Alan Turing once wondered whether there could exist a program that could tell if any program from the set of all programs (and inputs) would halt or not. He then tracked the behavior of the hypothetical halting predictor across a set of all programs (and inputs) and showed that the halting predictor predicted incorrectly for a program that was not part of the set of all programs (and inputs). It is funny how a program that is not part of the set of all programs (and inputs) could exist. But it could and he showed a method to generate such a program using a method called cantor’s diagonalization. Essentially he showed one such program existed by showing that the program which flipped the output of the halting predictor trying to predict its own behavior did not exist in the infinite set of all programs (and inputs)
One conclusion was that there are not universal analytical (or even algorithmic) shortcuts/solutions to all problems that can be run on a computer. Sometimes the only way to find out something is to execute the plan, and just wait long enough to see if it works eventually, and just give up if it takes too long, but don’t give up too early.
Another conclusion is that any prediction mechanism or theory you have will only work most of the time, and there will be truths and futures which have to be discovered by waiting it out if necessary for a very long time to unfold.
Among many things the human mind does one is to assign intentions to things like cats, or people. Not everything ever really has intentions (e.g. volcanos are not mountain gods). But sometimes it is more fun, relaxing, to think they have intentions. But other people also assign intentions to your self, and sometimes it is necessary to dupe (hide from) their system/theory of assigning intentions to us.
And this is were predictability of intentions derives its utility from. It is desirable that human intentions are predictable because it helps us have an easier way to live (i.e. eat, drink, move, be free, explore). But there are people who exploit this desire of predictability of intentions to manipulate, hurt and destroy people (a.k.a criminals, psychopaths). They have to be removed to increase predictability.
So in a low crime city, I can wait for a bus, know it will arrive in a few minutes, and that driver will drop me off along a route near a diner where I can eat in exchange for a known amount of money, and come back safely.
This is what many people call a high trust society.
On the other hand in a low trust society, I will have to wait for an arbitrary amount of time to hitchhiker in a stranger’s car who might drop on any diners they might find along the way, where if they are willing to exchange food for money, they might end up charging an exorbitant amount of my assets as barter.
There is nothing wrong in wanting to live in a high trust society and that is what we call culture. Culture is sometimes arbitrary. Sometimes you are expected to engage in rituals like greeting the waitress to get food. But if you do not signal using such arbitrary rituals you are a suspect for dangerous behavior.