(The "war is bad" principle applies fractally; even if you must fight a nation, you should still seek to capture individual cities bloodlessly.)
-
Show this thread
-
2. Do Your Homework. Know your own army's capabilities, know the terrain and weather, know your enemy's position and plans and capabilities. Organize and prepare. Most people underinvest in intelligence.
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
Victory does not go to the strongest, the bravest, the richest, or the most numerous, but to the one who makes the right decisions for the situation. You can outthink a disadvantage in fundamental resources. But to do that you have to ACQUIRE DATA AND THINK.
2 replies 2 retweets 25 likesShow this thread -
Victory requires two things: a.) your enemy fucks up; b.) you don't fuck up. You can only control b.) and wait for a.) to happen.
2 replies 0 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
The "do your homework" principle also applies to managing people. People are brave and cooperative when they're placed in the right incentive structures.
1 reply 0 retweets 17 likesShow this thread -
"Shih" is a word my translation leaves untranslated, but it's compared to drawing a crossbow or putting a rock atop a mountain; when people have the right "shih", courage and victory comes naturally. Set up the right context/structure and virtue will be like "flowing downhill."
3 replies 2 retweets 22 likesShow this thread -
3. ADAPT. Don't be tied to a fixed pattern. Attack the enemy where he's weak and avoid him where he's strong; tempt him to engage by offering apparent advantage, then defeat him with the unexpected. Be good at predicting him and hard for him to predict.
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
If the enemy outnumbers you, divide his forces. If the terrain is unfavorable, go somewhere else. You can adapt to any local disadvantage -- just ACTUALLY ADAPT. You cannot beat the odds.
1 reply 0 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
The way I see it, self-interest has two independent components: first, creating value; second, capturing or protecting value. The latter is adversarial.
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @s_r_constantin
Is it adversarial? When people engage in free exchanges, both sides end up with their utility increased. That's not adversarial even though it involves capture of value.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Free exchange is value creation. Negotiating over who gets more of the pie is value capture.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.