I don’t mean to be argumentative and love your work guy, just offering a counter opinion as there tends to be none in bitcoin land

If you didn’t come away from Covid a rabid anti-vaxxer, you’ve gotta be retarded

Bitcoin is great but the "bitcoin community" has a tendency to believe the wildest things. Vaccines are amazing and anyone that tries to convince people otherwise are either ignorant af or trying to sell something. At the rate we're going (in the USA at least) it'll probably take a massive resurgence of measles and polio to re-convince people that vaccines are a good idea.

Consider, if you are prepared to do so, that some lies are the catalysts of other lies, enablers if you will, and fiat is one of these fundamental and corrupting containers encouraging a house built on the lie that effects don’t have causes. We know this is bullshit—as Ayn Rand dramatizes. The arrow of causality has to account for the dialectical relationship between individual responsibility and social cohesion—fiat is the narcissist abusing our human need for trust. If the individual cannot save his value (his productivity), his life is rendered meaningless because responsibility is not possible and without responsibility there is no freedom. So you can see how the lack of freedom as a possibility (fiat) leads to reality itself, in a multiplicative sense, becoming a palimpsest of psychological operations intended to delude.

Data is data is data is total nonsense. The standards for good data is so low that many clearly black criminals are listed as white to intentionally skew crime data. The number of Somali kids in daycare is completely made up. The number of people who died in hospitals from Covid was substituted with the number of people who died with Covid. Big difference.

That's the point. Textbooks act as the "interpreters" you mention. They don't just provide data. Look at the citations in a modern, $150 university textbook. Wikipedia, Wikipedia, Article, another Textbook, citation-of-a-citation. It's credibility-laundering. There's the scientific method, which few mock, and there's explicit data which Covid exposed what "trusting without verifying" leads to: Take California in this trickle-down credibility ponzi. Fauci says "pick a mask, any mask" CDC publishes an official statement "any mask will work, but N95 is best" -- The first bad citation: CDC uses a 2013 Influenza study on mask efficacy that concludes "cloth masks aren't great" and interprets the study just-for-you Newsom sees the CDC citation and cites it for his public health emergency shutdown of public gatherings and mask-mandate A whole state halts to a stop because people cited a citation of an irrelevant study used to back someone's ego. The CDC was guilty of bad study citation countless times during the Covid19 crisis, and the CDC is what will get cited in textbooks. That's the problem.

Isn't *questioning* the definition of science? How much of the "data" we've been fed to believe as objective truths have we seen be overturned later? Countless. The concept of "trust the science" in and of itself feels anti-science... 😶

You have quite a number of false equivalencies and strawmans in this comment, too many to even respond to sensibly. So I'll just say that the idea of claiming that a piece of data is sound merely because it is a piece of data, will immediately lead you to a million absurd conclusions and contradictions. And its anyone who misses basic incentives and obvious lies that is missing the nuance. It is, without any ambiguity, the extablishment narrative that has almost zero nuance and explicitly shuts down and disallows debate or any questioning of the clear contradictions and falsehoods in the "official facts."