I suspect the CIA requested details of my admittedly hard to fully see idea about data compression as a "law of the excluded middle" move.

The idea is supposed to be: Either Philip will look less talented and inconsistent about precision, and his influence will decrease, or he will look correct, and his anti-Russian influence and ability to scarily (to Russia) sell diff eq to another country will increase.

My guess is, the Russians understand the reluctance of Western powers to buy my diff eq and what motivates it better than either I or the Western powers themselves do. Quite possibly, suddenly ethics-brand-wise weakened Western power official were suddenly and stealthily influenced by the Russians to be unlikely to ever want to buy it for some reason. Perhaps drugs companies would want it more; perhaps there is a secret reason, maybe related to university relations or "the system for how research is supposed to be done and acquired," why most firms wouldn't want to acquire the technology. Maybe it's expected that I would one day patent something quite lucrative, and then the diff eq idea would be published for all to see. Another concern is that without the release of my "process use and source code cloaking" techniques, the use of diff eq ideas would likely yield too much information about the use of the equations; in particular, even if the process were cloaked, perhaps certain variables in equations could be observed, leading Russian observers to being able to steal data about many important equation solutions simply by watching purchased American/Isareli/French/etc. tech in action.

So I'm thinking that my correct disclosure of the tech damages the Western powers, since it shows that I have the tech and the US still doesn't want it. That probably changes the US demand curve for purchasing ideas like this, and even the supply curve, in the sense that I think less tech innovation will be supplied to the US, unrelenting Democrat optimism aside.

In short, I think it makes my criticisms more potent--even though I shouldn't have to be a STEM whiz to be taken seriously, and all human trafficking victims should be listened to carefully and respected--and it doesn't really increase the odds of my diff eq idea being purchased. I suspect it never will be, based on some convention, and so it only hurts the Ukrainian/US position based on opposition to treating me with respect.

In general, it's pleasing to hear that the Ukrainians are doing better than expected on level. It messes with my sense of reality, a little bit; I really didn't expect that and I don't like feeling like my sense of the world is incorrect. There could be still be bad surprises to come from Russia.

I'm not sure what exactly it is that I don't understand about Russia or its mentality. Maybe what will happen is that American sanctions on Russia have "worked very well," in a sense, because the American government targeted certain unappealing characteristics of Russia that are also possessed by the American government, though perhaps less overtly, since there are lots of cover-ups in the US. Perhaps the "American Mr. Market" doesn't know about the misdeeds of the US, and American voters hold America not responsible for the similarities to the Russian system and Russian misdeeds. That would seem to suggest that maybe the American sanctions will damage the Russians *and* the Western powers that quietly, but not silently, support many of the same evil things that the Russians do.

I don't claim certainty, but if my understanding of the outcome of the war in Ukraine is wrong--perhaps because I don't get Russian economics too well--then I suspect that the sanctions will damage the West economically, too. Maybe we'll recover from that well; maybe I'm wrong.

In case this is going to be held up as a victory for Biden that will save the Democrats in 2022, I still feel very confident, based on things I understand better, than Biden and the Democrats will not do well in the 2022 or 2024 elections. Being stupid and causing a war that the Biden/Pelosi types surprisingly don't lose more than expected--they might score a blow against Putin and save Ukraine, even having falsely predicted that Putin wouldn't invade--they have still failed at literally everything else they've done, and will surely fail to convince voters that Republican criticisms of everything else they've done wrong should take a backseat to the one single thing Biden may have wound up doing right: not losing Ukraine completely to the Russians, in spite of allowing a huge and destructive invasion that will really hurt the Ukrainian economy.

I don't know if my ideas helped Ukraine; maybe my insights helped the Ukrainians. If so, that's good, although I will likely not ever like VZ, the apparent human-trafficking supporter.

-Philip White

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:46:47 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> I suspect the CIA requested details of my admittedly hard to fully see idea about data compression as a "law of the excluded middle" move.
>
> The idea is supposed to be: Either Philip will look less talented and inconsistent about precision, and his influence will decrease, or he will look correct, and his anti-Russian influence and ability to scarily (to Russia) sell diff eq to another country will increase.
>
> My guess is, the Russians understand the reluctance of Western powers to buy my diff eq and what motivates it better than either I or the Western powers themselves do. Quite possibly, suddenly ethics-brand-wise weakened Western power official were suddenly and stealthily influenced by the Russians to be unlikely to ever want to buy it for some reason. Perhaps drugs companies would want it more; perhaps there is a secret reason, maybe related to university relations or "the system for how research is supposed to be done and acquired," why most firms wouldn't want to acquire the technology. Maybe it's expected that I would one day patent something quite lucrative, and then the diff eq idea would be published for all to see. Another concern is that without the release of my "process use and source code cloaking" techniques, the use of diff eq ideas would likely yield too much information about the use of the equations; in particular, even if the process were cloaked, perhaps certain variables in equations could be observed, leading Russian observers to being able to steal data about many important equation solutions simply by watching purchased American/Isareli/French/etc. tech in action.
>
> So I'm thinking that my correct disclosure of the tech damages the Western powers, since it shows that I have the tech and the US still doesn't want it. That probably changes the US demand curve for purchasing ideas like this, and even the supply curve, in the sense that I think less tech innovation will be supplied to the US, unrelenting Democrat optimism aside.
>
> In short, I think it makes my criticisms more potent--even though I shouldn't have to be a STEM whiz to be taken seriously, and all human trafficking victims should be listened to carefully and respected--and it doesn't really increase the odds of my diff eq idea being purchased. I suspect it never will be, based on some convention, and so it only hurts the Ukrainian/US position based on opposition to treating me with respect.
>
> In general, it's pleasing to hear that the Ukrainians are doing better than expected on level. It messes with my sense of reality, a little bit; I really didn't expect that and I don't like feeling like my sense of the world is incorrect. There could be still be bad surprises to come from Russia.
>
> I'm not sure what exactly it is that I don't understand about Russia or its mentality. Maybe what will happen is that American sanctions on Russia have "worked very well," in a sense, because the American government targeted certain unappealing characteristics of Russia that are also possessed by the American government, though perhaps less overtly, since there are lots of cover-ups in the US. Perhaps the "American Mr. Market" doesn't know about the misdeeds of the US, and American voters hold America not responsible for the similarities to the Russian system and Russian misdeeds. That would seem to suggest that maybe the American sanctions will damage the Russians *and* the Western powers that quietly, but not silently, support many of the same evil things that the Russians do.
>
> I don't claim certainty, but if my understanding of the outcome of the war in Ukraine is wrong--perhaps because I don't get Russian economics too well--then I suspect that the sanctions will damage the West economically, too. Maybe we'll recover from that well; maybe I'm wrong.
>
> In case this is going to be held up as a victory for Biden that will save the Democrats in 2022, I still feel very confident, based on things I understand better, than Biden and the Democrats will not do well in the 2022 or 2024 elections. Being stupid and causing a war that the Biden/Pelosi types surprisingly don't lose more than expected--they might score a blow against Putin and save Ukraine, even having falsely predicted that Putin wouldn't invade--they have still failed at literally everything else they've done, and will surely fail to convince voters that Republican criticisms of everything else they've done wrong should take a backseat to the one single thing Biden may have wound up doing right: not losing Ukraine completely to the Russians, in spite of allowing a huge and destructive invasion that will really hurt the Ukrainian economy.
>
> I don't know if my ideas helped Ukraine; maybe my insights helped the Ukrainians. If so, that's good, although I will likely not ever like VZ, the apparent human-trafficking supporter.
>
> -Philip White

There are inserted typos in what I wrote above.

Maybe the analysis is that I would refuse to sell the tech, since it would likely go to the same US organization that used diff eq to torture me. Since any firm or government agency would likely refuse to acknowledge that I was hurt with more primitive versions of this very technology, and refuse to guarantee that I wouldn't be hurt with the tech again, perhaps it is predicted that I, upon realizing this--I just of it just now--would probably never sell the tech anyone.

If the Russian government is more motivated by economics than I had realized, and less willing to accept sanctions, then maybe the Russians will lose.

A big warning, again, which is intended to broadcast something the Russians have surely already carefully contemplated: The Russians have Chernobyl, as I mentioned, and since the Russians look "quite possibly unvictorious," there is going to be a big demand within the "Russian leadership economy," controlled/atypical/autocratic as it may be, to turn that around. I believe that the top leaders like Putin want to look "tough and undefeatable" about 100 times more urgently than even Nancy Pelosi. It should be very watched out for that a losing Russian military force might cause a mysterious detonation at Chernobyl, and deny adamantly that it was them and cover up all evidence.

That could create a "nobody really wins" situation and a global economic disaster that sucks in a lot of resources to try to mend the damage.

-Philip White

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:59:41 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:46:47 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > I suspect the CIA requested details of my admittedly hard to fully see idea about data compression as a "law of the excluded middle" move.
> >
> > The idea is supposed to be: Either Philip will look less talented and inconsistent about precision, and his influence will decrease, or he will look correct, and his anti-Russian influence and ability to scarily (to Russia) sell diff eq to another country will increase.
> >
> > My guess is, the Russians understand the reluctance of Western powers to buy my diff eq and what motivates it better than either I or the Western powers themselves do. Quite possibly, suddenly ethics-brand-wise weakened Western power official were suddenly and stealthily influenced by the Russians to be unlikely to ever want to buy it for some reason. Perhaps drugs companies would want it more; perhaps there is a secret reason, maybe related to university relations or "the system for how research is supposed to be done and acquired," why most firms wouldn't want to acquire the technology. Maybe it's expected that I would one day patent something quite lucrative, and then the diff eq idea would be published for all to see. Another concern is that without the release of my "process use and source code cloaking" techniques, the use of diff eq ideas would likely yield too much information about the use of the equations; in particular, even if the process were cloaked, perhaps certain variables in equations could be observed, leading Russian observers to being able to steal data about many important equation solutions simply by watching purchased American/Isareli/French/etc. tech in action.
> >
> > So I'm thinking that my correct disclosure of the tech damages the Western powers, since it shows that I have the tech and the US still doesn't want it. That probably changes the US demand curve for purchasing ideas like this, and even the supply curve, in the sense that I think less tech innovation will be supplied to the US, unrelenting Democrat optimism aside.
> >
> > In short, I think it makes my criticisms more potent--even though I shouldn't have to be a STEM whiz to be taken seriously, and all human trafficking victims should be listened to carefully and respected--and it doesn't really increase the odds of my diff eq idea being purchased. I suspect it never will be, based on some convention, and so it only hurts the Ukrainian/US position based on opposition to treating me with respect.
> >
> > In general, it's pleasing to hear that the Ukrainians are doing better than expected on level. It messes with my sense of reality, a little bit; I really didn't expect that and I don't like feeling like my sense of the world is incorrect. There could be still be bad surprises to come from Russia..
> >
> > I'm not sure what exactly it is that I don't understand about Russia or its mentality. Maybe what will happen is that American sanctions on Russia have "worked very well," in a sense, because the American government targeted certain unappealing characteristics of Russia that are also possessed by the American government, though perhaps less overtly, since there are lots of cover-ups in the US. Perhaps the "American Mr. Market" doesn't know about the misdeeds of the US, and American voters hold America not responsible for the similarities to the Russian system and Russian misdeeds. That would seem to suggest that maybe the American sanctions will damage the Russians *and* the Western powers that quietly, but not silently, support many of the same evil things that the Russians do.
> >
> > I don't claim certainty, but if my understanding of the outcome of the war in Ukraine is wrong--perhaps because I don't get Russian economics too well--then I suspect that the sanctions will damage the West economically, too. Maybe we'll recover from that well; maybe I'm wrong.
> >
> > In case this is going to be held up as a victory for Biden that will save the Democrats in 2022, I still feel very confident, based on things I understand better, than Biden and the Democrats will not do well in the 2022 or 2024 elections. Being stupid and causing a war that the Biden/Pelosi types surprisingly don't lose more than expected--they might score a blow against Putin and save Ukraine, even having falsely predicted that Putin wouldn't invade--they have still failed at literally everything else they've done, and will surely fail to convince voters that Republican criticisms of everything else they've done wrong should take a backseat to the one single thing Biden may have wound up doing right: not losing Ukraine completely to the Russians, in spite of allowing a huge and destructive invasion that will really hurt the Ukrainian economy.
> >
> > I don't know if my ideas helped Ukraine; maybe my insights helped the Ukrainians. If so, that's good, although I will likely not ever like VZ, the apparent human-trafficking supporter.
> >
> > -Philip White
> There are inserted typos in what I wrote above.
>
> Maybe the analysis is that I would refuse to sell the tech, since it would likely go to the same US organization that used diff eq to torture me. Since any firm or government agency would likely refuse to acknowledge that I was hurt with more primitive versions of this very technology, and refuse to guarantee that I wouldn't be hurt with the tech again, perhaps it is predicted that I, upon realizing this--I just of it just now--would probably never sell the tech anyone.
>
> If the Russian government is more motivated by economics than I had realized, and less willing to accept sanctions, then maybe the Russians will lose.
>
> A big warning, again, which is intended to broadcast something the Russians have surely already carefully contemplated: The Russians have Chernobyl, as I mentioned, and since the Russians look "quite possibly unvictorious," there is going to be a big demand within the "Russian leadership economy," controlled/atypical/autocratic as it may be, to turn that around. I believe that the top leaders like Putin want to look "tough and undefeatable" about 100 times more urgently than even Nancy Pelosi. It should be very watched out for that a losing Russian military force might cause a mysterious detonation at Chernobyl, and deny adamantly that it was them and cover up all evidence.
>
> That could create a "nobody really wins" situation and a global economic disaster that sucks in a lot of resources to try to mend the damage.
>
> -Philip White

Perhaps the obvious point I didn't think of how to state until just now is: You are not going to "tame" Vladimir Putin and other Russian leaders, like they are dogs or lions, any more than I can "tame" Joe Biden or Donald Trump.

There are two ways to stop these guys, short of waiting for them to die:

- start a violent war in which the top leadership and their backers are physically driven from the seat of power, killed/incapacitated, or captured; destroy the mechanism of systemic power
- change the system economically; eliminate the demand for the current style of Russian leadership and offer a better alternative; educate, persuade, replace; make the mechanism of systemic power unwanted by those that have backed it

Even if Putin and the Russians are defeated in this conflict completely, and Chernobyl is safe, that will not lead to a "Putin 3.0 -- Extremely Mousy Version." The American belief in charm and psychological tricks does nothing compared to the effectiveness of true long-term economics, that gives Russian citizens, who number many and have many resources that cannot just be deleted right now, something to be happy with, perhaps along with a justice system that holds bad guys in the system accountable. Torturing poor people and productive people and unfortunate/unsupported people within an economic system doesn't make that system "calm" or "contained" or "easier to deal with"...it mainly is agitating, leading to more conflict anger from within the system, not less.

I don't think that should be controversial; I don't see anything wrong with the perspective I wrote above.

-Philip White

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 3:11:04 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:59:41 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:46:47 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > > I suspect the CIA requested details of my admittedly hard to fully see idea about data compression as a "law of the excluded middle" move.
> > >
> > > The idea is supposed to be: Either Philip will look less talented and inconsistent about precision, and his influence will decrease, or he will look correct, and his anti-Russian influence and ability to scarily (to Russia) sell diff eq to another country will increase.
> > >
> > > My guess is, the Russians understand the reluctance of Western powers to buy my diff eq and what motivates it better than either I or the Western powers themselves do. Quite possibly, suddenly ethics-brand-wise weakened Western power official were suddenly and stealthily influenced by the Russians to be unlikely to ever want to buy it for some reason. Perhaps drugs companies would want it more; perhaps there is a secret reason, maybe related to university relations or "the system for how research is supposed to be done and acquired," why most firms wouldn't want to acquire the technology.. Maybe it's expected that I would one day patent something quite lucrative, and then the diff eq idea would be published for all to see. Another concern is that without the release of my "process use and source code cloaking" techniques, the use of diff eq ideas would likely yield too much information about the use of the equations; in particular, even if the process were cloaked, perhaps certain variables in equations could be observed, leading Russian observers to being able to steal data about many important equation solutions simply by watching purchased American/Isareli/French/etc. tech in action.
> > >
> > > So I'm thinking that my correct disclosure of the tech damages the Western powers, since it shows that I have the tech and the US still doesn't want it. That probably changes the US demand curve for purchasing ideas like this, and even the supply curve, in the sense that I think less tech innovation will be supplied to the US, unrelenting Democrat optimism aside.
> > >
> > > In short, I think it makes my criticisms more potent--even though I shouldn't have to be a STEM whiz to be taken seriously, and all human trafficking victims should be listened to carefully and respected--and it doesn't really increase the odds of my diff eq idea being purchased. I suspect it never will be, based on some convention, and so it only hurts the Ukrainian/US position based on opposition to treating me with respect.
> > >
> > > In general, it's pleasing to hear that the Ukrainians are doing better than expected on level. It messes with my sense of reality, a little bit; I really didn't expect that and I don't like feeling like my sense of the world is incorrect. There could be still be bad surprises to come from Russia.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what exactly it is that I don't understand about Russia or its mentality. Maybe what will happen is that American sanctions on Russia have "worked very well," in a sense, because the American government targeted certain unappealing characteristics of Russia that are also possessed by the American government, though perhaps less overtly, since there are lots of cover-ups in the US. Perhaps the "American Mr. Market" doesn't know about the misdeeds of the US, and American voters hold America not responsible for the similarities to the Russian system and Russian misdeeds. That would seem to suggest that maybe the American sanctions will damage the Russians *and* the Western powers that quietly, but not silently, support many of the same evil things that the Russians do.
> > >
> > > I don't claim certainty, but if my understanding of the outcome of the war in Ukraine is wrong--perhaps because I don't get Russian economics too well--then I suspect that the sanctions will damage the West economically, too. Maybe we'll recover from that well; maybe I'm wrong.
> > >
> > > In case this is going to be held up as a victory for Biden that will save the Democrats in 2022, I still feel very confident, based on things I understand better, than Biden and the Democrats will not do well in the 2022 or 2024 elections. Being stupid and causing a war that the Biden/Pelosi types surprisingly don't lose more than expected--they might score a blow against Putin and save Ukraine, even having falsely predicted that Putin wouldn't invade--they have still failed at literally everything else they've done, and will surely fail to convince voters that Republican criticisms of everything else they've done wrong should take a backseat to the one single thing Biden may have wound up doing right: not losing Ukraine completely to the Russians, in spite of allowing a huge and destructive invasion that will really hurt the Ukrainian economy.
> > >
> > > I don't know if my ideas helped Ukraine; maybe my insights helped the Ukrainians. If so, that's good, although I will likely not ever like VZ, the apparent human-trafficking supporter.
> > >
> > > -Philip White
> > There are inserted typos in what I wrote above.
> >
> > Maybe the analysis is that I would refuse to sell the tech, since it would likely go to the same US organization that used diff eq to torture me. Since any firm or government agency would likely refuse to acknowledge that I was hurt with more primitive versions of this very technology, and refuse to guarantee that I wouldn't be hurt with the tech again, perhaps it is predicted that I, upon realizing this--I just of it just now--would probably never sell the tech anyone.
> >
> > If the Russian government is more motivated by economics than I had realized, and less willing to accept sanctions, then maybe the Russians will lose.
> >
> > A big warning, again, which is intended to broadcast something the Russians have surely already carefully contemplated: The Russians have Chernobyl, as I mentioned, and since the Russians look "quite possibly unvictorious," there is going to be a big demand within the "Russian leadership economy," controlled/atypical/autocratic as it may be, to turn that around. I believe that the top leaders like Putin want to look "tough and undefeatable" about 100 times more urgently than even Nancy Pelosi. It should be very watched out for that a losing Russian military force might cause a mysterious detonation at Chernobyl, and deny adamantly that it was them and cover up all evidence.
> >
> > That could create a "nobody really wins" situation and a global economic disaster that sucks in a lot of resources to try to mend the damage.
> >
> > -Philip White
> Perhaps the obvious point I didn't think of how to state until just now is: You are not going to "tame" Vladimir Putin and other Russian leaders, like they are dogs or lions, any more than I can "tame" Joe Biden or Donald Trump.
>
> There are two ways to stop these guys, short of waiting for them to die:
>
> - start a violent war in which the top leadership and their backers are physically driven from the seat of power, killed/incapacitated, or captured; destroy the mechanism of systemic power
> - change the system economically; eliminate the demand for the current style of Russian leadership and offer a better alternative; educate, persuade, replace; make the mechanism of systemic power unwanted by those that have backed it
>
> Even if Putin and the Russians are defeated in this conflict completely, and Chernobyl is safe, that will not lead to a "Putin 3.0 -- Extremely Mousy Version." The American belief in charm and psychological tricks does nothing compared to the effectiveness of true long-term economics, that gives Russian citizens, who number many and have many resources that cannot just be deleted right now, something to be happy with, perhaps along with a justice system that holds bad guys in the system accountable. Torturing poor people and productive people and unfortunate/unsupported people within an economic system doesn't make that system "calm" or "contained" or "easier to deal with"...it mainly is agitating, leading to more conflict anger from within the system, not less.
>
> I don't think that should be controversial; I don't see anything wrong with the perspective I wrote above.
>
> -Philip White

https://www.yahoo.com/news/putin-own-soldiers-refusing-fight-084141253.html

Maybe my mental picture of "Russian soldiers being very willing to die for their families' finances" was incorrect; it did sound like something out of a novel to me, but I didn't see any other reason why anyone would want to be a Russian soldier during wartime.

Maybe it's just about the salary; a Russian soldier would think the money is good, the work isn't impossibly difficult, and the danger is low.

Anyway, if that was my mistake, then I would feel less weird about it...maybe some of my thoughts, including about economics and "getting the personified economy to help" were useful. If it's "Russian military morale" that was impacted, then I didn't think of that...I see military action and capability in terms of GDP and equipment, and maybe that neglects the human side of military interaction. Obviously, I've never served a day in the US military.