pull down to refresh
I think I kinda get it.
I don't understand why authors try so darn hard to come up with a novel declaration when there are perfectly good ones out there. (Selective revelation is my preferred one.)
So there's only so much try-harding I can stomach before I ask myself if there's enough signal making it worth it to work through that stuff.
Having said all that, the domination bit does kinda make sense in the context of the OODA loop that Hillebrand keeps referring to, if the goal of a group applying it is to dominate the observed group.
In isolation without prior knowledge, though, I'd have reacted very similarly.
Negativity welcome. Can you give me a good reason to not read the rest?
Well, maybe that's a bad question. Rather, I'm curious what turned you off about the question...particularly because it was something I found interesting. (Feel free to speak your mind, you won't hurt my feelings)
My negativity isn't about the topic, or even the information content.
It's that the phrasing makes it sound very AI. Again, I am not accusing anyone of anything. I am saying that I now have a negative aesthetic reaction to phrasing along the lines of "It's not X it's Y".
Especially when the words used are very vague like "raise the price of domination"
Ah, yes. I see that. Each chapter ends with a summary that does make the book feel a bit slop like. It wasn't bad enough that I got turned off though. Perhaps I am too willing to read slop, though. (I do find that I am duped by sloppyists on SN more frequently than I like to admit).
Too much dominatrix, I gotcha
Not gonna lie, and not accusing anyone of anything here, but this sentence genuinely already makes me not wanna read the book.
Sorry about the negativity. I think it says more about me than it does the book, and how I react towards certain turns of phrases now.