I've always found E.T. Jayne's treatment of the topic to be good. Randomness is in the mind of the experimenter, it does not represent an intrinsic characterist

I've always found E.T. Jayne's treatment of the topic to be good. Randomness is in the mind of the experimenter, it does not represent an intrinsic characteristic of the system but the ignorance of the experimenter. This is, in my mind, the most satisfactory answer to Gibbs paradox. Born rule on the other hand, I can't wrap my mind around. Absent wave function collapse (for which there is zero evidence), what exactly are Borne probabilities probability off :(