CIvgene can be complex and confusing, but if you’ve got an hour, I lay out the basics in a simple way. Good way to get started.
‘lies, damn lies, and statistics.’
You’re a monster. An authoritarian undermining democracy. Yes, yes, this is hyberbole. But is it? How did this happen? Odds are you are at least luke warm to democracy in theory. Yet you follow and support trends that rip into it’s flesh. Like some jungle predator with a face full of blood. A low information werewolf, who seems normal enough on a regular day. But periodically on a clear night, when the moon is full you are asked to vote. To support some idea put to the public. You wake up in torn clothing, covered in ‘I voted’ stickers, your integrity cut and bruised.
Generation X may well be the only generation who can see it. Anyone can be shown it, I hope, but only Generation X has a firm footing in both worlds. Generation X was the first generation to grow up with computers. They grok both automation and networks in a special way. Kids of the 80s remember seeming retail shrink wrap software and air gapped computers. Everywhere. There was no shortcuts. Your data quality defined your output. Type in the wrong numbers and get wrong answers out. Garbage in, garbage out, burned into our subconscious with toil.
Our computer world, before the internet world was lit ablaze with the web, mirrored the rest of the world. Statistics were garbage, or at least they could be. Open a newspaper, and some huge dramatic number would adorn page two. How many dead, how many tons of material, how many days until a trend reached a record. It may sound like our world now, but there were many such page 2s. The next week another chart, painfully explained would contradict it. It was understood that even one basic assumption change, either in the data or the formula changed everything. Boomers got this, the greatest generation got this, and so did Xers. We grew up in a self aware, analog world. A common culture.
Boomers didn’t grow up with computers. They knew what they were, sort of. Sure the tiny minority of computer professionals in that generation may share X’s perspective, but their youth was more rocked by the introduction of transistors, literally. X had a supercomputer sitting on their desk. Not cheap, not small, but a single desktop would have been worth waging war over just twenty years prior. They had the freedom to explore it, and more importantly, explore how people reacted to it.
Data inherently must have focus. Scope and scale matter. Forget that and you run out of memory, or bits in your data type. Ram and hard drives were tiny. Just big enough for an algo and some subset of data. You could only reiterate as many times as you can store. It was elegant and efficient or it failed. Eventually you realized, at some level, that elegance was a trade. Conflated data types. 3d perceptions smashed into 2d sprites. You made assumptions and you knew it. Everyone knew it. The bad assumptions were glaring. Mashed pixel art were unrecognizable and made games unplayable. Spreadsheets that wouldn’t produce even basic known outcomes with known good data. Programs looped forever. Generation X was computer literate, or in some cases they were forced to know they weren’t.
Along with the internet came more resources. Computers were still finite but growing faster than programmers could reduce their assumptions. Modems connected the world to mountains of code and data. An endless landscape of shared ideas and effort. Many mountains of garbage, but some with beautiful parks atop them. The children forever after would grow up in this connected world. Limited resources never explored, self reliance never tested. Air gaping was out of the question. The greatest became the latest. Not because younger people are lazy, as is often postulated, but because they can’t keep up. The mountains grow faster than any one person can shovel. You can copy someone else’s mountain in the blink of an eye, or if it’s big, the consumption of a cup of coffee.
An individual explorer may transverse the many mountains, but when a civilization builds a city atop, it collapses. A crash and screaming panic as sinkholes swallow up whole skyscrapers. It happened with Nazdaq founder Madoff, it happened with the USA Office of Personnel Management, It happened with Solar Winds, and it happened with first Diebold and now Dominion voting machines. Disasters unforeseen as cyber-security flies air patrols high above the skylines build atop faulty un-scrutinized code. The insider threat. Not from any one person, though they may participate, but built up from faulty assumptions. The mountains of un-examined code and data are the ultimate insider,
How did the ground under our feet become the an insider just waiting to defect? Conflation. Shortcuts, cheats and correlation without causation. Not scrutinizing the details because there are too many of them. An explosion of assumptions. The shoot from the hip idea that because there are experts, and they present detail, that detail is sufficient to understand all the important problems. People are drawn to the tallest, shiniest building, not because it has a firm foundation. It is un-examined. Instead it is a landmark in a rapidly changing skyline. A compass needle in a landscape so poorly planned that people run from landmark to landmark, lucky each time their presence is not their integrity’s grave.
Computers fail fast. So fast, that failure is the model. Instead of science and engineering, with both time tested models and scrutiny, computer code and data is slapped together. No loving examination is practiced. It’s a great model. A personal favorite. The wild west. Full of mystery and exciting puzzles. Chaos incarnate. Irresistible to the smartest humans suffering from perpetual boredom. Trying to find a solution, any solution, to any problem that temporarily blocks your goals. Lewis and Clark mapping out the wilderness over and over. Subject to skill and talent, but also to random luck. So random that massive signs and tourists celebrate the rare occasion that explorers mapped out a path worth keeping as a superhighway later. Except with computers the analogy of time and pavement breaks down. The first path that works is the path the entire world uses. No additional exploration is attempted. The computers follow the trail at light speed, it’s path rarely explored again.
Thee data dumps and code fragments are not the product of scrutiny, but instead junky fragile prototypes, forced into production. Piled up in massive hills and mountains adorned with the structures of democracy. No one person can own the exploration of such a hill, nor can the structures on it be easily moved aside, so no one does this impossible work. It’s all great fast fun copying these broken structures, but it’s not a game. Real lives hang in the balance.
A computers code can be engineered as their hardware often is. Designed with degrees of precision. Understood from the bottom up. Scrutinized not just by someone, but anyone who has an interest. An effort including the entirety of the world. It should be the whole world, because human civilization pays the price when it is not. When a skyscraper or a city falls into a pit of chaotic or un-scrutinized code the world falls with it. That’s their city too. Same bad data, same bad code. Democracy needs scrutiny. Not only of it’s data, but it’s twisted winding algorithms. It can be played like a game but it’s not. If any system ever had malicious externalities, defectors with real menacing goals against a society, it’s democracy.
Psychopaths, foreign actors, and other profit motivated defectors can use the chaos of top down computing as subterfuge, but that’s not democracies worst problem. Many democracies have faced complex and inept bureaucracies before. It’s the problem of both speed and ignorance. Speed as poor or subversive ideas can become critical infrastructure in mere months, and ignorance, that a closed source code system allows this. I single out generation X as the lone guardians not because newer generations can’t know better, but because they can, and don’t. Nothing drills a point home like toil and suffering. Struggling to make the limited resources of tiny ancient computers sing for you. You can see the compromises plain as day. It seems people who did not have to make due, don’t know what they don’t know. An unknown unknown. Younger people think you can trust any computer code that works, and they are dead wrong. The biggest danger to the whole system is they don’t even know there are risks.
It’s not that network babies can’t demand open source code, or limited use computers, or code audits. I’m hoping it’s that they never even thought about the problem. They never once had to look at a computer and say, this isn’t doing what I need, and had to solve it by understanding the problem with more depth. They are drowning democracy in their unjustified trust of the machines that they depend on. Having been educated in a system that never questions authority, so long as it feigns casual support for individualism. Individualism that computers and their twisted code, doesn’t know or care about. If it feels good, it must BE good. A write once paper log of operations doesn’t make network babies feel good. The better than genetics certainty of digital signatures doesn’t raise their confidence because they were taught not to be skeptical in the first place.
It’s doesn’t end with ignorance of the unknown unknowns. The real tragedy is the technocratic elitism. The same exact system that produces the blindly trusting, produces their captors with the same exact philosophies. As feel good generations filter out their geeks with the knack for code, and socially isolate them from shared social experiences, they quickly come to believe that the rabble is grossly ignorant. Thinking they understand safety and scrutiny, they use it to justify subjugation. The shared delusion that all people are one behavior set tells the technocrats that the sometimes intelligent but misguided have had every opportunity to distrust and scrutinize their world. They must be managed, or even worse, re-educated. Technocrats who are elite from youth categorize their less adept social peers as if they were Non Player Characters in some simulation, dehumanizing them. They need computerization to marry their misguided complex rules to their different in practice counterparts. To thwart natural law and enforce their chosen norms. The same norms that drive individual sovereignty and it’s derivative democracy. Don’t just take my word for it, look how badly political polling fails for example. If the model worked, the projections would be more accurate.
Democracy as a system is rapidly dying. It’s no surprise as it’s a system of cooperation. Computers make bad decision making possible at a blinding and still increasing pace. Both in the design of the computer software, and in enforcing broken social paradigms sold as science. There is a solution, but tales, myths of another time, block it from taking hold. During generation X’s youth the public was not aware of how important computer literacy would become. Many companies won a lottery as rare ‘ordinary’ employees were promoted into roles where they revamped their companies computer code and data. The companies in question got lucky. They hired personnel that had not yet recognized skills, who in turn, returned the companies investments many times the worth of their salaries. They stumbled onto a gunslinger, just made for the wild west. This turned into a hiring spree, and then a crisis. Politicians the world over have made it a top priority to find every single geek that they can identify through programs like STEM. It’s exhausted the supply, isolating would be technocrats from interacting with their broader societies.
It’s time to recognize the truth. The public has few top gunslingers. Don’t take my word for it, test yourself. Make some time. Examine some code or some data. Make it behave the way you want. If you can’t that’s fine. I and nobody else should think less of you for it.
Stop trusting the technocrats. They can’t provide you with solutions to democracy, it’s not practically possible. Their system of design is semi-random and they can not audit it in detail, even if they wanted to, which they probably don’t. Big tech and big data did not grow, or was not designed in your interest. Know what you don’t know. I don’t care if you put computer specialist on your resume, but don’t you believe it. Don’t believe the tall tales of gunslingers of the 80s and 90s still apply. Demand tangible proof of markets, votes, stats and anything MIGHT influence any sort of vote. Do not become someone else’s useful idiot. If they can’t prove it demand the code and the data. If you can’t understand it, and they can’t explain it where you deeply understand it, don’t vote for it. Or with it. Until they make a simpler model you can understand. If you can’t grok the code, and you can’t see the data, the only way to protect democracy is to assume it isn’t sufficiently vetted, or honest.
There is a chance democracy can be saved. If you realize the truth. Democracy REQUIRES more skeptics than our society requires technocrats. They are vital to peace and progress. It doesn’t even matter if you are not genuinely a skeptic, but democracy can’t function if you don’t act like one. Your smallest culture doesn’t make you better, and that goes double for the technocrats because of how their business model operates. That criticism and doubt from common society isn’t just important to democracy, it’s the only thing that keeps it alive.
Darwninan evolution leaves little room for debate. Genetic accidents come to dominate because of advantage. Including people. Even the very empathy that makes you recoil from the potential horrors of the implications above.
Civgene indicates that the subconscious mind (specifically the conscience) is a risk manager. Why? With comparative intelligence, new risks are assessed more quickly by humans with a conscience than humans without (psychopaths).
The risk formula is programmed both by other people like our guardians, and by our own experience. As our memories are recalled, a secondary map of emotions produces a new, involuntary, composite emotional state. Sometimes the subsequent compound emotion is fear of a yet seen danger the rational mind could not deduct as quickly, hence the advantage. Mandatory emotional recall is fast, as demonstrated by the laggard rationalization that follows it. This is true only if the data is natural (self acquired or at least sincerely emparted) and good mental hygiene is practised.
Just like a caring parent can program a human child with well intentioned warnings, so can a group be controlled. The ability for one human to program a society with a common identity is known as propaganda. Grandfathered by Edward Bernays. Fathered by Joseph Gobbels, mass programming of identities is a potential genocidal machine. Turning peoples own conscience against them. Rational minds enslaved to fabricated emotional risk warnings.
The civilized mind
Propaganda is a fabricated, subconscious, communication directed at societies, but it’s carriers originate naturally. This is visible as secondary communication cues. Intonation, secondary noises, linguistic lexicon shifts, lighting, temperature, smells, sounds, etc. Any subtle cue that can be rationally remembered can have a compound emotion attached to it. People are continuously programming each other. Human civilization is a vast, distributed, subconscious risk, supercomputer. Mainly throttled by the bandwidth of human interaction and attacks on it’s networks.
Karl Marx noticed this but did not understand what he is seeing. In general I have found his observations to be outstanding, while his conclusions wither as a function of time. Why did he get causality wrong? No failing of his own. He like his contemporaries simply did not understand that humanity was two distinct, separate behavioural sets. They were simply unaware of psychopaths.
His observations about late civilization stratification were correct. The modern bourgeoisie have re-emerged in America and the western world. In it’s natural form, the bourgeoisie as a class, emerges because of commonality in culture, specifically in subconscious ques. As the psychopath population grows, the society increasingly devalues cooperation and rewards strict competition. The bourgeoisie read the same books, attend the same operas, and go to the same parties. The feedback loop tightens as quantifiable knowledge consumption accelerates. The programming becomes less and less noticed, less frequently rationalized and ultimately goes completely unexamined. Simply put the rational mind can’t keep up with the subconscious programming, and so it goes unchallenged. The people who operate society, the bourgeoisie, eventually become completely psychopathic.
Now, in 2017 propaganda is more science than art. Massive databases of up to the minute word associations betray our subconscious communication and the current state of shared risk. Further the Internet has greatly increased the bandwidth for subconscious communication. Sharing (comparatively) professionally produced videos as fast they can be consumed. Entire libraries distributed in minutes. Immersive video games increase the bandwidth even beyond what a carefully scripted stream of videos can aspire to. Together they form a wall of customized emotionally calculated programming a physically present team couldn’t match.
Today the technical and financial elite are consuming same material. Racing to the treetop to be top ape in true psychopathic fashion. Their subconscious always silently consuming faster than rational memory components. Their rational minds can’t keep up. Their subconscious is polluted with ease as big data guides big media. The economic collapse, the human disaster, it’s happening again. But this time it’s measured in days instead of decades.
But there is hope. The art, the music, the stories, the pop cultures of the past can save some of us. If you are sceptical enough to seek and use them, and ultimately profit.
The more bandwidth your media has, the more quickly your subconscious can be damaged. Reading is the lowest bandwidth way to express complex information, so is the least dangerous. It is difficult for subconcious programming to outrun the critical, rational mind with a newpaper article alone. Listening is worse. A podcast or radio program are more likely to reprogram you. Video has many dimensions by which to perform the card tricks of propaganda. Your rational mind following one path and your subconscious another. And of course games both with their interactive 3d and reactive feedback could be weaponized at a level not yet imagined.
Slow the information down and test yourself. Our metaminds are a database. Care for it.
Beat the propaganda. The key is to slow down the face melting pace of rational learning and examine your feelings. Remember more bandwidth means more damage. No matter how smart you are, your conscience(if you have one) still absorbs propaganda faster than your rational mind can counter it. Take some time to let what you consume sink in. No matter the topic.
Reading has some risk. Listening is worse. Watching still worse. Games have the highest subconscious programmatic rate. Take the time after consuming public media to practice good mental hygiene.
Reject the bourgeoisie and protect civilization. Put your own mental hygiene ahead of accelerating competition. The lasting standards are open source anyway, inherently an exercise in cooperation. The currency of reputation is almost always worth more than short term victories. Forget top branch, it’s a big forest. It’s your mind. Don’t loose control.
Note: For the record this page’s (probably rather confusing) computer analogies were white on white and were not meant to be subliminal, but instead hidden unless sought. Alert me if the words subtly appear in your browser/copy. TIA.
Edit: Added a fifth trick for keeping your subconscious clean and belonging to you.
The words are hard to find when discussing the chaos in the 2016 presidential election in the psychopath trap known as the United States government. People, even both parties subconsciously captive proto-psychopaths, realize that something huge has happened, even if they can’t determine what. I think I’ve sorted it out.
I noticed that cyber-security specialists, for the moment, seem to fall almost completely on the statist point on the political compass. People of all political affiliations group around a single point of view. That cryptographicly signed, leaked emails, must be ignored. A point a view that without it’s massive scope and current context would ever have been proffered by even a significant minority of them a mere six months ago. Today It dawned on my rickety brain why. They are fighting the leading edge of a trend that changes their career path. Facing their own obsolescence.
I am not talking about the cyber security analyst at large trying to harden network structures against attack and limit damage when that fails. I’m talking specifically about internet based evidence gatherers. Internet cops. Specialists of formal investigation and the resulting digital custody chains. In one long mathematically indisputable batch of emails the ability of LEOs to have any effect, or to be effective, died.
Lets talk some math. DKIM is a method of signing an email. The entire thing including the header (sender, postmark and return address). Some of the wikileaks emails are signed by Gmail with 2048 bit encryption. Odds that the 2048 bit DKIM encryption signed emails have been altered is roughly 1 in 64 trillion. This may just seem like a really big number to you until you realize this number represents the biggest number of any evidence chain. The BEST case (the best tests and samples) for DNA being incorrect is 1 in 20 billion. Usually it’s more like 1 in 10 million with more realistic samples, genetic target and affordable testing. Forget the physical evidence point of view. With a fatal car accident every hour in the United States (for example) there is a 1 in 300 million chance any particular physical sample is corrupted after being onboard during a fatal car crash.
Why does this matter? Because the most reliable method of written evidence delivery, can now be sent from a random, anonymous, source on the Internet. Police, even international spies, need not apply. In addition, a corrupt government can no longer forge statistically significant contrary evidence in defense of a corrupt government.
The technology is now proven that it is no longer in the the interest of people to hire expensive, flawed LEOs, but instead insist that their governments just use DKIM for all digital communications. Chain of custody included. Cybersecurity custody professionals, perhaps subconsciously, have been protecting their own employment prospects from the automation wave.
If citizens had correct conceptual understanding of their own societies, that would probably NOT happen. Unfortunately that is not the case. Several theories about psychopaths have become part or near fact since the 1970s, coming as close as psychology ever does to hard science. They are largely considered to be 1-3% of the population, are attracted to wealth and power, are both ruthless and incurable, and are the highest functioning mental illness. Simply put they are attracted to corrupt opportunities of government power in the psychopath trap. They become gridlocked in that trap as career politicians, winning small victories while calculating risks from many blackmails from their peers. It’s dirty, and ruthless, and law is created and enforced like sausage is made. In unappetizing fashion.
In a world where psychopaths are fact, if you are foolish enough to think you have a ‘team’ in this fight, you probably have no idea how it works.
When countries, outsider candidates or even random citizens can introduce evidence with a better chain of custody than even the very best evidence the police for a country can produce, it throws the psychopath trap in disarray. Despicably maintained but carefully balanced power, suddenly shifts as LEOs suddenly pull cornerstones from their mooring. This, sometimes, is why they protest enforcing the law. Like pulling a rotten tooth from the mouth, it’s a grotesque and unnerving, if necessary job.
It is entirely possible that a political and psychopathic union may form during lulls in evidentiary activity. If enough time passes without a leak or a whistleblower, they may temporarily stabilize key support and convert the republic into some variation of dictatorship. This is where enlightened countries may be entirely lost to tyranny. This is where stupid psychopaths below the top rung do anything to save their own skin. There is justice among the horror as it won’t work for most.
Now that this technology exists (it need never be ‘approved’ to be effective) and the purge has begun, it is in the interest of insiders, even the dirtiest psychopaths, to both flee and keep the signed leaks coming. This is the signal that the trio of psychopath choice (double down, defect and die) only has one option left, defect. This is because dictatorships have far fewer key supporters, so most key political positions will be eliminated. With the leading indications of their internal enforcement methods coming to light, it’s clear that many if not all key supporters will be hunted and/or executed if they do not qualify for the short list of required keys. Psychopaths don’t do self sacrifice. He who panics first, panics best. A person with an uncaptured built in risk engine (the conscience) would know that. The smartest psychopaths should keep council with them.
Republics that proffer law and order without at least a superior custodial track for cryptographically signed communications will be known as democratic in name only. A rapidly fading role awaits them on the global stage.
If you are lucky enough to live in one of the republics that remains representative during this process, what will you be given? A technocratic republic for sure. One where hierarchy is not just casually but formally mistrusted. Where communications from officials in office are mandated to DKIM verification. A system where legal distribution looms over the would be corrupt secret deals in all new law. A place where voters would vote using the spoiler and gerrymandering free approval voting on a blockchain, verifiable from anywhere by private key, but who’s anonymity would be protected by both technology and law. A system where debt is allowed but all currency and money is free in return. A system where free trade could never include cessation of human rights in the trade. A system where a type one civilization may finally be possible.
Until then it’s simply an ugly waiting game. Patience, luck and work. A slow motion mudslide pushing away establishment key supporters. Until the first time hidden allies don’t scurry away when a stone is moved. Blackmail interlock cascade exhaustion. People will say, ‘lets see what went wrong’, but it’s already obvious. Secret alliances plotting against the public at large. In a word, corruption, intentionally placed in places the public can’t reach it. Placed by people, often psychopaths and their minions, who took advantage of a system that while sceptical was not sceptical enough.
Open source really embodies three changes from typical hierarchical human social systems. Gift culture, the right to fork, and perpetually increasing levels of complexity. But these pieces are not all new, what changed to make open source happen? What problem is it actually solving?
Gift culture is not new. It is as old as currency. Currency predated coinage as barter and skills and tasks. So why did open source happen if not for gift culture? What did change? GPL. A new kind of copyright license establishing the right to fork. That’s how Linux, the trial of a hard right to fork based in law, succeeded.
The right to fork is not new. Clearly established by the Christian reformation, and enabled by Gutenberg, the right to fork, until the 1980s was only established against ultimate authorities by war. Civil rights in the freest countries acknowledged it and derived their rights from it, but did not explicitly establish as a basic rule of engagement and existence. In politics threats of an ultimate fork were often sufficient to deter one.
What is new? Complexity at modern levels is completely new. Where is the complexity? Not in tasks or problems to solve. They are still simple to explain. In communication. In language. What does language indicate? Respect for stature and respect for others time. Not always based in the currencies of accomplishment and skill, but as a product of many parallel societies. A focus on the importance of social structure undermines ideas, there for innovation, and ultimately investment. The social structure becomes impassible and no problems or tasks are solved.
Repairing social structure becomes a second level trap. Meetings are held. Seminars attended. No, a fork is needed. The problem needs to be solved in order to be assigned sufficient language to solve it. The language to solve the problems have no parallel and therefore no linguistic identifiers for needed concepts. The industry tries to solve this by pumping out new names and acronyms, but they are often the property of someone and useless for general progress. This is a distraction. Undeveloped ideas are slowed by the work needed to name them. In the computerized, Internet connected world, the source code is language of progress.
The complexity horizon is reached when the task is so complex that less efficient top down problem solving can no longer function. No amount of time spent can solve the problem from the top. ‘Leader’ understanding doesn’t scale language fast enough. The client can solve the problem better if administration doesn’t block him. No right to fork means the client no longer invests. Trust (predictability of future trends) is lost because their personal experience is impassible. Future investment is diminished.
The perception that the ability to understand a problem and articulate it are always equal is a lie. Therefore the complexity horizon occurs when comprehension of tasks outrun articulation of it. False cooperation becomes apparent (bogus reciprocity) and destroys trust. How can understanding outrun articulation? The subconscious must participate in solving the toughest problems. That is imagination. Rationalization of conceptualization is being outstripped. The metamind is doing the work but the rational mind and the mouth can’t keep up. If a fork can be had, the solution can employ more minds at the task of articulation. If it can’t the relationship between solver and the client grinds on failing to economize and destroying the trust needed for investment from both.
This would have been impossible to decipher without first exploring Civgene’s explanation of the metamind and it’s subconscious roles. Based in fundamental behavioral contrasts between humanity and the animal kingdom, and the implications for economics. Please explore those ideas at your leisure.
To help grasp this here are some practical applications of open source and roughly when their complexity horizons were reached. Note that the open source alternatives begin to gain momentum at the complexity horizon but are not accepted as inevitable until some time later.
The original, complete, experiment. Operating systems are a software layer between varying hardware and the programs people are really trying to run. Commercial operating systems were plagued with bugs and suffered from declining stability. The cause was the non linear growth in variety of hardware a computer could be built with. Communicating in code eliminated grafted societies and their cumbersome verbal language.
Currency looses it’s value to a client as quality of transactions become less visible. The increasing non linear complexity of derivatives makes understanding any market impossible, ultimately damaging trade. By solving they Byzantine generals problem the complexity of language is eliminated. A small collaboration of solvers can write code to track and transfer currency for clients at a global scale in a transparent way.
Internet applications are a way to handle reliability and scalability problems. The non linear expansion of global cyberwarfare, and the non linear expansion of the internet of things (ultimately internet connected computers in all equipment) requires management of operating system functions at the network level or a systemic scale. This seems to be the first multi-factor complexity horizon. Devops holds another distinction as well. It is a new system. Not drawing on errors from past attempts to breach the horizon.
3d printers: Soon, perhaps some breaches now.
An epic confluence of complicating factors defy description and add complexity for manufacturing in on demand customization, trade, natural resources, security, and in the race to the atomic scale. 3d printers are likely the first multi-factor complexity horizon with more than two vectors of complexity. We have likely passed some of the factors already.