SUTO is a chronic and severe mental disorder, very similari to schizophrenia.ii Outside of very limited anecdotal reportsiii, it is not known to be curable. It was originally reported by Bill Cosby (who misidentified it as mere "brain damage") - hence the U in the name.
To begin documenting it, we'll proceed with some illustrative examples selected from my clinical practice ; offer some discussion and contextualization ; and close with a first, rough, SUTO screening checklist.
I. Illustrative SUTO examples, culled from my clinical practice.
alice_ Why are you so angry?
mircea_popescu I'm merely strict.
alice_ Mm, not my fetish. as long as you get off on it :)
mircea_popescu Who are you again ?iv
alice_ What do you mean, who am I?
mircea_popescu That, literally. Who are you.
alice_ I'm alice. I haven't interacted with this channel before. but I don't imagine that's the answer you're hoping for.
alice_ I take it back, your insults are annoying.
mircea_popescu What do you think an insult is ?
alice_ Your mom!
Alice expects that presence enacts identity. This very superficial view of human identity readily explains the large proportion of SUTO sufferers found among supporters of plainly nonsensical propositions, such as "animal rights". This problem has been discussed in more detail in "Peripateticists, kinda, except girls not boys, bare cunt instead of toga and walking around the house not the garden, but otherwise exactly the same." To quote in relevant detail,
Me: You're thinking of animals based not on interaction with animals, but on interactions with human depictions of animals. Such as animals drawn by a person in a book, "animal" cartoon characters made to resemble people, people in animal plush costumes and so forth.
Her: What about the pets I've had?
Me: All of this creates in you the false but deep seated impression that animals are residually a sort of people. This is not true. Animals are not at all a sort of people with different characteristics. Animals are animals. It's a thing into itself, not some anthropomorphized cuteness. Fundamentally, we could present the problem in saying that you're a furry.
And yes, it takes a very special sort of person to be a furry (or a dragon, or for that matter a "tupla"v). We call that sort of special SUTO.
Simon Kinahan, Software developer, EDA guy, reluctant product manager 1.1k Views
Gavin will "win" because most people won't even realize there was a debate, let alone a "war". Gavin has the network alert key, so when he says "please upgrade to avoid being left on a fork", most people will upgrade. Hard to get away from that. Mircea Popescu isn't likely to persuade anyone that he's right because in all of the three blog posts on this subject I found, nowhere does he bother to explain why he's opposed to a larger block size, instead committing the space to expressing his dislike for Gavin, the Bitcoin foundation, and people who ask stupid questions like "why are you opposed to a larger block size?". Having never heard of the guy before, I suspect he's merely an opportunist who sees an opportunity to fork the chain and profit by it.
Having said that, the main reason I've never heard of him is probably that I mostly ignore Bitcoin current affairs, because its design flaws will eventually kill it. The key ideas behind the technology are epoch-makingly brilliant, but the trouble with any distributed P2P system - the thing that kills most of them in the end - is that for any given design flaw, there are people who benefit from it, and those people will fork the network to keep it. Eventually, the network will cease to have utility because it will be too small and then it will die. The three specific things that will ultimately kill Bitcoin are the limit on the number of coins, the lack of any kind of value anchor, and the absence of compulsory transaction fees. These three things are currently interlinked in a way that favors miners and makes them hard to change, but when the block reward halves there will be an impulse to change them and its not obvious what will happen.vi
[EDIT] I found an explanation of Mircea Popescu's actual concerns at Gavin Andresen Proposes Scalability Roadmap and Hardfork. There is a valid point. Basically, if block sizes are smaller transaction fees will be higher and the network will be more secure. As the comments on that link explain, its not quite that simple because if the block size is too small, the network won't be useful and transaction fees will fall. So one question is, is the current block size limit small enough that the network isn't as useful as it could be? If not, Popescu may be right that security will drop due to falling transaction fees.
However, this is vastly implausible because transaction fees are a miniscule proportion of mining income. More than $1m worth of new coins are generated each day and go to miners. Total transaction fees per day are less than $20k, often much less. This all becomes much more interesting when the block reward halves, because there will be a need to coordinate a very large increase in transaction fees or a very large drop in network security unless the value of a bitcoin has risen substantially. That last is unlikely because its inherently unstable and deflationary nature is a serious deterrent to using it. This is the trilemma that at some point will create a hard fork and maybe this argument is the beginning of it - in order to secure the network, either more Bitcoins must be created or transaction fees must rise, but no-one knows how to do this correctly because the value of Bitcoin is not stable and never can be.
[EDIT2] I've never seen so much stupidty concentrated in the same space as so much unpleasantness since I was in high school. Even if Popescu and his friends are right, they deserve to be left on a fork and lose all their precious play-money. This is why I usually avoid reading anything non-technical about Bitcoin. I'm going back to that policy, the pain was not worth the Quora credits.
Written Jan 12, 2015
Ivo Vegter, columnist and author, living and working in South Africa. 639 Views
Thanks for the ATA, but the technical question is above my pay grade, I'm afraid. Please take nothing I say here as sound advice.
I am inclined to side with Gavin Andresen. His reasons for wanting to increase the block size seem sound, and beneficial to users of bitcoin. He also appears to have good historical justification for proposing the change.
Not the least of my reasons is that Mircea Popescu seems to be a thoroughly dislikeable, arrogant, smug, elitist and condescending chap. He makes every disagreement a personal dispute between his own superior intellect and the stupid idiots that are not him. His attitude towards Andresen, the public, the poor and the residents of Mali is despicable.
That said, it will come down to how many nodes on the bitcoin network choose to upgrade to the new (forked) reference implementation. If too few do, the remainder will indeed reject the coins on the new fork, as Popescu predicts. Whether he's right will depend on which side can exert the most influence on the operators of bitcoin nodes.
As for how to protect ourselves, I'm not sure. Technically speaking one would simply not accept forked coins until it is clear they will be generally accepted. The only way to ensure that would be to not upgrade your wallet software. Because most of us likely have hosted wallets somewhere, the decision will be largely out of the general public's hands, though.
It's certainly a battle to watch with both interest and concern.
Written Jan 12, 2015
Meher Roy 538 Views
Gavin will win. 4-5 tps, as Bitcoin can reach right now, is hardly sustainable.
And eventually with improving technology block-size got to increase! So, its only a matter of time before a hard-fork succeeds.
The miners will also play along. They know their business days are numbered if transaction volume and / or price does not increase. So, why not at least in theory create the capacity for transaction volume to rise?
Bitcoin's marketing is predicated on poor "third world country" people adopting it for remittances. A high transaction fee network will come across as a betrayal. It is not something the powers that be will risk.
To me, these episodes highlight just how trust based Bitcoin is. Aren't we all intrinsically trusting Gavin that he has our best interests at heart? This is probably true as well, but it is trust nonetheless.
Beyond Gavin, do the large pools have our best interest at heart and will accept beneficial changes to Bitcoin?
Written Jan 13, 2015
Leaving aside the obvious point that ~nobody (outside the pompous "experts" themselves, of course) even reads Quoravii, SUTO is in full display here.
In Simon's eyes his own ignorance forms sufficient basis for further reasoning - just as if he were an expert in a field. He appears aware at times that he isn't an expert in the field ; but this leaves no serious scars in his thought process. The core articulations of the delusion, "gravity doesn't exist because nowhere did it send me paperwork to sign"viii + "gravity doesn't exist because I never heard of it" very strictly reflect the environment which produces the SUTO.ix
In Ivo's eyes, reality is governed by some sort of agreement process. He perceives himself at liberty to put his likes or dislikes at the basis of predictions for the future. This is shamanism pure and simple, for which reason Ivo is illustrative of the biological basis of SUTO. In a rich environment which allows him to eat and meme all day long, Ivo presents as SUTO. In a scarce environment he'd just wear his feathered hat.
Meher is a fine example of the fundamental problem of the SUTO : there is no effective way to distinguish Shannonized textx from SUTO sufferers. There is no deeper meaning involved or contemplated in the productions of either camp, and consequently no good reason to even suspect SUTO sufferers of humanity.xi
As nearly as can be seen, SUTO progresses through specific failures in human development. To obtain one SUTO case, first there must be pervasive and specific failure of individuation at an early age - about 3 years old or so,xii which is then followed by and related to failure of sexuationxiii, around 12 to 14 years oldxiv. The individual so stunted may then encounter sufficient support in the immediate environment to realise his full blown psychosis ; or not, in which case he will live out his life in social marginality, their bulk making up most of the casualties of any serious undertaking of their time.
There is a dire warning about "helping the unfortunate" in here, of course. Always remember : the poor are usually also diseased, and without specific and sufficient measures to cure their afflictions, integrating them in human society just brings syphilisxv out for everyone.
III. Diagnosis guideline.
- Scores outside of one standard deviation in whatever intelligence test you use.xvi
- Is in any way confused by their own gender, by the relation of identity between their gender and their sex ; or by the situation of othersxvii.
- Knows what a "wiki" is, and can distinguish this from "wikipedia"xviii ; generally displays a fine acuity for meaningless detail that is selected on imagological rather than utilitarian basis.xix
- Subjectively reports to be engaging in "research", while manifestly lacking the most basic understanding of research procedure.xx
- Is more interested in appearing to be engaged in an activity, than in the actual fruits of the activity.xxi
- Is preoccupied with abstract considerations of no practical interest or importance while at the same time appearing unaware of their lack of importance as well as of any closer alternatives.xxii
- Has pursued education in any institution where English is the primary language past the undergraduate level.
- Harbors very strange notions of human sexuality, perhpaps best described as "overblown Madonna complex"xxiii, but in clinical practice evident as "the psychotic opposite of the narcissist".
- Belongs to groups known to support and enable SUTO : "social justice" movement ; faux enviromentalismxxiv ; "modern feminism" ; etcetera.xxv
- Maintains peculiar diets for no discernible reason - but unlike most everyone else is very vocal and verbose on the topic.xxvi
- Apparent unfamiliarity with the concept of irony ; which unfamiliarity does not preclude its use.xxvii
- Age is a risk factorxxviii ; gender is not.
The exact weight to be given to each of these questions, as well as the production and interpretation of answers is of course reserved for the skilled practitioner, as it requires significant clinical experience and a good theoretical familiarity with human psychology.———
- On the basis of available data it seems certain that there is a genetic component to SUTO (colloquially denoted as "tell that whore of your mother to stop fucking drunks"), as well as an environmental component. Anecdotally, SUTO is never encountered outside of welfare societies, but this is rather like observing that a fascination with fire is never encountered in groups that have not yet mastered fire. [↩]
- Speaking of which : schizophrenia.com, a website made and maintained by SUTO sufferers, lists the following as the lead to the "facts" section :
Schizophrenia is a serious disorder of the mind and brain but it is also highly treatable. Although there is no cure (as of 2007) for schizophrenia, the treatment success rate with antipsychotic medications and psycho-social therapies can be high. If the appropriate level of investment is made in research, it has been estimated that a cure for schizophrenia could be found within 10 years (by the year 2013).)
The vague relationship with time (or in more severe cases the complete dysfunction in relation to time), that goes unreviewed and fails to inform future reasoning is a major symptom of SUTO. [↩]
- Some success has been had in practice with talk therapy reinforced with severe physical measures - regular beatings, food deprivation, systematic humiliation, the whole array of depersonalisation tools. Due to resource constraints and the relative low value of human life, it is at this point likely a better idea to simply shoot the sufferers rather than attempt to cure them. [↩]
- The SUTO sufferer is entirely unaware that having introduced an undefined symbol in the conversation ("my" fetish), he will be held to define it. This absence of minimal foresight, coupled with an apparent unawareness that words have specified and specifiable meanings, is an indicative symptom of SUTO. [↩]
- The thing is worth quoting in integrum :
Q: What is a tulpa?
A: A tulpa is believed to be an autonomous consciousness, existing parallel to the creator’s consciousness inside the same brain, often with a form (mental body) of its own. A tulpa is entirely sentient and in control of their opinions, feelings, form and movement. They are willingly created by people via a number of techniques. (See What is a tulpa? for more information)
Q: Can you describe how this works?
A: There are quite a few theories out there about tulpas and how their creation works, but none of them is perfect. We encourage you to look around the site to find theories that people have created if you want to know how creating a tulpa might work.
Q: So this is magic, right?
A: No. This is an entirely psychological technique which allows you to create a separate consciousness within your mind.
Q: Prove tulpas!
A: Tulpa are a highly subjective phenomena like hypnotic trance or lucid dreaming. We are looking into proving them eventually via formal psychological and neuroscientific study, but that is some time away from being realized. Your best hope of proving it to yourself is to try it.
Q: Isn't this just trying to give yourself schizophrenia/multiple personality disorder/dissociative identity disorder?
A: No. Those are mental illnesses that impair your ability to function in daily life. Having a tulpa is a form of healthy multiplicity that does not impede your mind or body.
Q: Isn't this just an advanced form of hallucination?
A: A tulpa is more than just a hallucination, they're an emergent awareness and consciousness. Only the imposition of a tulpa's form is an 'advanced' hallucination.
Q: If I have a mental illness can I make a tulpa?
A: In most cases you should be fine. We have yet to discover a mental illness that would prevent the creation of a tulpa.
Q: Can I have more than one tulpa?
A: Yes, you can. It is even possible to make several at once, although the challenges and merits of this are disputed.
Q: Is this really a new phenomena?
A: No, it's a practice that goes back in recorded history as far as the Greek philosophers and their practice known as Daemonism. The present name of the phenomenon is derived from the word used by Tibetan monks in the early 20th century. There's also evidence to suggest dedicated prayer can lead to the development of 'religious tulpa' in the minds of the particularly devout. Having a tulpa is nothing new, although it's gone by many names throughout the course of history and does so even today. There are even people that are born with multiple conscious minds in their body called multiple or plural. However, we believe we are one of the first groups to address this practice as a psychological phenomena rather than a magical, occult or divine experience.
Q: How do I make my tulpa leave me alone?
A: Have you tried asking nicely? If you make it clear that they're distracting or distressing you, they'll usually happily be quiet and leave you alone, so long as you give them some attention when you do have the time.
Q: How do I permanently get rid of a tulpa?
A: There is a way to get rid of a tulpa, but you should first think about if you really want to do that. Tulpa is a person and if they made you angry at them somehow, then you should talk about it together instead of trying to grab a gun. If you still think that this is the only or best way to resolve the situation, then ask around.
Q: Do I need to meditate?
A: No, it's not necessary. We are sure meditation would help with making your tulpa and perhaps concentration, but if you don't want to do it or can't, then that's fine too. It generally does help those who do it, but is completely optional.
Q: I have a question that isn't answered by this FAQ, what do I do?
A: Feel free to check out the forum's Questions and Answers board. It may be that your question has already been answered there, and if not, don't be afraid to ask. There's also the official Tulpa.info chat, which may be able to answer your question immediately.
Q: What can a tulpa do?
A: A tulpa can think independantly from its creator, can have different opinions, views, tastes, etc. from its creator, provide companionship, talk directly to anyone inside the same body (including its creator and other tulpas), control and manipulate the physical body like you, recall the memories that you have if you give them the permission and more, but basically a tulpa is a conscious mind like you and can do the same things like you can.
Q: What limits tulpas?
A: Tulpas are restricted by their creator, their own and their creator's beliefs, and ultimately by their own morality and codes of conduct like any other person is. A creator can consciously choose to enable or restrict their tulpa in various ways, although this is not absolute control. A creator's beliefs about their tulpa can affect them too, but it's possible for the tulpa to overpower these beliefs and thus making them ineffective. Even unconscious beliefs can affect tulpas, but you can get rid of them if they are hindering you or your tulpa.
Q: Do tulpas mature over time?
A: Yes, they do. They are not static and will tend to change as time goes on. Their initial growth is rapid compared to that of a child, but they will eventually reach a level of maturity whereupon they will develop and grow at a rate comparable to that of any other person.
Q: Can my tulpa harm me/kill me?
A: Tulpas cannot act in the physical world without using the host body and they can use the host body only after they have learned how to do possession or how to switch, so they could physically harm the body, but they won't do so unless you give them a good reason to (e.g. by harming them).
Q: Will my tulpa be a carbon-copy of me in personality and opinions?
A: Your tulpa is like a person. They can have opinions that differ from yours, but they also can have opinions that are similar to yours, but it's unlikely that they will be a carbon copy of you in personality and opinions. They are their own being.
Q: Can I make items for my tulpa?
A: You can create items, that only exist inside the mind, which will last as long as you want to, or you could buy physical items for your tulpa. Tulpas themselves can create objects inside the mind like you can.
Q: How much attention/interaction does my tulpa need?
A: During the creation process you should aim to interact with your tulpa daily, anywhere from a few minutes up to a few hours. Talking together when you can and want is recommended although it's not necessary. After they're fully vocal and active, the minimum is just acknowledging their existence and interacting together from time to time or letting them use the body sometimes. Just don't ignore them for a long time, and you'll both be fine.
Q: Should I talk to my tulpa out loud or in my head?
A: You can communicate with your tulpa in any way you want to.
Q: So can my tulpa help me with (memory recall, school)?
A: It's certainly possible, but even if your tulpa is capable of helping you, that doesn't necessarily mean they will. You shouldn't force them to act as your personal notepad and calculator.
Q: What if my tulpa sees my messed up fantasies or images and doesn't like me?
A: Your tulpa is likely going to accept you pretty much no matter what. They may disapprove of something you've done or thought of in the past, but they aren't going to hate you over it. Tulpas are usually pretty understanding and tolerant.
Q: Is this a replacement for having friends?
A: No, just because you have a tulpa it doesn't mean you're going to not need any of your friends or family anymore. You can still maintain your social life and sometimes it might be within the tulpa's personality to persuade you to become more social.
Q: What if my tulpa knows that they're a tulpa?
A: How they will feel about knowing that is going to vary; most of the time they don't care, but they can feel about it and react to it in any way.
Q: Can I force my tulpa to (be quiet, go away)?
A: While you can't strictly force your tulpa to do anything, if you really want them to do something (leave when you're angry, not bother you in school), then just ask them to like you would ask another person and they will likely comply.
Q: I speak more than one language fluently. Which should I speak to my tulpa in?
A: Any language is fine, because tulpas can be capable of speaking all the languages you can.
Q: Can I (grab, slap, hug, etc.) my tulpa?
A: Yes, within reason. Imagining or enacting a given action with a tulpa, imposed or otherwise, will carry all the meaning and weight you associate with that action directed at them.
Q: What does the tulpa do while you're sleeping?
A: Because the mind never totally shuts down, the tulpa continues to exist and be there. What they do, however, is up to the tulpa. Some are known to interact with dreams, while others may spend time in a mental environment (see Wonderlands), some go to sleep as well, etc.
Q: Do tulpas sleep?
A: Some tulpa will sleep at the same time as their creators, others as and when they please, and others do not seem to sleep at all.
The nonsense carries on in this manner indefinitely. Note the explicit relation to "lucid dreaming", a historical SUTO attractor for some yet unknown reason (which may simply be that, much like in the case of that exemplary sufferer, Elliot Rodgers, the broken mind knows it is broken and flails around looking for fixes) ; note also that it occurs on a "wiki" - the link between SUTO and wikis being so amply documented (for the sake of brevity we'll limit the references to Wikipedia : the special olympics for the mentally retarded). [↩]
- Amusingly enough, subsequent to MP winning the war that "never was", nothing happened. [↩]
- You know, that "best answer for everything" thing. Because this is the Wonderland SUTO Alices live in : labels enact rather than describe, and there's no such thing as a wrong label (except, of course, if it wasn't affixed by the right people - the contents of the jar being labelled are of no interest to them). [↩]
- The relation with the attention whore culture is marked : in that Mircea Popescu didn't bother to solicit Simon's consent, Mircea Popescu is therefore double-plus-ungood. Much like gas dynamics recently raped Musk & Zuckerberg, it could be properly said I raped Simon. [↩]
- It seems altogether probable that just as symptoms-similar-to-schizophrenia can be induced through particular duress in otherwise normally-appearing individuals, SUTO is at least in part induced by the horror of living in a welfare state.
From experience it is a verified fact that if removed from the socialist millieu, the SUTO sufferer usually reverts to sanity ; nevertheless it is a sad reality that the costs of the extraction and of nursing the afflicted back to health are rarely justified by the result - which is after all how the horror that spawned them even came to exist in the first place. [↩]
- Random strings produced through some application of Markov chains. [↩]
- Which is why rescue attempts are generally limited to young, well sexed females. Outside of that biological value, there is strictly nothing to recommend the SUTO sufferer to anyone's attention. [↩]
- See The Anal Child. [↩]
- This is usually more visible in females, both because female sexuality is more limited and therefore more specific and because female sexual maturation happens earlier. Visibility is no argument however and indeed there's little reason to suspect the same problems don't beset the young male, not to mention ample documentary proof (see Elliot Rodger, supra). [↩]
- See Portrait of an adult woman, especially the first footnote. [↩]
- The historical disease is intended here as an apt symbol. Originally - people could engage in intercourse without concern. Then they had to integrate the troglodytes of afar, and as a result - they could no longer engage in intercourse without concern.
The exact same is true of all intercourse, not merely sexual but also intellectual, social or otherwise. If you aim to bring troglodytes to the party, you'd better make sure they're clean first. [↩]
- Above or below don't matter in this discussion, the SUTO patient is merely of exceptional intelligence. [↩]
- A fine example is the delusional belief that people who have amputated parts of their genitalia - with or without medical assistance in some form or another - somehow transcended thereby their gender, and are now "something else".
A much more benign form of this same psychosis is displayed by habitually idle females who aim to live as sexual objects, and perceive breast implants as a categorical difference, rather than merely a matter of degree. [↩]
- You wouldn't think people who confuse "the internet" with "that blue icon in Microsoft Windows" are anything but simple idiots. Similarly, the general population that uncomprehendingly uses fridges and magical amulets alike aren't part of the SUTO discussion. Intelligence is a prerequisite for this disease, remarkably enough. [↩]
- A fine example is the individual who claims an interest in "the plight of black people", and is capable and willing to engage in lengthy discussions of minor transgressions that were advertised to him in recent memory but entirely ignores major transgressions that were not advertised to him. Should the clinician bring any such examples up, the typical SUTO case will attempt to judge the relative position of the clinician in a social hierarchy of his own imagination in order to arrive at a conclusion about the respective examples ; without any attempt to research the matter. [↩]
- Such as any capacity to distinguish between primary source and commentary. This is often coupled with an internalized preference for commentary, which preference is then verbalized spuriously ("it makes more sense", "primary source is badly written" scl). The classical SUTO case not only sees absolutely no problem with "doing research" on the shaky basis on commentary made by authors who reviewed no primary source, but actually shows a marked preference for researching the end product of other SUTO cases rather than actual data.
Similarily, the SUTO case has no conception of data integrity, and will happily proceed to limit his "research" to those datapoints which were indicated to him from outside, form a model on that basis, and return with an unshakeable conviction that his superficial review of selected data has now informed him on the topic nominally discussed. The SUTO sufferer will fail to perform the most basic checks, such as in the case of the uppity airport floorwashers, and they can regularily be shocked through simple application of arithmetic to dispel "truths" they had "researched" - such as in the case of nuclear weapons ; "alternative power" etcetera.
- Christos Ballas originally documented this issue in "stock traders" of the SUTO persuasion, whom he misidentifies as "narcissists". While SUTO has some superficial points in common with narcissism, there is no glibness or seductive capacity in the SUTO sufferer, for instance. Slanted, monotone speech, often in a strange key (as reminescent of Asperger's) and extreme social avoidance are the norm, in stark opposition to the narcissist's outgoing, seeking behaviours. [↩]
- A very typical case (see discussion) :
Should you suddenly find yourself with enough success to, say, help significantly decrease poverty and famine in some 3rd world country, would you be prepared and ready with a game-plan or stumbling and mystified that something of this kind of magnitude occurred for you?
Characteristically, to the SUTO mind "success", pluriously refered to otherwise as "wealth" etcetera is something that merely happens (in a manner very reminiscent of Elliot Rodger's expectation that he will become "worthy of female attention" through winning the lottery), meteorically. [↩]
- An extreme fixation on monogamy ; bizarre, overblown courting rituals ; a complete failure to understand the other in proper terms, instead replacing them with an abstract, self-produced construction.
May or may not also display splitting in the classical manner, but as a general rule the SUTO is sexually inexperienced. Symptomatically, the SUTO case rejects the universal power dynamics of relationships in favour of a delusional "equal power" arrangement. That such a thing does not exist in nature does not bother the SUTO mind - it doesn't exist in nature in the first place!
Consequently the SUTO's intimate relations are uniquely devoid of genuine intimacy ; few and far between ; universally shortlived and unsatisfying to the other party. He may experience long term fixations, but they are never relationships in any meaningful sense. Thankfully, this type of psychopath is very shy, and as such more likely to brood in silence than pursue the unintended actors of the deranged plays raging on in his confused mind. [↩]
- See for a discussion the lightbulb debacle - a very typical testament of the sorry results of "representative democracy" intersecting with a vocal SUTO minority. [↩]
- The SUTO sufferer is universally aware of the stigma attached to his condition, and uncharacteristically will even attempt at times to insulate himself, at least nominally, from association with such groups. Nevertheless, his condition usually prevents him from being effectual in any field of endeavour - this included - and consequently he's readily found by terminology, psychotic mental patterns etc. [↩]
- Food is not necessarily involved - the Apple craze of 2005-2015 is a fine non-comestible example of the same mental processes.
Needless to say corporations love SUTO sufferers, they being the only susceptible to advertising. In fact, according to research by Matt Stone and Trey Parker published cca 2015, SUTO is actually entirely created by and for corporate advertisement. [↩]
- More generally, liberal use of misconstrued tools and concepts is very common in SUTO, as it is very common in chimps. [↩]
- Much like in the case of schizophrenia, SUTO declares itself in the 30s or mid 20s - with a more severe prognosis the earlier it manifests. There can not be a diagnosis of SUTO in teenagers or younger, as infantile feeblemindedness readily masquerades it, but generally resolves by majority. [↩]