The Complexity Trap

There's a lot of confusion when it comes to the role and significance of complexity. The biggest misconception is that complexity is a sign of progress. We are better off living in a modern society, full of complexities, as opposed to simpler but less affluent societies of the past. Many conclude from this that it is the complexity that added comforts and affluence to our lives.

However, it's not complexity that made modern societies preferable to past ones. It's the efficiencies achieved that did that. A great deal of progress is due to a removal of complexities. The internet being a good example of this.

We can now look things up on the web when we wonder about things. We save ourselves hours of time trying to find the right books in the library. Internet made life in this way less complex.

The complexity inherent in the internet technology is hidden from us, and that's a good thing because complexity is something we want as little of as possible. Complexity is a wasteful bi-product of progress, and should be treated as such.

This is why I'm enthusiastic about the internet, but skeptical to many of its applications. My pet hate is crypto-currencies, which are way more complex than the bare minimum required for wealth preservation.

There's no simpler way to store wealth than to own some physical gold. Hence, any derivative of this is inherently wasteful. Paper gold, ETFs, and future contracts may have their place. But they are more complex than the metal itself.

Fiat money is a step farther away from simplicity. It requires legal tender laws, taxation and central banking; systems that add nothing of value, but heaps of complexity.

Crypto is even worse. No-one understand it completely. There's no inherent need for it. It consumes energy. It cannot be held in our hands. It's a complete waste, yet people ascribe value to it, mainly due to their muddled understanding of complexity.

Complexity requires intelligence to be understood, so people think that complexity is a sign of intelligence. They may not understand the system before them. But they see the complexity of it, and they assume that this is due to some higher purpose.

This is an age old trick. Make a machine look complex and fancy, and people will believe it to have special powers. The con-artist can then get away with all sorts of claim, because only he is smart enough to fully understand the intricacies of his creation.

If sufficiently impressed, some will buy the story and the product, because that's the smart thing to do. Having bought into the scam, they talk highly of it. They admit to not understanding it fully. But they were smart enough to get in early. Never mind that there are far simpler alternatives to the product at hand. Complexity is a sign of progress.

This can in turn become a self fulfilling prophecy. The scam balloons into a bubble of massive proportions. Complexity really is a sign of progress! The more complex the better! Why not introduce Bitcoin futures and Bitcoin ETFs? Heck, why not make a lending platform like Celsius?

But complexity is in reality a waste product. It burns energy. It consumes resources. It muddles facts. It obscures truth. If nothing is added in the way of convenience and simplicity, complex solutions collapse.

The tower of Babel is a story about this. It was a stupid project from the start, and it collapsed. Nothing of value was created by the project. Once this was fully understood, people went their separate ways.

This is about to happen again. Once the true nature of complexity is understood, people will turn to simplicity for solutions, and they will find it in gold, productive land and capital goods capable of producing life necessities.

Tower of Babel

By Pieter Bruegel the Elder - Levels adjusted from File:Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder_-_The_Tower_of_Babel_(Vienna)_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg, originally from Google Art Project., Public Domain, Link

Zero Deaths from Monkeypox

Monkeypox is supposedly very dangerous. The mortality rate is about 10%. Yet, the current outbreak has seen zero deaths so far despite more than 1600 confirmed cases.

This is reminiscent of the virus scare of 2020, where people dropped dead in the streets in China but not in Europe.

Whatever the current Monkeypox outbreak is, it's not the deadly variant found in Africa. It's either a mild version of this disease, or some other disease altogether.

Monkeypox

By not listed - http://phil.cdc.gov (CDC's Public Health Image Library) Media ID #2329, Public Domain, Link

Plain Sailing

Having just sold my house in Norway back in 2017, I was faced with the task of choosing investment vehicles for my proceeds. This was in a time of fever pitch enthusiasm for Bitcoin, and I was everywhere advised to put at least some money into this. However, I chose to do the following instead:

1. Pay down all debt, including my wife's debt
2. Put aside enough cash for 2 years of consumption 
3. Put the rest in gold

Had I chosen Bitcoin instead of gold, I would have been just as well off in monetary terms as I am with my gold at the moment. It can therefore be argued that my choice has made no difference. However, this is not true. My choice has been the better one by far. The reason for this is that it matters a lot how we get from one point to another.

Our goal is to preserve and grow our wealth, and wealth is not strictly monetary. Wealth is just as much about how we feel about things. Wealthy individuals are relaxed and secure, and they attain this mental stability from the stability of their investments.

Had I chosen Bitcoin instead of gold, I would have had to endure a 60% drop relative to gold, followed by a 2000% jump, and a subsequent drop of 60%. The drop would have made me depressed. The jump would have made me euphoric, and the recent drop would have again thrown me into a depression. That's one hell of an emotional rollercoaster.

When we compare this to gold, we see that I have in fact been far more wealthy with my gold than what I would have been with Bitcoin. I have lost no sleep to depression, nor euphoria. I check the price of gold every now and again, but never with dread or excitement. Up days give me a kick. Down days are disappointing. But I'm never thrown off balance. No-one needs to be a Zen master to retain their cool when looking at gold charts.

Some may argue that I've missed out on a lot of trading opportunities. But that's missing the point. Traders are constantly looking at charts while actively controlling their emotions. It's stressful and uncomfortable. It's also time consuming. By my definition of wealth, traders are poor.

I spend virtually no time looking at charts, and I don't need to actively control my emotions. I spend my days doing stuff I like, and I hardly ever worry about anything. I attain my Zen from the stability and security inherent in my investment portfolio. By my definition of wealth, I'm rich.

The quickest way to riches is not through trading, but through sensible allocations. Done correctly, a sense of wealth takes hold of us early, long before we are rich in monetary terms. We attain our Zen, and our wealth increases, both emotionally and monetarily.

Wax plant

Keeping an Eye on Monkeypox

Monkeypox isn't getting much attention at the moment. That's either because this month is Pride month, or because the disease isn't spreading. However, a quick look at the below chart tells us that the disease is still spreading, and therefore a potential threat.

The media silence is either due to misplaced reverence towards a lifestyle that spreads Monkeypox, or part of a deliberate effort to propel the spread out of the confines of homosexual men and into the general public.

A spread beyond the confines of hardcore Pride people comes with obvious benefits to pharmaceutical companies. Millions of dollars can be made if Monkeypox vaccines can be mandated onto the population, so it's not unthinkable that this is the motive.

But we should not get too hung up in possible motives. Let's instead analyze the chart so that we'll know which way things are likely to go.

First thing to look for is whether the curve is exponential or not. We see that there were 100 cases on May 20, and more than 200 cases on May 25. May 30 saw more than 400 cases. June 4 saw more than 800 cases.

That's an exponential growth, indicating that the spread is out of control. However, June 9 did not reach 1600 cases. The number came in at about 1300. That's a slow down in the spread.

Note that the chart is cumulative. The numbers will never go down. The end of the outbreak will be reflected in the chart as a flat line. A drop in new cases will show up as a slower growth. The slow down may in other words signal that the peak is already in.

It remains to be seen if Pride month will revive the exponential growth in numbers. But current numbers are cause for optimism. The population has not been sufficiently weakened for the disease to spread beyond the most vulnerable among us. 

Monkeypox, cumulative cases, linear plot

By Edouard Mathieu, Saloni Dattani, Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser (2022) - "Monkeypox". Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: https://ourworldindata.org/monkeypox [Online Resource] - https://ourworldindata.org/monkeypox, CC BY 4.0, Link

Renewed Interest in Sudden Adult Death Syndrome

I first wrote about Sudden Adult Death Syndrome back in September 2021, and I have since monitored the phrase on Google trends. My suspicion was back then that we would see the phrase spring into the public consciousness at some later time. That would fit the play book of a psyop, where scary stories are first mentioned quietly, and subsequently pronounced loudly nine to fifteen months later.

The goal of any psyop is to make the target audience scared and insecure, and this can be achieved by first playing down a story and subsequently making it into a big deal. The target audience is in this manner programmed to be forever weary of rumors and anxious as to their relevance. Mass hysteria can thus be created.

As to the reality of SADS, we can find clues in Wikipedia's data on notable deaths.

Notable deaths according to Wikipedia

We see an elevated death rate among young people in May and June of 2021. That's twelve months ago, and the % rate has gone down ever since. Why then was the first mention of this syndrome in September, and why has the story reappeared now? Above all, why is the reader treated as an idiot, incapable of making the connection between government policies and the increase?

We are dealing with old news of little value to anyone. Its only purpose is to scare, bewilder and confuse.

Similarly, we have Monkeypox which appeared first in news stories a year ago, only to reemerge as news last month. However, someone must have forgotten about Pride month. Monkeypox spreads among people living the Pride lifestyle, and that doesn't jive well with Pride month. The story is therefore laid silent for a few weeks to let the Pride crowd enjoy their raves and discos with no worries.

Once Pride month is over, expect renewed focus on Monkeypox. Until then, we can all go out and rave as much as we want.

Three wise monkeys

By Kalyan Shah - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link

Structural Misogyny in the NHS

The NHS in England has inadvertently revealed itself to be a misogynist organization, eager to belittle women to the point of hardly mentioning them at all. This becomes clear when we compare the language used to describe diseases unique to either men or women.

Their web pages on ovarian cancer use the word women a total of 3 times. They also mention trans persons as people who can get this type of cancer. However, their pages on prostate cancer makes no mention of trans people, and they use the word men no less than 18 times.

The underlying message is clear. Women are not to be seen, heard or mentioned. Men, on the other hand, are treated as complete human beings.

Logo of the NHS used in England

By The original uploader was F at English Wikipedia. - See NHS identity guidelines, Public Domain, Link

Putin's Threat

Ukraine has lost some 20% of its territory to the Russians, and the response by the West has been to send the Ukrainians more advanced weapons with longer range. However, the West has refrained from sending weapons with long enough range to reach targets well inside Russia.

Weapons currently sent to the Ukrainians can hit targets immediately inside Russia, but not much beyond that. The West is escalating the fighting, but only gradually so not to provoke Putin to the point of acting on his threat to hit targets outside of Ukraine.

Putin is known to be a man of his words. When he says that something will happen, it usually does happen. So when he said that decision making centers beyond Kiev will be targeted if there are attacks on Russian soil, he likely meant it. But what targets were Putin having in mind? How and where could Putin strike beyond Kiev without risking an all out war with the West?

The answers to these questions may be found in the way the West has targeted Russian decision making centers. Western intelligence has been fed to the Ukrainians, and used to kill top ranking Russian officers. Could it be that the Russians have the intelligence to respond in kind, but the good sense to refrain from this kind of tactic?

It would be foolish of Putin to order an attack on a big target inside the US, so I doubt that there will be a bomb dropped on the Pentagon, even if a Russian sub could do such a thing. NATO's headquarters in Brussels are similarly unlikely to be hit.

The targets need to be of a kind that don't provoke popular support for a direct confrontation with Russia. They must either be so anonymous that no-one cares, or so unpopular that no-one objects.

Furthermore, attacks must be done in such a way that they're either impossible to trace back to Russia, or so well announced in advance that no-one is surprised when they happen. We're looking at car accidents that kill high ranking NATO officers, or attacks so well announced that no-one gets hurt.

In the case of well announced attacks, they need to be done with such force and precision that the inspire awe and fear. The public response should ideally put pressure on politicians to set an end to the fighting in Ukraine.

There is no lack of unpopular and/or anonymous officers for the Russians to target. However, we have no idea whether the Russians have the means to take them out on an individual basis. But if they can do this, Putin may at some point name the person he has in mind, and then follow up with a targeted assassination. If so, the person must not be too famous, or Putin himself will be targeted. It's better to go for someone that hardly anyone has heard of.

Mark Esper with Jens Stoltenberg

By U.S. Secretary of Defense - 200212-D-AP390-6107, CC BY 2.0, Link