I've met a decent few people who claim to be good at keeping secrets. I've met fewer who've made a compelling case that they are trustworthy in the "I have fashioned myself in such a way that noone should regret giving information to me. Not only will I not reveal it, I will take no actions which would turn this into a bad decision for you to have made"-way. An ambiguous fraction which might or might not be zero has demonstrated this competence. What I've never even heard discussed is being a good keeper of ignorance. There are very valid reasons for someone to not trust me with a secret. While I believe that I have the "you will not regret telling me things"-property, I might be wrong about that, and even if I am not, it's not exactly an easy thing to prove. Success isn't noticeable, only failures are. So, I not only want to be safe to give information to, I also want to be very safe for good people to lie to and withhold information from. There's easy ways to do this. If I trust you and you ask me to not question something, I won't. That's what trust means to me. It doesn't mean that I expect you to always tell me the truth. That might be a terrible policy. Trusting you means expecting you to make good decisions about what I should know and what I shouldn't, where good has my wellbeing among others in mind. But there are settings where asking me to not question something is suspicious or otherwise impossible, and I am a very curious person, so it would really be nice to have a general way of not doing damage when left in the dank about stuff that I should be in the dark about, but for which I won't be told that I should be in the dark about it. Thoughts?

as you mention the problem to my mind with this line of thinking is that it assumes the other person is worthy of such trust in the first place. making this a policy would just turn you into a patsy.
having people you can put that level of trust in would be nice, but I think in most cases, people may operate at that level of trustableness 99.9% of the time, because the stakes are low. but when the shit hits the fan for them and they have built that level of trustability they will throw someone under the bus. You'd never know they'd act that way until under the gun.

sure, trust isn't an all or nothing thing. I have maybe one person who might seriously choose being worthy of my trust over their literal actual life (and even they would not do this, since they know that i value their life more than whatever they may or may not be able to reveal). But most things to have trust about aren't worth that much. I only need people to value such agreements more than whatever benefit they might reasonably derive from them. As for making that call, it's pretty easy to see when people who are smart enough to fuck you over at personal benefit do not do so. They might always be playing the long game, but very few people actually ever play long-games with such uncertain reward, and one can just keep the stakes below the current likelihood-assessment. It's not fail-safe, but the boons of trust are worth some more or less calculated risks

lacan says that one cant reach his desire (cute gf) without risk, the risk of being hurt, betrayed or rejected is the risk you have to take while acquiring set desire (confessing to crush)

Of all the baffling claims people make about lancan, attributing the concept of basic risk-reward-calc to him might just take the cake

lacan warned me of such empty signifiers

in lacanian psychoanalysis' healing process comes down to reducing the effect of the Other on the subject, by freeing them of their burden (real insecurity) making them "like how a lover uses the other as a stopper, rendering invisible the lack in the Other". or teaching the analysand how to navigate their symptoms and explaining why and how they effect the analysand, courage is a very important aspect in this because its the very process of rebalacing the ego and the unconscious (by deciphering), the very courage of opening up, letting it out and acknowledging what you just let out

isnt this courage aspect not exactly this risk I was speaking about, I probably should have used the word courage instead, courage is how you attain your desire and desire justifies the effort to live, without desire why would you show your presence in the first place, why not the desire of freedom to be able to move on and do what you REALLY want