Heterarchy might be an interesting way to relate some things but as a quality it is completely subservient to paradigms.

So you can force the concept of heterarchy to be meaningful, or you can force it to be meaningless.

It might be ,revolutionary' for a moment but it's not a touchstone.

The problem here is that the Crumley quote states the human brain is "not ordered hierarchically". This dogma doesn't fetch. It's like the chicken/egg or fate/free will argument. You can't just 'win' such arguments by saying "therefore I win".

Some aspects of the brain, of thought etc are hierarchical, some are not.

It would be reasonable to just put the last quote about 'summary offenses' in plain language rather than compounding the unarguable offence of 'sowing confusion'.

Political laws, artificial laws, are created by individuals, and do not really reflect a broader culture.

If I have enough guns or money I can make a law that says grapes have to be eaten 3 times a day.

When individuals make 'laws', the underlying motive, almost always hidden, is to copy nature. It fails. Certainly everything reflects something and a person chooses which reflections to respect.

You are not distinguishing between natural and artificial law.

Artificial, political law in an element of artifice, culture. It expires.

Natural law is an element of nature. It grows.

I don't understand exactly your point. A lizard eats a fly. When the lizard dies a lot of flies eat it.

Nature is fair ultimately.

If you are referring to levels of awareness, saying that predation is a lower act than some other, then yes you are right. But a person can use their own values to decide which predations will survive. It is my belief, and my actions reflect this, that natural predation among animals evolves and is justified ultimately.

The predation of artificial laws though serves only as a boundary that has to be watched. Meaning if someone wants to create artificial laws and use force to oblige others to respect them, those laws and their enforcers must be held to a reasonable standard.

'Law enforcement' is not a natural occupation. You have to contort to find an archetypal law enforcer. It is something that did not exist in humanity's past and will not exist in humanity's future. Gangs have always existed though.

The part about drilling out the lock is recited every time a person rents a safe deposit box but it is silly. Safe deposit locks are far simpler than auto ignition locks and can be picked in a few seconds by an amateur. The security is in the fact that amateurs do not have easy access to the vault.

There is no doubt that some one was in the safe deposit box between the time I closed it and the next time I accessed it. There is no doubt. I'm emphasizing that. There is no doubt.

One hard drive that was stored there worked fine when I put it there. When I retrieved it, it no longer worked. It is possibly a coincidence. Maybe it broke from some other cause. But it is unlikely.

Of course law enforcers making 100k plus per year do not steal small amounts of altcoin to supplement their income. No argument there.

But in the United States, harassing and intimidating people who don't show respect for 'law enforcers' is the norm now. At every level, but most notably at the federal level, that has become the signature of 'law enforcement'.

Of course cops who raid safety boxes have to provide some identification to prove they are part of the right gang. The only thing that has changed in recent years is that now the bank officers can be obliged to keep the violation secret. The mafia has taken over.

As to the cloud, sure that's an option if you have a good encryption program.

Natural law adapts to its subjects.

A fly can be eaten by a lizard and later the flies descendants will return the favor.

In practical terms though I just mean that the gangster scum who hide in government mobs and terrorize the vulnerable are at the end of their usefulness to nature. A puff of wind and they dissolve. They are losing their power.

Sounds like 'you' play the same game as 'them', but maybe with fairer ethics. Still, it's not for me. As far as I'm concerned there is natural law, and then there are pretenders, like government wonkmeisters. My money is on the right horse.

America, like most countries, is not really interested in defending its citizens. Rather the focus is determined by the ruling clique. If it were in the interests of America, or most other countries, to grind its citizens into sausage and feed them to wolverines then that would happen.

Nationalism is a failed attempt to extend family ties. It benefits only those smart enough to see its usefulness and yet immoral enough to want to profit from it.

The only fair trustable way is to base it on a number that does not exist yet. For example there might be some astronomical phenomenon, say sunspots, that produce a number to many decimal places and which can be measured by any individual but are not predictable as yet.

So you might say "the ten digits closest to and higher than the ten digits following the decimal on x measure of sunspot activity on y date".

Actually, tech has reached a point where individuals can wield more power than organized militaries, so there is no reason to submit even to a benevolent despot. My post was meant more as a courtesy, a warning.


Several years ago, if you googled "secret sections of the patriot act" you would find a wealth of information. Today nothing. Unfortunately, in the United States now there are secret courts dealing with supposed security issues that are authorized to do all manner of things.


There are only two keys issued and I have both. There are no co authorized parties on the box. My signature could not be easily forged in this case, for reasons, and a person is required to sign in to open a safe deposit box. A record is supposed to be kept of all access times.  Security is actually adequate on the bank side but they have little choice but to submit when clowns with badges threaten them.

I am engaged in no illegal activities and have nothing illegal and the people involved know that. The harassment is because, as I mentioned earlier, I have said to them the same kinds of things they have said to me, i. e., threats. The difference is they attacked me after they threatened me. There is no question that this was not done by any individual in a bank. It was done by incompetent arrogant predators with badges.

I have a fairly small amount of cryptocurrency, but it is a large percentage of my total assets. I had put all of my encrypted wallets on disks and drives and put them in a safe deposit box. The last time I went to the box it was clear before I even finished opening the interior box that someone had been in it.

I never got any notice from the bank nor anyone else that some search had been conducted. I do have a minor history of saying the same things to police that they have said to me. This has resulted in a ridiculous amount of stalking behavior by police, but this with the safe deposit box is more serious.

One hard drive worth more than $100 was broken. I now have to go through the process of cleaning out the wallets and sending the balances to new ones. This will cost a lot of time and effort.

Do I have any recourse? I am in the United States and understand that provisions of new security laws allow such things, but this seems quite ridiculous. I cannot afford a lawyer. Is there any reasonable option?