I am getting lost earlier so you or the parent might be able to help.

>Which should perhaps tell us something, especially given the disastrous sexual libertinism that characterized the early communist regime of the USSR.

How does that tell us the behavior by those three actors is motivated by him trying to subvert society through weaponized sexuality(to assume for arguments sake)?

Leaving out the US during McCarthy for a moment to reduce the risk of derailing, totalitarian / authoritarian regimes acting against people criticizing them (here in form of his "Mass Psychology of Fascism" in which he also criticized the communist party and later added his orgon stuff) doesnt tell me much about the author other that he isnt a good fit for such systems. Enforcing conformity is what they are all about and at the core of the dysfunctional error correction mechanism that plagues these systems.

And more confusing, how can the second part of that sentence work as a qualifier? Does that mean you would not expect him to get this treatment in the USSR since he showed ideological loyalty on this topic (again for arguments sake)? I would argue looking at the political purges at the time where even complete ideological loyalty and conformity didnt protect you from power considerations its not surprising either.

As some general feedback regarding the rest of the post, reconsidering the certainty about individual statements as well as conclusions might make the post more readable. It otherwise reads as constructing arguments for an already taken conclusion.

From Wikipedia:

>On 23 August, six tons of Reich's books, journals and papers were burned in New York, at the Gansevoort incinerator, a public incinerator on 25th Street. The material included copies of several of his books, including The Sexual Revolution, Character Analysis and The Mass Psychology of Fascism. Although these had been published in German before Reich ever discussed orgone, he had added mention of it to the English editions, so they were caught by the injunction.

Publishing the Mass Psychology of Fascism had him kicked from the German Communist Party before.

Another pretty random bit of information, i recently stumbled about his Sex-Pol movement in another context as the Mitrokhin Archive alleges that Arnold Deutsch (Recruiter of Kim Philby of the Cambridge five) was a follower of said movement. Pretty sure thats a great example or the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baader-Meinhof_effect

>Frequency illusion, also known as the Baader–Meinhof phenomenon or frequency bias, is a cognitive bias referring to the tendency to notice something more often after noticing it for the first time, leading to the belief that it has an increased frequency of occurrence.

Having agency in a society ( through democracy, markets, shaping narratives in discussions and many other ways) might just require adults who deal with the horrible aspects society produces in a responsible manner. Which includes not designing solutions for a false peace of mind. After all, you yourself (as in every individual) are the one responsible for the consequences you produce.

Personally i hope this might be a matter of outer alignment, as in a problem of not agreeing on shared goals that you can apply to problem solving in a coordinated manner. Which has to include the ability to verify process and outcome (which unfortunately in itself are highly safety critical) and the unwillingness to accept false but pleasant conclusions with high costs for others.

You can also not make any statement about reality by arguing with feasibility.

edit: I am unfortunately not qualified to tell you how feasible ways to deal with reality in this case could look. Which doesnt mean that i cant identify some error cases. You also require different levels of competence for designing a rocket and recognizing a non functioning one.

edit1: In regards to the usage of statistics as a basis one should also remember confidence and these cases https://www.science.org/content/article/unlucky-numbers-figh...

I am having quite the big problem with this getting downvoted. The poster is spot on here and this needs to be communicated. Not doing so is irresponsible. Overconfidence in this regard is extremely dangerous and there is no nicer way to say this.

You can not reasonably assume that you are able to judge something works reliably without understanding how the error cases look. Especially if these are capsuled from you and or you dont know what to look out for.

This is at the very core of why something like the post scandal was possible. People repeating the same mistake in this very thread is just really bad. The only thing worse would be not telling them this.

It also leads to the same horrible misjudgements as in the article mentioned above. If you dont know what to look for you will come to erroneous convictions by ruling out the error cases you do know.

Hardware bugs are simply capsuled better so people dont recognize them as such. Its the same mechanism at play as for people who assume software normally functions. They are also just unaware of the inner working.

Stuff is just really complicated and people should manage their expectations. I get that going from assuming to have a solid base to no such thing existing is difficult to handle but there is no sensible way around that. Not doing so gets you stuff like the article.

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/7/14/does-the-west-s...

Cant say anything about the plausibility but the references to EU sanctions against Kosovo and the former president of Kosovo being currently on trial in the Hague are interesting points.

Non opinion piece on the background https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/24/why-kosovos-standof...

Would be happy to hear from anyone familiar with that perspective, it was news to me. But pressuring Kosovo to play ball in the negotiations doesnt seem to be out of the question?

Have been thinking about the issue as well and have been drifting more and more in the direction dealing with human error / aiding human thinking by just raising the bar abit without trying to find completeness and focusing on acceptability. Fixing the stuff that should be easiest. So looking at the description of errors and and how to communicate them in a sensible way. A minimum consensus based safety focused approach with capsuled complexity seems to be the way to go.

A few perspectives you may or may not have heard of and find interesting in this context. In the spirit of capsuled complexity and accessibility with good podcasts / videos:

Example for the concept and power of capsuled complexity with the 5 level explanation series from WIRED https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raHM3k-uR0E

You already mentioned information pollution so you might be familiar with the whole military perspective, from operations in the information environment / cognitive warfare, Diss/Miss Information and missing context, psychographic advertisement, ODAA Loop and the research coming out of IBMs Watson by Juliane Gallinas with her Ted Talk about "(General)Patton in a Box" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOQkPNlTTBY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rg7uKsWlGs If things shift into a game theoretical perspective its also always worth while reminding people that even psychopaths like drinkable tap water. There is some win-win stuff.

(Air) Accident investigations and crew resource management for how to design processes dealing with human error. Mentour Pilots youtube channel or the series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayday_(Canadian_TV_series). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhO-87wwLJs about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_Flight_401 for example

Taiwans gov0 (zero) is an approach of consensus finding in politics. Outer alignment is also relevant here. I generally find totalitarianism (corrupt dysfunctional systems) a useful frame of mind in terms of why consensus finding has giant benefits. Joost Meerloos "Rape of the mind" has a good description of how these systems become dysfunctional. Also https://sproutsschools.com/bonhoeffers-theory-of-stupidity/ Noble lies and the problems in how to deal with them are also noteworthy here.

Hostage negotiator are a in hindsight not so surprising great source for consensus finding mechanisms and mindset. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EguLJgkc54

Tim Urbans echo chambers vs idea spaces

You mentioned epistemology, ontology in computer science is a great counterexample for the dangers of aiming for completeness as well as Humes guillotine.

You might also like the stuff from Daniel Schmachtenberger on the sense making crisis. But i always feel always bad about recommending this since its hours and hours of videos. But from the types of information pollution to mementics to a description of the everything crisis we are in through the frame of finding a third attractor its quite valuable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LqaotiGWjQ

Tristan Harris might also be relevant for how technology (like social media and AI) is causing problems due to humans interacting with it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoVJKj8lcNQ

https://www.gold.org/goldhub/gold-focus/2021/06/basel-iii-an...

Or directly from the LBMA:

https://cdn.lbma.org.uk/downloads/Pages/NSFR-PRA-Letter-fina... https://www.lbma.org.uk/articles/pra-clearing-banks-may-now-...

This is not to say that all ETFs work this way. I believe Xetra is one example of being fully physically backed. But this naturally increases running cost due to storage. Last i checked i believe you pay in the rough region of 0.1% a year in storage cost at the reputable physical gold bullion storage sites as a large customers (tons / room). That sums up. This also explains why physical copper is not something you can easily invest in.

But again, this kind of misses the point, i would really appreciate a definition of paper differing from backed by derivatives. I think you might be onto something here, i ran into this argument a few times now so i believe i might be missing something.

I would also like to reiterate that i do not share the conclusion the initial post made about run away gold prices. I elaborated on that in the other posts.

Sorry for the late edits, had to double check the numbers.

But again, due to golds importance from the monetary perspective, significant price increases are not going to happen. It could be seen as currencies devaluing, thus lending out central bank gold reserved to achieve price stability is very much on the table. I believe it was Greenspan that talked about this in the past.

¹ https://www.reuters.com/article/jp-morgan-spoofing-penalty-i...

I believe your error stems from looking at my comment regarding what implications it would have on your position. Those assumed implications are however erroneous.

I am telling you initial cause blame attribution is open ended and thus dangerous. Thats why it cant be used. Because there is some stuff that cant be justified. If you go down the path of Russia is to blame not because they did it, but because they started it, you are writing a blank check for anything that happens afterwards.

This statement says nothing about removing any blame from Russia, its just the statement that some stuff is unjustifiable. Which is why those lines of reasoning are not a good idea.

As i pointed out in another post, it also shifts the narrative from Russia blew up a dam to Ukraine would have been allowed to do that. Thats cognitive warfare, straight out of GRUs active measures. Which is also why my other post wasnt concern trolling. They are actively doing that and attention needs to be paid unless you want GRU dictating how you think about Ukraine.

You seem to be a genuine account. It amazes me that you thought this to be a reasonable comment.

I looked at my comment again and its pretty clear that i was talking about the kind of reasoning, not the specific argument. Please think before you post.

Once you stop judging stuff on its own you can justify anything. Its why its not sensible to do that.