Winning Structurally

[Blueprint]

The issue i have with all these math experts is that their explanation is crap.  Not everyone speaks math the way they do....so more then half the stuff is not understandable.  Why dont they give real examples using real numbers and maybe normal ppl can pick it up.  They use the whole damn alphabet just to tell me 1+1=2 

Yes, exactly.  Sounds familiar.

[TRD]

That's exactly what I said .. abstract .. terminology.
So its the hacker's & military's terminology similar,
but I can't take json or python to add a notch on my body count.

The rest, it either does not make any sense to me ..
or its allegedly simply a proof of what they are talking in some weird language;
& not anything practical.

His, Frege, main book has not been translated in English ever,
& Poena's nine points, which also allegedly are one & the same thing,
are simple logic (zero is a natural number - predecessor, some equality points, etc.) & its descriptors.

None of that can I use in anything roulette-based;
if you happen to notice anything useful, pinpoint to it.

[Blueprint]

“Nothing more practical than a good theory.”

[TRD]

Fine. & the theory distilled from Frege is ..

[Blueprint]

Fine. & the theory distilled from Frege is ..

I shared a specific paper.  Look or don’t look.  Doesn’t matter either way.

[TRD]

OK, I somehow missed that somehow.. possibly coz:
looking at search results now shoe that 'Philosophers Manifesto' is a magazine ..
can you point to the exact issue N°, & which article/page.
(nothing gets returned with 'Philosophers Manifesto Frege')
Thanks

(btw .. remove 'htt ps://w ww.' from links to override the filter imposed;
seems Steve is fine with the links as long as they ain't clickable)

[Blueprint]

I’m creating a substack to share what I want.  If you can find it, you’re welcome.  Take good care.

[roulettefan]

  ping