Method to the madness

When I wrote in that previous article about how America uses AI and supercomputer simulations of socio-economic systems, something clicked: “wow, that actually explains why their geopolitical moves look so idiotic”.

Let me explain.

America makes chaos in the Middle East, destroying Libya and Syria. America switches focus to North Korea, stirs up the conflict almost to the point of war, then starts peace negotiations, but then freezes them because it doesn’t actually want peace there. It stirs up a civil war in Ukraine, creates a chaotic state and freezes it, not allowing it to be solved. It creates chaos in Venezuela by introducing sanctions that make sure the situation can’t be improved, and then tries to introduce their asset Guaido as the new “president”, making sure the government of the very incompetent communist Maduro is de facto cemented in place because patriotism. They pressure Europe to start importing economic migrants who are sure to create chaos and disruptions and possibly throw Europe into civil war. They stir up conflict with China over whatever – Taiwan, some islands in South China Sea, economy, trade. They wage systemic psychological warfare against Russia, to the point where their politicians are cornered into either recommending total war with Russia or be labelled Russian assets.

It all looks crazy, as if they are going around the globe and intentionally stirring up conflicts, not allowing conflicts to be resolved peacefully, and rotating them in circle, shifting attention from one to another with no apparent goal other than increasing the intensity and amount of the global anxiety level.

And then it clicked: it looks like something you would have in a simulation: a scalar labelled “anxiety level”. A simulation tells you that you need to increase the global anxiety level and keep it within a range, and then your operatives get orders to stir up shit all over the world, including pulling Trump’s strings to go do something (or his daughter is going to have an unfortunate accident). What’s going on doesn’t make any sense otherwise because it all looks as if CIA is being run by idiots, but if it’s actually being advised by a simulated system with specific goals in mind, and if the simulation tells them that they need certain parameters within certain ranges in order to get desired effects, and the system monitors the social network for feedback on the emotional states of both the general population and specific groups, this chaotic madness is exactly what it would look like, only there’s method to the madness.

The more I think of it, the more it looks like Alex Jones actually had the right idea about what’s going on, only he’s too unhinged to explain it properly so it sounded crazy. It all looks like someone hired very intelligent futurologists to plot a pathway from the present day to some very distant future where mankind either sheds the flesh and is pure AI, or exists as hybrid biotech merged with computers, and colonizes planets orbiting the nearby stars. The simulation was probably trained by feeding it the information about the past, and when it became capable of reliably “predicting” the present, they started trusting it with predicting the future, and I would guess this has been going on for a while and they train the AI with feedback from the reality, which revises the projection of the future. I would expect the simulation to inform them about divergencies – for instance, if you want to get your kind of future, you need to change certain things in the real world to steer things in a different direction, and then human agents get instructions on what to aim for, and then we get to see politics that looks insane, but it’s only insane if you think it’s done by humans who do things based on emotions, for instance if you think that Trump is tweeting his nonsense based on his emotions and thoughts, and not because he’s instructed to do something by his handlers in Langley, who are instructed what to do by the deep strategy team.

So, basically, it’s the futurologists directing the machines that treat humans like predictable entities, basically a herd of cattle that will respond positive to green pastures and negative to cattle prod, and can be steered easily in certain directions, and the only opposition to this are the human geo-strategic teams, primarily in Russia, who are so far incredibly disciplined in diffusing this chaos and are instructing other countries and promoting restraint.

Gold spike

Due to the current geopolitical situation, gold (and other precious metals to some degree) spiked either close to, or, in some currencies, over the all-time high.

This spike is significant enough for the main-stream press to start reporting on it, which means a lot of ordinary people with poor investment skills are going to join the marketplace, and, of course, wipe themselves out, as they always do, because they don’t know what they are doing.

It is my opinion that this current price spike is a transitory event on the path towards a very serious crisis. My recommendation is to wait this out, don’t sell (if you already have metals and you think this is a good opportunity to cash in on the investment), wait for the panic buyers to sell, wait for the prices to fall, when everybody thinks this was a false alarm, buy all you can, and buy gold, because silver might be a target of very nasty speculations, for instance dumping large quantities of industrial silver on the market if China has no use for it due to tariffs and sanctions. Industrial silver is around 60% of total silver consumption, and the market is small compared to gold and this can really hurt you. Gold is essential because it’s the core monetary metal of the central banks and they see it as a strategic asset. If JP Morgan or some other big player in the silver market dumps even a fraction of all the silver they have stored in anticipation of industrial demand, the prices will drop so hard it will wipe you out if you buy while it’s expensive. Buy only if such a silver dump takes place.

 

What is money?

Something’s been bothering me recently: I feel incredible aversion to Bitcoin, and when analogies with gold are made, it was difficult for me to verbalize what exactly is it that I find objectionable about Bitcoin. Today the final piece of the puzzle clicked, so I’ll explain.

Money is by definition an universal commodity, something that is universally accepted as a standard of value and universally accepted in any form of barter.

People who created Bitcoin think that value of money is derived from scarcity, so they designed it to be scarce. The problem is, they designed it to be too scarce, and so it’s completely useless as money, because money should by definition be a standard of value. If value of money changes over time, it’s useless as money, and that happens when money is either abundant (inflation) or scarce (deflation). This inherent scarcity makes Bitcoin a high-risk investment paper, and people can get rich with high-risk investment papers, but it’s not money. Interestingly, that’s the same reason why fiat currency is not money: it is too variable over time. Gold and silver have a track record of being a reliable measure of value over millennia. That is because the supply of gold and silver seems to scale quite reliably with demand; essentially, when it becomes scarce, it starts making sense to open another gold mine. If it isn’t scarce, it’s mined less. Bitcoin gets exponentially more expensive to mine. Gold doesn’t seem to be quite perfect as a measure of value, but it’s historically much better than anything else, and isn’t a speculative asset. Value stored in gold is frozen, coins buried in Roman times can be dug out and sold for exactly the amount of value that was in them in Roman times. Value stored in Bitcoin is fluctuating wildly.

This is my main objection to Bitcoin, but I only now managed to verbalize it properly; I assumed it implicitly before, but the idea wasn’t clear. There are also other objections, which I will also list.

Money must by definition be physical, on the lowest possible layer of abstraction. This is so because trade must not imply any technological intermediary layers. You cannot assume electricity, computers or global computer networks for trade. You can have all those layers as convenience, for instance you can have paper money that is a banknote payable in gold or silver on delivery, and you can trade banknotes instead of gold coins. You can also have a computerized bank account which shows numbers that replace the banknotes, and you can trade with bank transfers. That’s all fine, as long as you can revert to the actual money when the “pointers” and instruments of convenience fail. Basically, when a solar flare wipes out the technosphere, you still want to be able to buy and sell things. For convenience, of course you will use credit or debit cards or SWIFT transfers. However, for security in extraordinary circumstances you must be able to revert to the most basic physical form of money. This means that nothing abstract can be safely used as money.

Money must be anonymous. If your financial transactions can be monitored by the government, this will necessarily mean a totalitarian power of the state over an individual. No kind of “law and order” argument is more important than this; obedience to the law is secondary to the sovereign liberty of the individual. Everything else is slavery to the state. The ability of sovereign individuals to trade anonymously predates the existence of the state, and is more important than the existence of the state. Gold is anonymous. Fiat currency is much less so (banknotes have serial numbers), and Bitcoin is not anonymous at all. It’s the worst possible invasion of financial privacy imaginable, because once someone gets your wallet number, he can track every single transaction you made till the beginning of time. The Bitcoin ledger is a privacy disaster, comparable only to the current fiat banking system and the credit cards, which also track everything you do. The state which can track everything you do eventually controls everything you are allowed to do.

Financial transactions should be fast; seconds at the most, fast enough to pay at the department store without holding up the line. Bitcoin transactions are slow. To quote CoinCentral, “a Bitcoin transaction generally needs 6 confirmations from miners before it’s processed. The average time it takes to mine a block is 10 minutes, so you would expect a transaction to take around an hour on average. However, the recent popularity boom of Bitcoin has caused congestion on the network. The average time for one confirmation has recently ranged anywhere from 30 minutes to over 16 hours in extreme cases.”

Waiting for hours or days for a transaction to clear is not acceptable, which makes Bitcoin unsuitable as an instrument of payment for goods and services. It’s acceptable as a high-risk investment paper.

So, basically, the only criteria of money that Bitcoin manages to satisfy are scarcity and acceptability, where scarcity was misunderstood by the creators and was thus implemented in such a way that it disqualifies Bitcoin from monetary applicability.

Undercurrents of doom

Some or all of you must be thinking that too many “unrelated” things are going on for it all to be either accidental or in fact unrelated.

There seems to be a clear message out there that this world is coming to an end, and everybody should prepare, get their shit together and be ready to leave at any time.

Also, there are things clearly going wrong with the world, making the status quo untenable. I will list the short and long term problems in no particular order.

The Western civilization is falling; the scourge of feminism produced a temporary increase in economic output at the price of doubling the workload per family at half the pay per breadwinner, and also reduced the birth rate to the lowest in the world, while the concept of universal human rights prevents the wealthy Western countries from shielding themselves from the influx of migrants from countries with high birth rates, who are essentially parasites unable to contribute anything of value to the West, and their only intent is to harvest the resources that are exposed due to the West’s ideological vulnerability. The ideological concepts of progressivism, of replacing the religious foundations of the West with secular ones by introducing the concept of “human rights”, brought the entire civilization to the point where this concept will either be recognized as fallacious and deadly and thus rejected, or the entire civilization will collapse from both internal and external pressures. One thing is certain: the men in the west will not offer their lives in defense of a feminist civilization that openly rejects their essence. The civilization will fall without any defense, and the “powerful and emancipated” feminist women will be bought and sold on the Muslim slave markets of the future Europe. When Islam conquers the West, it will be nothing but darkness and death until the end of time. There is no culture that became Islamic and then stopped being Islamic. The only way that happens is when the Muslims are militarily defeated and purged from a territory, but once a population contracts the mental disease of Islam, it cannot be cured. The same applies to other mental infections, such as Christianity or Communism. The Christian ethics, according to which the poor are inherently virtuous compared to the rich, refuse to die once planted, and were simply recycled by Communism. Once a population contracts Communism, it refuses to be cured, because it implicitly assumes to have a high moral ground. East Germany is a wonderful example. Similarly, once someone contracts Islam, some implicit assumptions about the nature of the relationship between human beings and the transcendental are basically impossible to remove, and those happen to be the most harmful ones, such as the assumption that God wants/demands human submission. Once that’s implicitly accepted, it’s game over for the human spirit.

The world is dying. The layout of the tectonic plates, as of some 65 MY ago, opened up the circumantarctic sea current which plays a role that can most accurately be described in thermodynamic terms as a method of pumping fluid through a heatsink, after first circulating it through all the heat exchangers. Every single time in the history of the planet when ocean could circulate freely around one of the poles, it ended up with a planetary glaciation, which ended only when the layout of the continents due to slow geological forces rearranged the land mass in such a way as to impede the Coriolis-driven free flow of sea water around the poles. It takes a while for the planet to cool down, and this time it took 65 MY, but a few MY ago the process accelerated so much that almost all the buffer gasses leeched out of the atmosphere and into the ocean, to the point where Milankovitch cycles actually started throwing the planet in and out of periods of glaciation. This is a fatal threat, because historically speaking glaciations are extinction level events for hominid species, and this Pleistocene glaciation cycle is only an overture to the runaway glaciation, where Milankovitch cycles are no longer sufficient to bring the planet out of glaciation, at which point the ice covers the entire surface of the planet, and stays there until the tectonic plates shift again to impede the circumantarctic watercooling pump. It’s quite ironic to see all the fuss about global warming on a planet that is on its death throes due to runaway cooling. The only thing that could actually save the planet is if the Andes were crushed and used to fill in the gap between Antarctica and South America. I’m not sure that the current trend of replenishing the buffer gasses with industrial output will have any permanent effect, because the actual cause of the problem is geological. It might turn back the clock and give the world a few more millions of years of borrowed time, and then again it might produce a large Dansgaard-Oeschger event that might actually accelerate the process of cooling. The thing is, nobody knows, because the climate models are just not good enough; too many thermodynamic buffers and accumulators, and the system is inherently chaotic. The long term prognosis is unchanged: unless by some miracle the increased CO2 output manages to stabilize the climate on the pre-Pleistocene levels, almost all life on the Earth’s crust will be extinct in the timeframe of a couple of millions of years. Humans will be extinct much sooner than that.

We are in a critical phase of the West where the perfect storm is brewing, the kind not seen since the collapse of the Roman Empire. America obtained total control of the global economy, and holds the world hostage with a combination of economy and technology. Those forces are straining and will inevitably collapse. I can’t see America going down into the night without a fight, and my analysis is that what we are seeing since the 2001 in the world are merely steps America is taking to make sure that the collapse goes down on their own terms, and that they are the ones set up to emerge as the leading power once again when the nuclear dust settles. Russia appears to have complete understanding of the situation and seems to be spreading this understanding among other powers, and their strategy is to not take the bait, buy time, prepare in all possible ways, and turn what America planned as a game of chicken into a bull fight, where the bull of America keeps charging and provoking conflict, and the matador of Russia skillfully evades, dodges and absorbs, until the bull tires out and is reduced to just standing there for the kill. America is doing its propaganda thing, but for the first time in history it’s not working, because you can’t convincingly portray someone as aggressive when he’s objectively trying to avoid conflict at all cost and you’re the one charging at him and poking at him for years, trying to provoke a retaliatory strike in vain. This game, however, will soon end, because American economy is on borrowed time since 2008. The people who kept it running for so long are incredibly smart, incredibly competent, and they have immense means at their disposal. The fact that they kept it up for so long, despite the terrible cost inflicted to America’s geostrategic position by the fact that Dollar was openly used as a weapon, is testimony to their competence. However, the others are not stupid either. If anything, the Russians are smarter, and the Chinese are not far behind either, especially since they are consulting with the Russians and coordinating strategic moves. It’s quite difficult to de-dollarize your economy and do it in such a way as not to provoke total confrontation with America before the process is done, but people doing it are very good at what they are doing. From what I can see, the experts on both sides are incredibly smart and they are not really making unforced errors in this complicated game of chess, but I don’t see many ways of it ending that don’t include a nuclear war. At one point, America will run out of time, and will be forced to initiate a conflict regardless of whether their psychological warfare against Russia and China was effective; they would prefer to play the role of a good guy defending the free world from the evil forces, but if that doesn’t work, they will still strike openly as a power-hungry empire that doesn’t want to go down quietly. The inherent arrogance of America makes this inevitable.

Society is at the point where the combination of increasingly totalitarian states and pervasive technological surveillance all but guarantees complete and permanent loss of personal freedoms, as well as the loss of ability to manifest forms of society that politically diverges from the form that is presently in power. Essentially, the West is turning into a form of Stalinist Soviet Union, but armed with cameras on every corner, and AI that looks through all those cameras, as well as those on the satellites and drones. People sense this somewhere, and while some rationalize and justify, and others murmur in protest, everybody understands that doing something about it will come at incredible personal cost. However, at a certain point everybody will rise up at once, as was always the case in the end of all totalitarian systems of the past. People who are in power today will end up like Nicolae and Elena Ceausescu. However, this is not inevitable, and it’s quite possible that everybody will live on like cows on farms – captive, controlled, comfortable and powerless to change anything. But they will proceed to like the trending things on Facebook and Twitter, thinking they are changing the world, and they will trade Bitcoin, thinking they are wealthy. People fear strong AI because they think the machines will end up ruling the world, but I think Frank Herbert was closer to the reality of what is to happen: it’s not the machines, but people in control of the machines, who will enslave you, and the stable end-results will be either the Brave New World, or a Butlerian Jihad. The lesson of Herbert’s Butlerian Jihad? “Thinking” machines are just something other people use to enslave you.

But there is something more important at play in the background, something that is actually important, and yet even if I told you what it was, which I in fact already have, nobody would take me seriously, so I won’t even bother. It’s not as if words or belief will affect the outcome.

Some thoughts

I’ve been thinking about several things that are difficult to categorize, so I’ll write about all of them at once.

Why smart people make mistakes, for instance people predicting collapse of the global Dollar-based economy for years already, and evidence appears to contradict their predictions. It’s quite simple, really. They understand the deep underlying reality of the situation, but they underestimate the significance of other factors, such as meddling and interventions of very powerful players who desperately try to at least postpone the breakdown, if not completely alter its form. It’s only logical, if you assume the prediction is correct. It then also follows that the people in power will see what’s going on, and they are not going to take it sitting down. They are smart, and they have huge means at their disposal, and they have absolutely nothing to lose. They will print tens of trillions of fake digital dollars that will buy out the dollar bonds and then annihilate both. They will print a hundred paper-gold bonds for each gold bar, and sell them quickly to induce panic, and then when people start selling the actual physical gold, buy it with the fake Dollars they printed out of thin air, and then justify the printing of those Dollars with the newly acquired gold backing. Print trillions of dollars but suppress the price of dollar-backed oil, among other things by faking the existence of supposedly huge shale-oil supplies which are in fact thin air. Cripple the rest of the world with artificial roadblocks infiltrated into the payment system so that everybody else is fighting an uphill battle compared with the American companies. Print huge amounts of fake money and infuse them into your own technological companies to give you the upper hand. Print huge amounts of fake money and invest them into equally fake companies just to get them an IPO and bloat the GDP, retroactively justifying the printed amount with GDP numbers. Emit huge amounts of cheap credit into the economy to keep it on life support, while making the rest of the world pay for it, and if someone objects, threaten them with sanctions and war.

Most smart economists understand that the foundations of the Dollar and the American economy itself are untenable, and yet they fail to understand the lengths to which the players who created this system will go to defend it. Also, they see that the collapse will be a great disaster, yet they fail to actually use this as a premise and think from the position of the people in power who see the same thing, but also have the mechanisms at their disposals to do the otherwise unthinkable things – create a war that will hide and transform the collapse, from the “emperor is naked” testimony of fraud and theft that is the basis of the modern America, into a completely different narrative, that of “evil enemies of democracy” who attack and subvert America at every angle, to the point where they caused the great economic collapse itself, at which point America had no choice but to retaliate with nuclear weapons, but alas, it incurred heavy casualties, and all this chaos and destruction is actually someone else’s fault.

I actually think everybody was right – the people who see the geostrategic situation and understand that it is precursory to nuclear war, the people who see the foundations of the Dollar economy and understand that it is untenable and collapse of the debt economy is inevitable, the people who sense unclear doom and prepare, the people who fear the technocratic surveillance state, the people who fear the collapse of the Western civilization and its moral and intellectual foundations. They are all right, and it’s all happening on the same vector. It’s just that they underestimate the people who are actually guiding the process.

They are not stupid, and regardless of what they are telling you, they themselves understand perfectly well what’s going on, they have excellent analysts, military strategists and economists at their disposal and when they make and implement plans, they are incredibly more far-reaching and layered than most people are willing to accept. Imagine what would be going on if I was in charge of this thing, and if I had the wealth and power of America at my disposal to implement everything. I would be playing at 20 chessboards at once, with hundreds of people as smart as myself delegated to specific tasks. If you think you would be able to see what I’m doing from the outside, or predict events based on some part of the pattern you’re perceiving, then you’re naïve beyond belief. I would cook up specific points of chaos in order to divert attention of all other players, play feints and counter-feints intended for obscuring the sight of their analysts, introduce dozens of legitimate issues they can’t ignore while not being sure which one is the real attack-vector, and I would have a perfectly calm mind while stirring up the fogs of war that increase other players’ emotional potential, making their thinking slower and more inert, more prone to distraction.

That’s why smart people make mistakes. They don’t understand the power and ferocity of the guiding intelligence of the enemy. Sure, it’s easy to say it’s naïve to perceive the economy in the state of deep manipulation for decades and pretend there’s nobody at the wheel, that it’s just instinctual trading, reflex of self-preservation of the bankers, greed and power, but it’s actually emotionally preferable to the recognition that it’s all the result of people smarter than yourself at the wheel, with all the power in the world at their disposal, and that most of the events that seem unrelated are actually intelligent moves, most likely aided by artificial intelligence which simulates moves and their likely effects for the players, so that they can pick the best strategy against the simulated rational self-serving opposition.

If you gave me a trillion dollars, that’s what I would do – have the game-theory experts design and supervise the acres of supercomputing technology running AI software, and have it running a very detailed simulation of the real world, displaying the probable responses of all the world powers, set up the scenario very similar to the actual state, and then run millions of various scenarios, until you map out those with the highest probability of you ending up on top. If you think they are simulating the climate, and not simulating this, with all the computer game technology being there for decades, where you can run a combination of Civilization, Sim City and Starcraft on computers the size of a smaller city, running tens of thousands of teraflops-level computation units in parallel, well, let’s say I’m not betting high by predicting this. The thing is, human emotional responses are easy to predict, and it gets easier the bigger the group, so it actually gets easier when you’re trying to work on a nation-level. You give the computer the option to tweak variables, and it will end up with something that will look very weird, disconnected, not at all like figures on the same chess board, the way computers come up with weird optical designs when you apply them to making lenses. However, when you actually grind that weirdly looking piece of glass into the aspheric shape recommended by the computer, you see that it actually works.

That’s my problem with the AI. The computers themselves are incredibly stupid, and are no danger. However, when you take those computers, with their enormous quantitative power of simulating trillions of outcomes and pruning the tree of options until you get something that’s useful, and give them to extremely smart people, who work for extremely evil people, you end up with a nightmare of incredible proportions.