and had neither worries nor a lick of sense. Why do we even need this? If we assume happiness is the ultimate goal for every individual, I don't see why we need all this. I don't see how all this formalized knowledge actually benefits a person.

Because if everyone thought like that, we wouldn't exist. Formalized knowledge built our civilization, our communication, our art, our infrastructure, and allowed us to understand the cosmos and the world around us. That's why you need to interrupt "being."
You have to view yourself as a gear or a brick helping to keep the building standing—that is, keeping civilization alive. That requires sacrifice, of various kinds. You have to be useful to society for civilization to endure. You need to be a contributing factor, not a parasite, because parasites tear civilizations down.

So you eat, you sleep, you feel good, you satisfy your urges—isn't that just how we're wired? Isn't the whole point to follow our instincts if we want any semblance of happiness? Nowadays, everyone is just sprinting after empty status symbols.

Humans weren't "created" that way; we evolved from those exact creatures you're talking about.
But look where those creatures ended up. They’re beneath you. You step on them, they don't step on you. Believe me, if you weren't crushing them—starting with viruses and bacteria—they’d be wiping us out without a second thought for "peaceful coexistence."

Life is a struggle, and you need to accept that. If you don't put in the work, you won't survive. Living purely by those principles you mentioned—just chasing pleasure—leads straight to ruin. It's not about hedonism; it's about structure and sacrifice. The only real question is what you're willing to sacrifice for, and whether those goals are actually worth the cost.

Take me, for example. I have zero interest in wasting my time moving piles of paperwork or shifting data from one folder to another on a computer. My goal isn't to be some Wall Street banker hoarding digital numbers in a vault or a checking account. To me, that's a complete waste of time. It contributes nothing to the world and offers no tribute to civilization.

Then again... without banks and money, the world wouldn't be half as developed as it is. Money built the modern world, for better or worse. Personally, I think it's done more good than harm. Without it, we wouldn't have reached this level of population density, nor would we be dealing with the specific mess we deal with today.

The bottom line is that you have to decide for yourself what your objective is and which goals are worth spending your life on.

Someone once said—maybe it was the Dalai Lama or someone similar—“Be the change you wish to see in the world.” That’s the gist of it. Don't sit around waiting for other people to build the world you want; go out and build it yourself.

To do that, you need a clear vision. You need a purpose worth sacrificing your life for. You have to relentlessly demonstrate that vision to the people around you, and once they start believing in it too, it becomes a reality.

If you watch a documentary on Elon Musk (the guy behind PayPal, SolarCity, SpaceX, Tesla... there's plenty more where that came from), you'll see exactly how that works in practice.

You don't necessarily have to be a genius (though he clearly is), but you do need an unwavering, crystal-clear stance and a vision. Everything else tends to fall into place naturally, provided you don't lose sight of the blueprint.

As for me, hedonism is a massive waste of time. Chasing money and fame is the same thing—it's just squandering the only truly precious resource we have: time.

Look, you clearly have some issues going on here that require a professional evaluation, but don't go jumping to conclusions about needing surgery or anything extreme just yet. You need an actual diagnosis first before you start making big moves.
Also, try talking it out with your family at home to get their perspective. When you see a doctor, try to steer the conversation away from just being handed a prescription for sleeping pills. If they just try to write you a script and send you on your way, push back. Ask if there are other options—maybe some therapy or something else that can work alongside medication rather than just being a quick fix.

Medication alone doesn't solve the root problem; it just masks the symptoms.

Fighting is ultimately pointless if you haven't thought about what comes after. If you win the war but have absolutely no clue how to actually wield that newfound freedom or manage the aftermath, you haven't really gained anything—you've just lost a massive amount of resources for nothing.

Exactly. We should be focused on actually building something meaningful instead of just wasting our breath fighting against wind turbines.

Knock out your studying during the week so you can actually have a life on the weekends. Seriously, just build a solid schedule, stick to it, and you’ll be way less stressed. These types of campaigns usually fly through the lower-tier schools, but in the Ivy Leagues? It’s a much steeper uphill battle.

Sure, you can definitely overdo it when it comes to emphasizing the "self." If you’re the one constantly shouting about your own importance, it usually just smells like bragging or some desperate attempt to flex your masculinity. But if someone else is doing the highlighting for you—say, a friend constantly praising your ego—that’s actually a sign of true character. Though, let's be honest, it can also just be a polite way of calling someone an egomaniac.

In my book, the strongest character belongs to the person who stays hungry. Someone willing to learn, to experience new things, to try something they've never touched before. It’s about being able to take advice, chew on it for a bit, and then actually use it if it makes sense. At the same time, though, you have to follow your own internal compass. You listen to what feels right to *you*, rather than just following whatever the crowd deems "logical" or "normal."

From the outside, this can make you look like you don't have a backbone. People might see you as indecisive or flighty, like you don't really know anything. But I’ve always found that those types of people tend to navigate life much better. They get along with everyone—whether it's in a marriage, at a job in Manhattan, or just making casual acquaintances.

Being open to new possibilities while still maintaining a clear sense of direction? That’s the sweet spot for a healthy ego. It means: I know exactly what I want, but I'm not too stubborn to realize there are a million ways to get there. Some paths are better than others, sure, but being flexible allows you to reach your goals without stepping on toes or making unnecessary enemies along the way.

You’re confusing stubbornness with having actual character. There's a massive difference.

Stubbornness is when you know—deep down, you *know*—that you're wrong, but you keep digging your heels in just because you can't stomach looking like an idiot. It's pure ego and pride refusing to admit a mistake.

Character, on the other hand, is having a core set of principles that guide how you move through life. For some people, their word is gospel. If they tell you they’ll be at your place at 8:00 PM tomorrow to handle a specific task, they’ll show up and get it done, period. No excuses. And if something truly unavoidable pops up, they aren't going to ghost you; they'll reach out immediately, explain the situation, and reschedule.

That’s just one way to look at it. It applies to things like a handshake deal or respecting an agreement without needing a thirty-page legal contract from a firm in Manhattan. You deal with people where a simple handshake means the job is as good as done, and you don't need extra insurance because you know they'll follow through.

Having a sense of self also means that when you're at the office, you don't let a manager talk you into working unpaid overtime or picking up tasks that weren't part of the job you actually signed up for. That wasn't the deal.

It can mean living life on your own terms—like owning a ranch out in Montana and doing things your way. You build, you plant, and you live by your own rules, regardless of what the neighbors have to say about it.

The line between being stubborn and having character is drawn the moment you realize you're wrong. A stubborn person keeps charging blindly into the wall. Someone with character? They listen to reason and take the advice.

The real question is, how do you actually define winning? It’s not about having three hundred people sliding into your DMs or chasing your clout. To me, true success is coming home to a stable family, a husband who actually has your back, a partner who loves you deeply, and watching your kids grow up surrounded by that kind of affection.
'Screw that, just look out for number one.'

See, that whole "damsel in distress" trope is exactly what triggers a guy's instinct. Most men are hardwired to be protectors; they naturally gravitate toward women who seem like they actually need someone to step up. It’s much easier to win over someone who invites that protective energy than some hyper-independent woman who doesn't seem to have any room left for anyone else in her life.

Sure, names impact your psyche, but the way this poll was phrased is just bad design. It really should have been asked like this:
does a name *have* to influence your psychology?
Because it doesn't.
The way it stood, I felt forced to select "yes" just because it was technically the only logical answer.

A few people here have already touched on this. When you're a kid, you live under a strict set of rules, boundaries, and limitations. But once you hit adulthood, you're essentially your own boss. Nobody is dictating your destiny anymore. If you find yourself miserable, that unhappiness is usually just the direct result of the paths you chose—your career, your job, or even the people you decide to surround yourself with. In short, if you're unhappy as an adult, you've got no one to blame but yourself. A child, however, isn't solely responsible for their misery during their upbringing.