Knowledge Today Is a Polluted Ocean

Analysis and Opinion

By Joe America

What is knowledge? It’s the data resident in our brains. There is no moral judgment applied to what’s there. It’s just there. The judgment comes into play when we use that data and find out if it is scientifically right or wrong, or when it leads to acts that are deemed good or bad according to judges who can be others or ourselves.

My, the clutter that enters our brains. The news on TV, what we learn at work or school, what our family members and friends say, our readings, and social media. Gossip at the nail salon. The government’s edicts. “Run Sara Run” posters or Harry Roque intruding when we’d like to keep him out. The seminars and You-Tube videos and political rallies. Rivers of data flow in and creeks flow out, what we say or write or think but keep to ourselves. And what we DO with the data to help others or ourselves, calculate taxes, build things or tear them down. Pray. Fight. Love. Hate.

But the knowledge is just there, in our heads. It’s the entering and leaving that does things good or bad for ourselves or others.

Our knowledge today is a polluted ocean.

Trash is rushing in, sewerage, absolute nonsense, dirty data, lies, conspiracy theories, fake news, propaganda, sales messages, promotions, and opinions. Lots of hostility. Whacky ideas. Fallacious arguments. And a trickle of clean water, of pure facts, of truth, of sincerity and love. We are being absolutely overwhelmed with garbage moving in at the speed of electricity.

Think about it. Joe Biden was duly elected President of the United States in a process of local elections that is reliable, honest, and secure. Biden won a clear majority. He corralled 306 electoral college votes to Donald Trump’s 232. He got 81.3 million popular votes to 74.3 million for Trump.

Yet, based on May polling, 30 percent of all Americans still believe Joe Biden didn’t win. Projected to the entire population, that means 80 million Americans think their president is a fraud.

Not 1,000 whack-nuts, or 100,000 misguided souls, or 1,000,000 people led by the nose through the tulips.

80 million Americans have ‘knowledge’ that their President is a fraud. They KNOW it. Just ask them. They’ll tell you how Trump was cheated. They’ll tell you who they heard it from, Sean Hannity, how the pollsters cheated, and the liberals made off with Trump ballots. They KNOW this. It is their knowledge.

Friends, how is it possible to run a nation or build anything when that kind of trash is piled up inside voter’s heads? And being shoved into our heads?

For sure government is shoveling shit. The Philippines budgets billions for liars and trolls. US politicians pursue misinformation as a political imperative so nut-case candidates can draw votes from their base of nut-cases. Well, not nut-cases, exactly, psychiatrically speaking. But people whose knowledge is an ocean of sewerage and who WANT to pour the stuff into others’ brains.

It is a given, a fact, a scientific certainty, that we are swimming in as sea of polluted waters and most certainly have some of the stuff in our own knowledge banks.

“Okay, okay, Joe. We get it. But what are we supposed to do about it?”

Ah, good of you to ask. I don’t have all the answers. But I’ve got some ideas.

  • Adopt a sense of humility about your knowledge. Know that it’s dirty water. Let fresh water in. Don’t push it away as if it were an insult to learn something different. Let the trash flow out, preferably down the drain leading straight to hell.
  • Be skeptical about opinions in areas you don’t wholly understand. Ask for references. Check them out. Verify. Get all sides. Build your own “whole picture”.
  • Don’t let the hard-sell peddlers in the door, the trolls and conspiracy fanatics or anyone slinging insults. Learn to identify them. Keep them out of your life. They are delivering dirt.
  • Know the basic logical fallacies, ad hominem arguments, fallacy of the exception, straw-man arguments. Don’t let bad logic lead you in the wrong direction. Don’t let emotions take the place of analysis.
  • Google. If the internet is much of the problem, it is also the solution if you use it to search, verify, and cross-reference.
  • Make up your own mind. Don’t just go with the polluted flow. We have the brains to do this and can develop the skills. We can build a higher level of discourse and a cleaner base of knowledge. I’m confident we can.

If you have further ideas, do use the discussion section to share them. We are all students here, looking for the occasional teacher.


Photograph by Sam Helmy from

139 Responses to “Knowledge Today Is a Polluted Ocean”
  1. NHerrera says:

    Again, the Dunning-Kruger chart @LCPL_X posted in the previous blog is relevant here:

    People with little knowledge — amplified further by the manipulation of people like Trump and cohorts and social media — have the most confidence in their polluted knowledge. Since many, sad to say, have little knowledge to start with, and thus inhabitants of Mount Stupid or Mount Nut-Cases, it will difficult to climb out of that Mountain.

    You outlined a good set of recommendations for those still near the base of Mount Stupid — with less brain pollution.

    Timely blog article. Coinciding with the finding that most of the top plastic pollution in the world comes from the rivers of the PH, particularly the Pasig River. Even DFA Sec Teddy Boy Locsin was prompted to tweet that we are again Numero Uno in that regard.

    • NHerrera says:

      Re humility, I practice that in a small way. I never prefix my name with a Dr. in front of my name. [I now forget that I got a Ph.D. from a prestigious US University a long time ago; appropriate too since the special knowledge I acquired in that field is now rather stale. It’s the habit and attitude I now value more.] It helps in real life since doing so makes my conversation with others unencumbered by the use of all those titles people in the PH are fond of using — Atty. Roque, Engineer Villar, Dr. Cruz, etc. There was a fellow I worked with who felt much insulted if the prefix Mr. is used instead of Dr. with his name.

      • kasambahay says:

        kudos po, nherrera, looks like you’ve reach self actualisation, happier and content with your present lot.

        me? I probly have a very polluted mind having ditched such trappings as jewelries. got sick of people telling me how beautiful ako, but the sods are staring at my jewels and not at me. so I got rid of my jewels, sold them off and give the proceeds to charity, and my sisters nearly killed me! had me nearly committed for being insane. but what freedom, to be less encumbered and unnoticed.

        my polluted mind is again rearing up, caused by this father and daughter team sa malakanyang. parent and child team, diosdado macapagal and gloria arroyo, cory and noynoy, and now the looming duterte father and daughter.

        from previous experience, father and daughter team of diosdado and gloria was disastrous, whereas the mother and son team of cory and noynoy was okay. and now my polluted mind says the duterte father and daughter team has the hallmark of disaster, the daughter already being too narky vs the 2nd highest official of the land, the vice president.

        all because the vice president said something about dabaw and lucky for the vice, she was not sheriff, lol! anyhow, since the vice outranked the mayor, the vice is entitled to an opinion. and since the mayor is not yet president, she ought to respect the vice.

        • NHerrera says:

          I read that as “unpolluted mind.” Thank you for your note, kasambahay.

          I particularly like, … ditched such trappings as jewelries. got sick of people telling me how beautiful ako, but the sods are staring at my jewels and not at me. so I got rid of my jewels, sold them off and give the proceeds to charity … And your notes about father-daughter/ son.

  2. off topic but a good primer on DeFi from Mark Cuban:

    Disclosure: I have negligible amounts invested on a few LPs. The risky ones.

    • It’s a foreign language to me. It takes me back to my theoretical math days when I took the class and learned exactly nothing.

      • NHerrera says:

        I believe what we learn is not so much the use of the specific math theorems or the like in our later working life, but the exercise or habit of requiring proofs in studying theoretical math. Something I believe is unconsciously done in one’s thinking, say, in banking or marketing work — in requiring proof or support of ideas through statistics and other means not necessarily mathematical.

        • Yes, the disciplines stick if the technicalities do not. I believe so too.

          • NHerrera says:

            Haha. You expressed that in clear brief language what took me two long sentences to say!

            • LCPL_X says:

              I’ll not sully gian and Micha’s tit for tat below, NH.

              But much of this money stuff is about consensus. Think of the Medici’s in Florence and their double ledger entry, and how that got them into royalty and eventually the Holy See.

              it’s essentially magic. Thus money isn’t about math proofs but human consensus. When enough people decide they’ll play along. The thing becomes of value. El Salvador decide so. CBDC is same-same.

              Thus it is so.

              • NHerrera says:

                Lance, you did not get my note above in the exchange with Joe correctly. Let me clarify.

                In realms other than theoretical math which requires mathematical proofs, a critical thinking man requires some form of support for his ideas, which I said maybe in the form of statistics or other means — which I add now can be in the form of consensus in a sizable group the person respects. Sample: the tens of millions of Trump crazies is certainly sizable but I do not respect them so their crazy idea that the US 2020 election was stolen do not provide “proof” or support of that idea to me, but the many Courts, including SCOTUS and government institutions and officials I respect provide the support that the election was not stolen. In short “proof” as an idea has nuances. Proof in theoretical math is a different animal from proof outside of math.

                Another sample: in the matter of Bitcoin, Blockchain, CBDC etc being discussed here now by Gian, Micha, Joe, yourself — people I admire/ respect for their thoughts — I am listening and weighing them for the “proof” that may crystalize for me about the subject.

              • LCPL_X says:

                NH, i was actually agreeing with you. Sorry for not being clear there.

                The Medicis proof was in the double entry ledger; Bitcoins is blockchain.

                Just like Medicis moved money and valuables; Bitcoin although backed and proved by blockchain, Micha is saying its not of intrinsic value. Shit.

                This is where consensus is needed. Something of value is something of value when two or more parties agree on said value. This is why the rich move their money around using symbols, like art. Token as gian says.

                The thing to be valued is thus arbitrary. Just needs critical mass. Consensus.

                Why is gold of value? Certainly theres beauty (shiny) and useful (like for outer space), but its actual value is in its scarcity. But then again, so too rare earth metals now needed for batteries and tech. Why not use rare earth metals; well because there is better consensus in gold.

                Enough people agree in gold. If this agreement is arbitrary, then why not transfer said consensus to Bitcoin.

                But as a math guy, NH, you should be studying the 21 million as cap of Bitcoin, it turns out that there is not really 21 million even, but 20.99999999… something something (I’m not sure exactly) but a number with like 9 places past the decimal to ensure a certain type of divisibility.

                I have no idea about it. Just that it struck me as interesting, but with only a PhD in Google, I can only gape in awe.

                Here’s the link to Bitcoin’s math (there are more sites):

                Thus it is actually better than gold.

                p.s. >>> NH, OT, but did you ever come across this dude when at Stanford, ?

                Alfred Matthew Hubbard (July 24, 1901–August 31, 1982) was an early proponent for the drug LSD during the 1950s. He is reputed to have been the “Johnny Appleseed of LSD” and the first person to emphasize LSD’s potential as a visionary or transcendental drug.

              • LCPL_X says:

                Because if someone lassos the golden asteroid in space and brings it to Earth, gold will cease to be of value. As Micha says “shit”. W/out its scarcity it ceases to be of value.

              • NHerrera says:

                … 21 million as cap of Bitcoin

                Lance, thanks for that interesting, intriguing bit of information. Why indeed the cap? At the recent $60,000 per Bitcoin [it has gone down, I understand], that corresponds to $1.26 trillion. May it relate, at least to the concept that scarcity gives value, but why the particular number of 21 million. It seems like Einstein’s speed of light as the threshold speed of physical objects.

                Re-Bitcoin cap. With $1.0 million per Bitcoin, we have $2,100 trillion. So, [conecture???] if this Bitcoin thing persists in a big way, $60k Bitcoin is peanuts.

              • LCPL_X says:

                I think my reading of the Parable of the Talents lends well to this Bitcoin discussion, NH.

                HODL means HOLD ON FOR DEAR LIFE, that is like the dogma for Christians that Jesus Saves. In many ways Bitcoin (or crypto) in general is like religion.

                My ears perk up when talking of religion because the whole notion of mass delusion tends to become true, I notice thus affect all eventually. The current system that we’re all party to now is in itself mass delusion that requires wars and other stuff to insist it is the best system.

                So I’m coming from a this system is already broken, let’s find a better (or worst) one, NH. The point is to find another.

                Blockchain is here to stay. To connect it to Joe’s blog (because this Bitcoin stuff is relevant, especially CBDC as Philippine Central Bank considers it), while considering Bitcoin’s pro and con, what is the thing we are suppose to be focused on.

                Well the fact that its better at being money than fiat; and better at being gold than gold, already says something.


                the math of all this is where eventual consensus will be, just like the “truth” say in the Catholic church is in its sacraments, ex. imagine the Catholic church without it, then unlike fiat (chempo’s truth) and gold (Micha’s truth) , crypto is in its math and how parsimonious it is, as to explain to people.

                So with all this commentary, IMHO appropriate to Joe’s blog about sifting thru trash in attempt to enjoy the wider ocean of knowledge (pure knowledge), in the end I think it is only NH that can make sense of Bitcoin.

                Thus right for this blog you NH are the occasional teacher here. Not I, not Micha, not chempo. not Joe not gian. The essence of Bitcoin is in math. Thus your purview.

                p.s. — I myself actually are still on the fence, NH, just to be clear.

      • Important projects in the crypto space:

        Sending messages through the blockchain using smart contracts.

        Registering Domains using blockchains and smart contracts.

        Posting Messages that cannot be censored through the blockchain. (You can censor but that means you have compromised the whole chain)

        Social Media over a blockchain.

        Blogging over a blockchain

        Podcasts over a blockchain

        These are from the top of my head and does not include the more advanced stuff. Basically What I do not understand to a great degree I did not put here.

        • I spent a little time exploring a blockchain blog platform to secure writings from intrusion and erasure. If I don’t make my $100 payment to Word Press evey year, the whole of TSOH goes away. But the format of the blog is very rudimentary and the technology to get there more than I can withstand in my impatient older years. 🤣

          • This is one of the things I am exploring. have had a blog since 2008 and would like to store that too. There are no options for when I die. You are right the blockchain may be a way to keep my random thoughts online

          • L CPLX you may be interested on this podcast :

            • LCPL_X says:

              Thanks, gian!

              I’ve not finished it yet, but that’s a long the lines of our discussion.

              Do you think you can write a blog or in the comments about how you got started and how to get started in the Philippines if you only have say the minimum of resources.

              Basically a how to. And what not to do. Seems like a race now between Bitcoin and CBDC, so it behooves people in the Philippines to set up before BSP catches up.

              • I heard about this in early 2009 or 2010, I spent a lot of time in Reddit and hacker news and I read the paper then.

                I didn’t feel the need for it and wasn’t really that interested on it. Have a chill relationship with money and thus wasn’t really FOMO with the 62000% returns.

                Duterte and COVID19 changed my perspective and for some reason, I connected the years 1984 and 1985 GDP of the Philippines with my risks now.

                So what attracted me to Bitcoin and other Cryptocurrencies was during scenario planning (closet prepper, a side anecdote. I was computing and writing down what would be the state where I would buy a VSAT internet connection and a Satellite Phone as a backup communications channel. Basically, if I am losing about the same amount in consulting fees by being off-grid during the aftermath of a super typhoon or a big earthquake where connectivity can be down from a few days to months). If the Philippines becomes a full banana republic what can I bring across a border with minimal fuss. Definitely not gold, or USDs.

                The quickest on-ramp for crypto in the Philippines is probably CoinsPH. This eWallet registered with the BSP allows you to buy 4 cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin (BTC), Ether (ETH), Bitcoin Cash (BCH), and XRP.

                When you have your Cryptocurrencies you can then transfer this to cryptocurrency exchanges like Binance, KuCoin, or PDAX.

                I primarily use Binance.

                If you are a little more daring you can use debit cards to buy crypto directly from Binance.

                CoinsPH fees are very high compared to that of Binance.

                I initially got into crypto as part of prepping. But as a technologist and programmer the technology made me super excited. For reference ML/AI stuff didn’t excite me as I have a feeling the current approaches lead to a dead end and a new AI winter is probably in play.

                Hope this helps fellow Pinoys.

              • Bitcoin as a vehicle to transfer value in and out of the Philippines is terrific, but I suspect there is a point at which regulations would be imposed. I like your problem-solving approach to everything.

              • NHerrera says:

                Yes, an inspiring approach to problem-solving. Thanks, gian, for the brief.

          • LCPL_X says:

            Great run down, gian. Thanks!

            I found these helpful in trying to understanding the essence of Bitcoin,

            “Simmel believed people created value by making objects, then separating themselves from those objects and then trying to overcome that distance. He found that objects that were too close were not considered valuable and objects that were too far away for people to obtain were also not considered valuable. What was also considered in determining value was the scarcity, time, sacrifice, and difficulties involved in getting objects. In the pre-modern era, beginning with bartering, different systems of exchange for goods and services allowed for the existence of incomparable systems of value (land, food, honor, love, etc.). With the advent of a universal currency as an intermediary, these systems became reconcilable, as everything tended to become expressible in a single quantifiable metric: its monetary cost.

            A fundamental point of The Philosophy of Money is that money brings about personal freedom. The effect of freedom can be appreciated by considering the evolution of economic obligations. When someone is a slave, their whole person is subject to the master. The peasant has more freedom, but if they are to provide the lord with payments in kind, such as wheat or cattle, they must produce exactly the item required, or barter it at a great loss or inconvenience. But when the obligation takes a monetary form, the peasant is free as to whether to grow wheat, or keep cattle, or engage in other activities, as long as they pay the required tax.”

            And this link,


            “The social ontology of money: But exactly how does the “social construction” of money work? This question invokes the more general philosophical issue of social ontology, with regard to which money is often used as a prime example. An influential account of social ontology holds that money is the sort of social institution whose existence depends on “collective intentionality”: beliefs and attitudes that are shared in a community (see, e.g., Searle 1995, 2010; Smit, Buekens, & du Plessis 2011). The process starts with someone’s simple and unilateral declaration that something is money, which is a performative speech act (see Austin 1962). When other people recognize or accept the declaration it becomes a standing social rule. Thus, money is said to depend on our subjective attitudes but is not located (solely) in our minds (for a discussion see also the entries on social ontology and social institutions). In an early philosophical-sociological account, Georg Simmel (1900) had described money as an institution that is a crucial precondition for modernity because it allows putting a value on things and simplifies transactions; he also criticizes the way in which money thereby replaces other forms of valuation (see also section 4.1).”

        • LCPL_X says:

          Look at 2009 to 2021. pan out.

          There’s a great article in FT,

          “Derrick Brown, a former NBA basketball player. Now chief executive of US venture company Free Fenix, he says he is “an investor first and foremost, who also happened to play sports in the past”. He adds that were he starting his sporting career now, he would ask for part of his pay to be in crypto.

          Brown first invested in cryptocurrencies partly through an allocation in specialist hedge fund BlockTower. “I look at everything from a diversification standpoint,” he says, noting that less than 5 per cent of his portfolio is allocated to cryptocurrency. “Bitcoin might drop 20 per cent in a day, but year to date it’s still up 85 per cent; it’s about how far out you see the big picture,” he adds.

          Ro agrees. “This is a market at an experimental stage and this is what happens,” she says. “I’m a typical hodler. I believe in crypto in the long run, but I’m not going to put all my life savings in it. I have stocks, real estate, jewellery, art . . . it’s about diversification.”

          Ro is reluctant to say how much she is worth as a result of her bitcoin punt, as she has been targeted by scammers and has received death threats after talking about the subject. But she was able to leave full-time banking in 2017 — the year of bitcoin’s first significant rally, when prices rose from just above $800 to almost $20,000. Bitcoin’s surge to $63,000 earlier this year increased Ro’s fortune.

          “Let’s just say, I have done very well. I have gone from being a banker to working at a non-profit,” says Ro, who studied at Yale and Columbia universities. “Getting in early because the tech seemed really cool also worked out as an investment, so that’s also pretty cool.” Being an early investor meant she has had to try a dozen exchanges, suffered hacks and been locked out of investments. Her friends have also done well from her foray, as she recalls giving them bitcoin “just to test out how it works”.

          Joe, Micha, et al. as you can see, from its inception Bitcoin still appreciated a great deal. Wall street is Wall street after all, but the focus should be in Main street. Is it usable, CBDC has already answered that question, otherwise CBs won’t even entertain crypto.

          So gian, Brown and Ro onto something especially w/ the tech of it all (I’ve not sung money into this. too high even as it descends still too high for me, but I am looking into its periphery businesses its ecosystem, those i can be at the ground floor of, like Mind Med for pharma).

          gian can explain HODL and the strategy behind it better than I can since he has Bitcoin.

          Joe and Micha you’re focused on the Wall street aspect of this, Main street is where its at.

          The question is simply how will Bitcoin (crypto) fair when the Fed goes Digital Currency(DC). And IMHO because money and person (read that Stanford Philosophy of Money/Finance article) are supposed to be separate, people will choose Bitcoin/crypto precisely because money by definition is “the universal means by which the labour of people can be exchanged” , on which Kant added money is “a thing the use of which is only possible through its being alienated”.

          Thus once the Fed adopts DC, money will be intertwined with who you are, when its purpose is to be alien from you or separate. Marx could not have seen what Kant saw a generation before. That the point of money is anonymity. CBDC will conjoin you to your money; Bitcoin/crypto will preserve anonymity (just like cash/gold, art, barter/trade, etc. etc.)

          Anonymity is the biggest point here, once CBDC is instituted. Is that of value is the question. IMHO, yes!

          • Micha says:

            Anonymity is exactly where your money launderers, kleptocrats, and criminal syndicates want to be.

            • LCPL_X says:

              This is already done openly in Delaware, Micha.

              All money can be used for good or bad. Anonymity too can be for good, bad. I don’t want the Feds to freeze up my money because I’ve not gotten the COVID vaccine. that’s the power of CBDC once it renders bills/coins obsolete.

              As for Ponzi scheme, remember promises of wealth is the point of a ponzi scheme,

              from (“Satoshi” actually agrees with you Micha, could be something, or could be zero)

              “The fact that new coins are produced means the money supply increases by a planned amount, but this does not neces­sarily result in infla­tion. If the supply of money increases at the same rate that the number of people using it increases, prices remain stable. If it does not increase as fast as demand, there will be defla­tion and early holders of money will see its value increase.”


              “It might make sense just to get some in case it catches on. If enough people think the same way, that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Once it gets bootstrapped, there are so many appli­ca­tions if you could effort­lessly pay a few cents to a website as easily as dropping coins in a vending machine.”


              “In this sense, it’s more typical of a precious metal. Instead of the supply changing to keep the value the same, the supply is prede­ter­mined and the value changes. As the number of users grows, the value per coin increases. It has the poten­tial for a positive feedback loop; as users increase, the value goes up, which could attract more users to take advan­tage of the increasing value.”


              “Maybe it could get an initial value circu­larly as you’ve suggested, by people foreseeing its poten­tial useful­ness for exchange. (I would definitely want some) Maybe collec­tors, any random reason could spark it. I think the tradi­tional quali­fi­ca­tions for money were written with the assump­tion that there are so many competing objects in the world that are scarce, an object with the automatic bootstrap of intrinsic value will surely win out over those without intrinsic value. But if there were nothing in the world with intrinsic value that could be used as money, only scarce but no intrinsic value, I think people would still take up something. (I’m using the word scarce here to only mean limited poten­tial supply)”


              “A rational market price for something that is expected to increase in value will already reflect the present value of the expected future increases. In your head, you do a proba­bility estimate balancing the odds that it keeps increasing.”


              “I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large trans­ac­tion volume or no volume.”

              “Bitcoins have no dividend or poten­tial future dividend, there­fore not like a stock. More like a collectible or commodity.”

              • Micha says:

                “More like a collectible or commodity.”

                Exactly right. And it is a commodity with no physical existence. Therein lies the center of the scam.

                Steel is a commodity. Oil is a commodity. Corn is a commodity.

                Corn has intrinsic practical value. It can be used to make tacos or ethanol.

                Bitcoin the commodity, on the other hand, is an electronic fluff whose inflated artificially created value was derived from an accounting ledger.

                Therein lies the scam.

                And the madness doesn’t stop there.

                Bitcoin is also being paraded as a parallel currency with the potential to replace the dollar, the yen, the euro, the sterling, or the peso.

                If you’re falling for this, I also have a bridge to sell in Tabuk.

              • LCPL_X says:

                I think you’re missing the point , Micha.

                “Bitcoins have no dividend or poten­tial future dividend, there­fore not like a stock. More like a collectible or commodity.”

                The main take away of that sentence is that it isn’t like a stock. What you and Joe are commenting on is exactly that its being traded like one.

                In prison, collectible or commodity are cigarettes, thus cigarettes take the form of money precisely because they don’t get to carry legal tender inside.

                If everyone is a non-smoker (as thought experiment) people would still use it as money, until something else replaces it.

                In this digital age, cigarette is Bitcoin/crypto. its not supposed to be traded like a stock, but markets can be formed for anything really, and just like any commodity,

                exchanges form. Like Futures market , where a futures contract has no intrinsic value.

                “In this sense, it’s more typical of a precious metal. Instead of the supply changing to keep the value the same, the supply is prede­ter­mined and the value changes. As the number of users grows, the value per coin increases. It has the poten­tial for a positive feedback loop; as users increase, the value goes up, which could attract more users to take advan­tage of the increasing value.”

                The fact it does this, simply means more people are looking into it. I’m saying the more the better, because when CBDC is the default money, then they’ll be able to say , Hey this one allows us more privacy.

                Its not fraud because the blockchain is open for everyone to verify. What people decide to value is key here, Micha. Just like cigarettes in prison or a futures contract, where a cigarette is to be smoked and a futures contract is suppose to be just with the parties involved but now its traded , both items become something totally different than


                The point, is that “Satoshi” himself didn’t know exactly what it would become, just that the code was tight and secure.

                If you were to sell me a bridge in Tabuk you’d talk me up into selling me that bridge, Micha; “Satoshi” didn’t hyperbolize Bitcoin at all at the start, thus the users decided its worth much later on. See the difference there?

                You’re missing that aspect of your claim, Micha. from 2008 to 2021, Satoshi has nothing to do with it anymore, Bitcoin has taken on a life of its own. Fraud or ponzi necessitates people at the top scheming, there’s none;

                the most rational explanation of the ups and downs is either whales with a lot of money misdirecting (the opposite of ponzi, because whales are actually the ones wanting to buy Bitcoin but at a lower price point) or that these are just normal fluctuations as people figure this tech out further.

                HODL means the latter. Ride it out until the ecosystem surrounding it improves as more people buy into it, understand it. You aren’t even attempting to understand it, you ‘ve already determined the limits of Bitcoin.

        • LCPL_X says:

          This notion of a scam, Bridge in Tabuk, Ponzi, etc. is real interesting for me, kinda like conspiracy theories.

          If you really drill down who’ll be for or against Bitcoin/crypto, you’ll understand the rhetoric for or against.

          For example, if I’m a late comer in Bitcoin but I’m a whale meaning huge money to sink, like anyone in Finance I can essentially throw money to misdirect, this I think is what Elon Musk, etc. are doing, thus pay for Bitcoin at a much lower rate.

          But if you’re a whale who already has Bitcoin, you’ll not really want to misuse funds to misdirect, you already have it, so its more profitable to look at other crypto or periphery businesses ecosystem. You’ll essentially HODL too.

          Investors will affect the market, and telegraph their moves in support or against Bitcoin, but the profit for the against position is unclear. Only makes sense if you’re attempting to lower the price.

          To buy it yourself.

          You can be like Micha, and say I’m trying to save souls here by unveiling this scam, but I doubt that if this is your position and you’re not a whale, you’ll participate in the market either way. Precisely because its of no value thus of no consequence.

          So the most , you’ll ever do, the MOST, is what Micha is doing here, essentially repeating claims against Bitcoin, not really studying it closely.

          But a person like chempo though as a banker and as someone who believes in the banking world as the thing keeping modernity and civil society afloat will want to actually follow through with his opinions, but again unless chempo is a whale or has money to burn ,

          like Micha, he’ll simply go with what is free publication, so thru blogs and youtube, to fight against Bitcoin.

          The opposite of chempo and Micha (the irony of this team up should not escape anyone) are folks like me and gian , me as a libertarian Bernie supporter and gian as someone who’s interested in freedom and practical use (again refer to Stanford link above).

          Not so much gian here, but me (because I like to argue mainly) will be explaining the benefits of Bitcoin. In hopes of converting more people to Bitcoin, at minimum to give it fair consideration. The idea here is the more people jump in the more useful a thing becomes.

          That s for the rhetoric aspect.

          Then comes the market. A person who does research will buy his Bitcoin in person, no exchanges. A person who just wants to buy a little will go on say Gemini, user friendly. Then you’ll have folks true believers who’ll just keep on buying up Bitcoin assured that this is where the future leads. Then you have the whales, same but with more buying power. Then you’ll have true savvy investors that will hedge, buy and sell, and make a buck or two thru this process.

          If I’m missing any other actors in the market, feel free to add.

          chempo, Micha, and those that think its a scam will not look into this any farther, but will use confirmation bias at will, see I’m right?!!! it’s down! When its up, who cares! people are dumb.

          So the only possible actors that will play into all this is the gov’t, the Fed, thru FTC & FCC will enforce.

          Essentially, my point here is where is the scam of it all if you have so many actors playing their role in said market with varying interests. the naysayers part in all this is simply in the naysaying and nothing else, unless of course they have the power to influence the Fed/FTC/FCC.

          chempo’s position I can understand, commercial bank and credit card companies will be rendered obsolete.

          Micha, your position is still unclear to me, let’s say the Fed will now go with CBDC, bills/coins are stopped, all digital now, doesn’t that serve the interest of MMT? IF Bitcoin/crypto is outlawed by the Fed, don’t we still end up at the same place with Digital currency? When this happens where is the scam? The Fed?

          There will be no need for banks, because the Fed can directly turn on and drain money from the market. This consolidation is CBDC, Micha. the ramifications of which I’ve already outlined.

          • I hear you. I am not a naysayer. More an observer with a wry sense of humor. It’s not a ponzi scheme unless it collapses and some poor sucker is left holding the bag. Anyone putting money into bitcoin is more like a gambler than a fool. 😎

    • Micha says:

      This is a scam through and through. Why introduce a parallel currency? On whose authority? Who makes the arbitrary rules? Is it meant to override or totally replace the dollar system?

      • probably 90 percent are scams or near scams but not all. Tokens are about decentralised systems. Decentralised governance, Decentralised funding, decentralised social networks, decentralised web hosting, decentralised messaging. Finance is front and center because it is how everything gets funded.

        A lot of these coins are projects trying to get funding. The investment is done through buying these coins. These coins sometimes have voting rights to the project direction (DAO). So a lot of the legit coins are essentially investments on technologies that are solving problems.

        • Micha says:

          “A lot of these coins are projects trying to get funding.”

          And I thought these crypto coins are being peddled as a form of money, a parallel currency to rival or even replace the dollar. Why in the world does it need funding?

          Funded by state issued money?

          What’s going on?

          • There are tokens called stable coins these are supposed to be backed by actual deposited dollars or various currency depending on the fiat backing. Project either through staking or ICO (Initial Coin Offerings) allow you to exchange the stable coins with project coins. The project coins have various rights included. These rights range from a percentage of the project earnings, a vote on project direction are the important ones. In this light not all coins are trying to be currency. Some are trying to act like shares, voting shares, shares for dividends, etc.

            • Micha says:

              In other words, a scam.

              “There are tokens called stable coins these are supposed to be backed by actual deposited dollars.”

              What is its intrinsic value that it can claim to be backed by deposited dollars?

              • actual bank deposits audited by third parties. SEC filed cases against stable coin issuers that had dubious deposits.

              • Micha says:

                In other words, crypto coins have zero intrinsic value.

                I thought that needs to be emphasized.

                “In this light not all coins are trying to be currency.”

                Well, well, well..what the hell. Why call it a coin then? Why not call it fluffy ensaymada?

              • that is why a lot these are called tokens.

            • Micha says:

              And anyone can issue a token. MRT issues a token, so is a movie house or a concert event. Thing is, an MRT passenger gets a transport service in exchange for the peso that he pays up at the station. So does a movie or concert goer, they get an entertainment for their money. What does one get in buying a crypto coin? What value, what service, what product?

              Nothing. Zilch. Nada.

              If the objective is to simply fund-raise dollars, the girl scouts have a much nicer way of doing it – they bake cookies and sell it and you get a smile and a warm thank you from those cute little girls at a Costco entrance.

              Crypto mining on the other hand uses a lot of electricity which is a bane to the environment and what do you get for all that effort?

              A crypto piece of shit.

              • Mocha are you familiar with the Byzantine General Problem? Bitcoin mining requires Proof of Work to secure the network. Go by first principles. Dont be like the people who can’t think for themselves.

                The question is do you value decentralisation? The foundation of crypto world right now is the belief that a lot of the infrastructure of the internet world should not be exclusively in the hands of corporations/governments.

                This is why Decentralisation matters.

                If you don’t value Decentralisation then of course everything in the crypto world is useless for you. You probably want the corporations to defacto rule everything, and that’s okay we can all wish for the world we want.

                For me specially coming from a country with no say in world matters decentralisation is valuable and should be encouraged.

                You are fixated in the coin part not in what is important to us. Creating a more decentralised world.

              • LCPL_X says:

                “For me specially coming from a country with no say in world matters decentralisation is valuable and should be encouraged.”

                That’s what Micha says about MMT!!!

                And chempo says MMT is shit.

                They teach the Parable of the Talents wrongly in Sunday school. The Master is not God. The Master here is Central Banks. The servants are servants, that’s us. The last servant with 1 and stayed with 1 talent is suppose to leave Central Bank. That’s the lesson.

                Jesus was actually talking about crypto and blockchain.

                He’s saying go all in with Bitcoin and blockchain. And leave your Master, Central Banks. Take that 1 Talent and buy Bitcoin, then HODL.

              • Micha says:

                Okey, so this is all about decentralization; not just some innocent issuance of tokens. The objective, the bigger agenda, is to undermine the state and its government.

                What makes you think it will succeed? What are you gonna do if tomorrow the central government will issue a directive that, because its authority and power is being challenged, it will henceforth ban all forms of crypto trading and that the FBI and the police will hunt down anyone who violates the state sanctioned lawful order?

              • TBH. I learned about crypto early on but did not think about this because of that mindset. After 10 years and with the thought of death being ever-present death in the internet world meaning being de-platformed decentralization becomes very important.

                What I mean is, It is true that a sizeable number of people supporting Crypto are the libertarians, and anarchists groups, another sizable group just wants to make money, but there is also the technologists like me who are doing this in search of building resilient systems/platforms not only in technology but in governance, messaging, blogging, podcasts, etc.

    • chemrock says:

      I think Cuban lost his pants in the crypto Tethers

  3. i7sharp says:

    The picture (of the flotsam/jetsam)
    somehow reminded me of this article written by the late Edgar Lores:

    By the way, there were 375 comments in it.
    One of my “contributions” (24 of them) said, “I almost fell of my seat …”
    Ouch! I meant “off” … of course.
    Just one of (probably) many errors – grammatical or otherwise.

  4. i7sharp says:

    Yet another guide on Bitcoin?:

    Meanwhile, …
    If you have further ideas, do use the discussion section to share them. We are all students here, looking for the occasional teacher.

    Perhaps “the occasional teacher” will show up soon?

  5. NHerrera says:

    This just one man’s opinion, but the writer, Eswar Prasad, has a credential. He is a professor at Cornell University and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. This is his opinion, writing as a guest essayist for NYT. The essay, dated June 14, 2021, is titled “The Brutal Truth About Bitcoin”

    Here are the introductory paragraphs:

    “Bitcoin, the original cryptocurrency, has been on a wild ride since its creation in 2009. Earlier this year, the price of one Bitcoin surged to over $60,000, an eightfold increase in 12 months. Then it fell to half that value in just a few weeks. Values of other cryptocurrencies such as Dogecoin have risen and fallen even more sharply, often based just on Elon Musk’s tweets. Even after the recent fall in their prices, the total market value of all cryptocurrencies now exceeds $1.5 trillion, a staggering amount for virtual objects that are nothing more than computer code.

    “Are cryptocurrencies the wave of the future and should you be using and investing in them? And do the massive swings in their prices — nearly $1 trillion was wiped off their total value in May — portend trouble for the financial system?

    “Bitcoin was created (by a person or group that remains unidentified to this day) as a way to conduct transactions without the intervention of a trusted third party, such as a central bank or financial institution. Its emergence amid the global financial crisis, which shook trust in banks and even governments, was perfectly timed. Bitcoin enabled transactions using only digital identities, granting users some degree of anonymity. This made Bitcoin the preferred currency for illicit activities, including recent ransomware attacks. It powered the shadowy darknet of illegal online commerce much like PayPal helped the rise of eBay by making payments easier.

    “As it grew in popularity, Bitcoin became cumbersome, slow, and expensive to use. It takes about 10 minutes to validate most transactions using the cryptocurrency and the transaction fee has been at a median of about $20 this year. Bitcoin’s unstable value has also made it an unviable medium of exchange. It is as though your $10 bill could buy you a beer on one day and a bottle of fine wine on another.”

    Sorry, Joe, I am departing from the subject of the current blog topic — I am being carried away from the more recent comments.

    • i7sharp says:

      “Bitcoin was created (by a person or group that remains unidentified to this day) …”

      Remains unidentified to this day?!
      So much for “knowledge today”!

      Have you heard that the DepEd still could not identify the source of the word “makakantot” – – found in a teaching module?
      So much for “knowledge today”!

      In this day and age of Google, let us test our “knowledge today.”
      Speaking of “polluted” – as in “polluted ocean” – let us see where a search for “the most polluted chapter in the Bible” would lead to.

      • LCPL_X says:

        Was it Jesus who told your that he was the son of God ; or was it really Paul?

        One can live in bliss without really knowing the source, i7sharp.

        • i7sharp says:

          By far, the “most polluted” chapter in the Bible is Chapter 20 of the Book of Ezekiel.

          Whereas in other (1,188) chapters of the Bible “pollute” and its derivatives occur only twice at most, in Ezekiel chapter 20 alone they occur eleven (11) times!
          By the way, “abominations” occurs four (4) times in the same chapter.

          One particular proper noun found in the same chapter stands out and it occurs only once in the whole Bible.
          The phrase “unto this day” occurs 88 times in the whole Bible: twice in the Book of Ezekiel … and only in chapter 20. (‘Tis worth revisiting this … in due time.)

          I submit there is no better source of eternal knowledge than from where I culled the above info.
          It is the same source I used back in 2015 when, as one can see, the exchanges were more interesting, IIMSSM.
          It seems I posted five times in this blog article:
          2016: Desperately seeking Ninoy

    • LCPL_X says:

      “As it grew in popularity, Bitcoin became cumbersome, slow, and expensive to use. It takes about 10 minutes to validate most transactions using the cryptocurrency and the transaction fee has been at a median of about $20 this year. Bitcoin’s unstable value has also made it an unviable medium of exchange. It is as though your $10 bill could buy you a beer on one day and a bottle of fine wine on another.”

      This exact same paragraph can be said of fiat, NH. its happened before, it will happen again. The reason all other fiat’s connected to the US dollar, belief that it is better managed. Not so…

      Why everyone is now clamoring for inflation over here. But we’re told just supply chain issues, temporary. Could be nothing, but my point that revelation is no revelation really.

      IMHO, the good professor here is speaking from Mt. Stupid, as I don’t see any math in his attack or support of Bitcoin. thus arguing as Micha has.

      Let’s use that Dunning -Kruger graph to see where all pros and cons on Bitcoin stand, and say as threshhold if it has no math, its speaking from Mt. Stupid. Which means so far all discussion on Bitcoin had been from this perch.

      And say, in this land of the blind, NH has one eye.

    • Micha says:

      I thought some might be interested in the link if they are not behind a paywall :

      • LCPL_X says:

        Its value is volatile. <<< Even after consensus? How?

        Its users aren’t as anonymous as they think. <<< Is this an expose on blockchain? Is Bitcoin blockchain proven unsecure then?

        It might be a threat to the environment. <<< The laptop I'm using now is a threat to the environment. How is it more?

        And it could be exacerbating inequality. <<< You mean more so than capitalism? How?

        I can't access the full NYT opinion just what NH has posted. So my questions above.

        The bolded proposition is the most damning, the other three are just fluff.

        • Micha says:

          Go in incognito mode, delete your cookies and browsing history and try again. If you still hit a paywall, get a subscription. It’s only about 10 bucks/month. And no, NYT don’t accept bitcoins.

    • LCPL_X says:

      It worked thanks! I’ll post the full piece below so we’ll not have to click on the link back and forth… I’ve bolded what I wanted to address and italicized my points.


      By Eswar Prasad
      Mr. Prasad is a professor at Cornell University and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

      Bitcoin, the original cryptocurrency, has been on a wild ride since its creation in 2009. Earlier this year, the price of one Bitcoin surged to over $60,000, an eightfold increase in 12 months. Then it fell to half that value in just a few weeks. Values of other cryptocurrencies such as Dogecoin have risen and fallen even more sharply, often based just on Elon Musk’s tweets. Even after the recent fall in their prices, the total market value of all cryptocurrencies now exceeds $1.5 trillion, a staggering amount for virtual objects that are nothing more than computer code.

      Are cryptocurrencies the wave of the future and should you be using and investing in them? And do the massive swings in their prices — nearly $1 trillion was wiped off the their total value in May — portend trouble for the financial system?

      Bitcoin was created (by a person or group that remains unidentified to this day) as a way to conduct transactions without the intervention of a trusted third party, such as a central bank or financial institution. Its emergence amid the global financial crisis, which shook trust in banks and even governments, was perfectly timed. Bitcoin enabled transactions using only digital identities, granting users some degree of anonymity. This made Bitcoin the preferred currency for illicit activities, including recent ransomware attacks. It powered the shadowy darknet of illegal online commerce much like PayPal helped the rise of eBay by making payments easier.

      As it grew in popularity, Bitcoin became cumbersome, slow, and expensive to use. It takes about 10 minutes to validate most transactions using the cryptocurrency and the transaction fee has been at a median of about $20 this year. Bitcoin’s unstable value has also made it an unviable medium of exchange. It is as though your $10 bill could buy you a beer on one day and a bottle of fine wine on another. <<<< Micha, Bitcoin safely settles about every hour and, as a bearer instrument, credit risk is not a concept. Even within a country like ours, do not confuse the speed of your Visa payment with its final settlement. No settlement occurs when you buy your coffee at Starbucks. Rather, your bank and Starbucks’ bank generally settle 2-3 days later, with each bank taking credit risk to the other along the way, with rare, but occasionally disastrous results. As to fees, that’s about right 20 bucks, but this issue is fixable, so long as the first is abated, thus keeping it de-centralized; SegWit, wallets, etc. are already minimizing fees, here

      Moreover, it has become clear that Bitcoin does not offer true anonymity. The government’s success in tracking and retrieving part of the Bitcoin ransom paid to the hacking collective DarkSide in the Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack has heightened doubts about the security and nontraceability of Bitcoin transactions. <<<< Not necessarily, the FBI could’ve simply hacked the criminals phones and or cryptowallets not the Bitcoin blockchain itself. The most important charge against Bitcoin and the author uses current events to hint at an event that has other explanations.

      While Bitcoin has failed in its stated objectives, (Huh? What? How?) it has become a speculative investment. This is puzzling. It has no intrinsic value and is not backed by anything. Bitcoin devotees will tell you that, like gold, its value comes from its scarcity — Bitcoin’s computer algorithm mandates a fixed cap of 21 million digital coins (nearly 19 million have been created so far). But scarcity by itself can hardly be a source of value. Bitcoin investors seem to be relying on the greater fool theory — all you need to profit from an investment is to find someone willing to buy the asset at an even higher price. <<<< That’s our discussion here and on another thread, what then is the value of gold if not scarcity; and fiat if not consensus?

      Despite their high valuations on paper, a collapse of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is unlikely to rattle the financial system. Banks have mostly stayed on the sidelines. <<< China's going with CBDC so its banking on the Bitcoin model, thus no sidelines there, so too other Central Banks around the world As with any speculative bubble, naïve investors who come to the party late are at greatest risk of losses. The government should certainly caution retail investors that, much like in the GameStop saga, they act at their own peril. Securities that enable speculation on Bitcoin prices are already regulated, but there is not much more the government can or ought to do. <<<< This makes sense, don’t do anything

      Bitcoin is not innocuous. Transactions are processed by “miners” using massive amounts of computing power in return for rewards in the form of Bitcoin. By some estimates, the Bitcoin network consumes as much energy as entire countries like Argentina and Norway, not to mention the mountains of electronic waste from specialized machines used for such mining operations that burn out rapidly. <<<< This is some Greta Thurnberg bs. How about factoring in the cost of burning old bills to the Ozone layer!

      Whatever Bitcoin’s eventual fate, its blockchain technology is truly ingenious and groundbreaking Yup!!!. Bitcoin has shown how programs running on networks of computers can be harnessed to securely conduct payments, within and between countries, without relying on avaricious financial institutions that charge high fees. For migrant workers sending remittances back to their home countries, for instance, such fees are a major burden. Technologies that make payments cheaper, quicker and easier to track would benefit consumers and businesses, facilitating both domestic and international commerce.

      The technology is not without risks. Facebook plans to issue its own cryptocurrency called Diem intended to make digital payments easier. Unlike Bitcoin, Diem would be fully backed by reserves of U.S. dollars or other major currencies, ensuring stable value. But, as with its other ostensibly high-minded initiatives, Facebook can hardly be trusted to put the public’s welfare above its own. The prospect of multinational corporations one day issuing their own unbacked cryptocurrencies worldwide is deeply disquieting. Such currencies won’t threaten the U.S. dollar, but could wipe out the currencies of smaller and less developed countries. <<<< El Salvador is all in with Bitcoin; a bunch of other countries are going all in with CBDC, will the critical mass of other countries leaving fiat threaten the US dollar? Common sense, tells us Yeah!

      Variants of Bitcoin’s technology are also making many financial products and services available to the masses at low cost, directly connecting savers and borrowers. These developments and the possibilities created by the new technologies have spurred central banks to consider issuing digital versions of their own currencies. China, Japan, and Sweden are already conducting trials of their digital currencies. <<<< Again, the choice henceforth will be de-centralized vs. centralized

      Ironically, rather than truly democratizing finance, some of these innovations may exacerbate inequality. Unequal financial literacy and digital access might result in sophisticated investors garnering the benefits while the less well off, dazzled by new technologies, take on risks they do not fully comprehend. Computer algorithms could worsen entrenched racial and other biases in credit scoring and financial decisions, rather than reducing them. The ubiquity of digital payments could also destroy any remaining vestiges of privacy in our day-to-day lives. <<<< That last paragraph is like saying technology will exacerbate inequality. Sure but hasn’t the current system done that already?

      While Bitcoin’s roller-coaster prices garner attention, of far more consequence is the revolution in money and finance it has set off that will ultimately affect every one of us, for better and worse. <<<< The author should’ve started with this sentence first, then justified said proposition. Bitcoin will change things, period.

      • LCPL_X says:

        * <<< China's going with CBDC so its banking on the Bitcoin model, thus no sidelines there, so too other Central Banks around the world

      • NHerrera says:

        Interesting/ instructive comments on the article, Lance. Thanks.

        Whatever Bitcoin’s eventual fate, its blockchain technology is truly ingenious and groundbreaking. Good point, I agree too.

      • Micha says:


        You keep on repeating the theme of replacing the system (by which you probably specifically mean our present state-backed monetary system) with nothing more than a computer code created by a nameless anonymous individual.

        And here I would ask again, because you have ignored this question previously, what would you and giancarlo do if tomorrow the Federal gov’t will, having deemed bitcoin to be causing instability and disruption and challenging the authority and power of the state, declare all crypto trading illegal and hunt down anyone who violate the order like what China had already done.

        • LCPL_X says:

          I have already answered this question, Micha. And I said America being America the bastion of free trade and capitalism and freedom, cannot do this. If it does , it will just give Bitcoin and crypto credibility. Remember the US of A is all about making a buck, Micha.

          But if I were in China, then I’ll figure out ways to go around said ban. The same way now with internet. So essentially, I’ll either just own Bitcoins and safeguard it somewhere, like gold; or use it when I do say go to El Salvador or the US or EU.

          You have to understand that humanity is really crafty. So you don’t premise your opposition of Bitcoin by banning it, that’s a silly What IF, that’s like saying LCPL_X , what will you do if the US gov’t says that it would ban sex tomorrow?

          Instead, as I’ve suggested attack the code of Bitcoin.

          Because if you are correct that Bitcoin is either a risk to gov’t or shit (it really can’t be both), then people wouldn’t fight for it at all. See how you’re saying both things as true , so we already know that Bitcoin is not shit. And that it will change a lot of things.

          Start your thinking from that. That Bitcoin will change a lot of things.

          Then imagine one progressing along with CBDC (you do agree that eventually all CBs will go with DC, correct?). So when you have Crypto/Bitcoin and CBDC, which will one people use more? That’s actually the question (for us social science folks, but for NH with PhD in math, he’s perched

          on another hill from which to view Bitcoin, that is the last say as to Bitcoin’s usefulness).

          But I can tell you that Bitcoin’s programmed divisibility seems already worked out.

          Thus, you are approaching your attack of Bitcoin wrongly, Micha. Attack the code, attack the math. Better than making false assumptions on human behaviour.

          • NHerrera says:


            N.B. My Ph.D. is in engineering, but with an interest in mathematics.

            • LCPL_X says:

              Oooops, sorry. NH, I read the above wrong. But I think I’m still somewhat on the right path no? that your interest in math will put you above and beyond how we (mere mortals, meaning non-math folks) are discussing this subject.

              • LCPL_X says:

                For example, to i7sharp’s numerology (to Micha) , if he persists,

                I’ll have to break out my Hebrew bible and argue from translation (my hunch will be that KJV will differ greatly to Hebrew, becuz we’ve been thru this already in another argument). That is how you attack weak propositions. Thus de-polluting ideas form weak assumptions (here specifically it’s i7sharp’s purported translation of “pollute”).

                Bitcoin’s is in the math/code, if none are found then you can argue economics and human behaviour (not before), but as already stated your guess are as valid as mine, due to humanity’s creativity when it wants what it wants. Pain and pleasure and all that.

              • i7sharp says:


                Not talking about bitcoin, at all, but rather about “knowledge” and things “polluted”
                with the aim to share “further ideas” in relation to Joe’s.

                But let me briefly address the “purported translation” you talk about and also your claim I do not know my source with this link:
                They all had a familiarity with the ancient languages of Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and often many more. They came on the historical scene at a time when the knowledge of early biblical texts and language was exploding. Such a flowering of interest and expertise was unique.
                Do you know of more qualified translators?

                I believe in the profound significance or value of precision and often hope the home country will someday deserve to be called
                The Republic of Precision (RP, the previous country code)
                Precision’s Home (PH, the new code).
                Please see

              • LCPL_X says:

                “in Ezekiel chapter 20 alone they occur eleven (11) times!”


                Here’s the Hebrew, i7sharp! They only have 4 such translation to pollute. Compare it to your beloved KJV. 11 – 4 = 7 is lucky!!!

                “As for you, O house of Israel, thus saith the Lord GOD: Go ye, serve every one his idols, even because ye will not hearken unto Me; but My holy name shall ye no more profane with your gifts, and with your idols.”


                “As for you, O house of Israel, thus saith the Lord GOD; Go ye, serve ye every one his idols, and hereafter also, if ye will not hearken unto me: but pollute ye my holy name no more with your gifts, and with your idols.”

                As Joe pointed out there is always Google, so always study the Hebrew: (you don’t have to be a PhD in Theology, i7sharp, just look at the forms of the letter of Hebrew, why the KJV folks opted to use polluted for different Hebrew verbs I know not. But like i said its an issue of translation.)

          • Micha says:

            It’s already been established that bitcoin has zero intrinsic value, no math theorem needed.

            The Fed merely tolerate bitcoin now because it’s not yet causing disruption or instability on a scale that would register an alarm. But the moment it does you can bet your bottom token it’s going to move as swiftly and without a sweat. All it takes is an executive order.

            What you are advocating here is nothing less than an insurrection to our presently established monetary system.

            • LCPL_X says:

              You were doing the same via MMT, Micha. And chempo said exactly what you’re saying now.

              As to value, I’ve asked already aside from scarcity, what is gold’s current value now, as jewelry (beauty) and space (sun shield)? its scarcity that gives it value.

              if you add that 12%, 29% and 43%, that’s all based on its scarcity, is it not?

              • Micha says:

                It doesn’t matter how scarce an object is, if there’s no demand for it it’s not going to have appreciative value.

                Fiat, otoh, has value because it’s got the entire infrastructure of the state and government behind it; and it requires its citizens to pay taxes on its designated unit of account. And it has got a whole slew of enforcement agencies to make that happen in case you forgot to pay on time.

                It also has F-16s, aircraft carriers, tons of nuclear warheads, and apache helicopters.

                How many division does bitcoin have?

              • LCPL_X says:

                There you go Micha at least we’re getting somewhere now.

                YOU are essentially saying the value of something is in the consensus of said value. You’ve conceded without even knowing it.

                If people agree something is valuable people will fight for it. That is your thesis.

                Bitcoin similarly people will fight for it there is consensus though not yet reached critical mass, though it has no CB, or F16s or FBI/IRS, people will fight for it precisely because it has none of those. Because its the opposite of what you’ve just described, Micha.

                How will all that structure you’ve just described fight to be relevant, no not by attacking Bitcoin ala Iraq and Af-Pak or Temperance movement or Drug war, but by going CBDC (you’ve not conceded this fact yet, i noticed 😉 ).

                As to Bitcoin divisibility refer to NH’s post above.

              • Micha says:

                “If people agree something is valuable people will fight for it.”

                And that’s the problem. Because very many people are not going to agree that bitcoin is valuable.

                Why are you so gung-ho about CBDC too?

              • LCPL_X says:

                Because CBDC is Bitcoin only centralized, Micha.

                Whether centralized or de-centralized, humanity will go with blockchain. Once everything goes to blockchain, what use are concepts of fiat and gold? None.

                So you see, Micha, there will be consensus, whether it will take the form of centralized or de-centralized, is the only issue.

                The only way to defeat Bitcoin is to stop the internet, but for CBDC that’s like saying ban oxygen, then we’ll all die, Micha!!!

              • Micha says:

                I just love how you gush all over for blockchain. It’s a record keeping tool; it’s not like ledgers and accounting had been invented just yesterday or that it’s the best thing that ever happened after sliced bread.

                CBDC is virgin territory for central banks. I like the concept of it because it bypasses private commercial banks in the payment system.

              • LCPL_X says:

                Micha, you’ve got it. Guess what also bypasses private commercial banks?


                That’s the whole point.

                Both Bitcoin and CBDC use blockchain. You cannot gush over one but not the other. Both use blockchain. Both will render banks obsolete, Micha. We’re finally back in the same camp again.

  6. Micha says:

    In another news :

    The Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory Doesn’t Hold Up.

    The rush to find a conspiracy around the COVID-19 pandemic’s origins is driven by narrative, not evidence.

  7. i7sharp says:

    “Joe America” strikes again?
    What did he mean by this?:
    If you have further ideas, do use the discussion section to share them. We are all students here, looking for the occasional teacher.
    My ideas are not welcome – or welcome up to a point only?
    Let me ask him nicely at

    • We’ve been down this path before, which is why you are in moderation. This is a discussion blog about the Philippines. Your extraction of cases in the Bible listing all the books where ‘pollute’ was mentioned, a very long list, is not helping readers understand the Philippines. I elected not to publish it. You could have made your point in a sentence or two. You persist in failing to understand the purpose of the blog and contributing to it forthrightly. Indeed, you seem to want to test my editorial limits. Hey, you can contribute to vibrant discussion here, or not. Your choice. I get trolled all the time. I’ve got thousands blocked on Twitter and a few hundred here. You’ll be just one more if you can’t comprehend what the blog is about, after all these years.

      • LCPL_X says:

        There’s websites like the one I linked to that shows the Hebrew in original. You simply jot down the places where pollute is used over say the word profane and see if its the same in Hebrew or not. Don’t take my word for it, compare contrast no need to actually know Hebrew just copy paste each word (in Hebrew) against each other, and you can see they are different words. There will be conjugations (us, you, etc. etc.) but the root three or four letters will be apparent.

        This isn’t rocket science. KJV is in English; the Old Testament was both in Hebrew and Greek (sometimes Arahmaic). No need to be expert, because there’s Google and copy/paste. I’ll concede that pollute and profane are cognates; but that Hebrew (i’ve not seen the original Greek, because maybe the translation went from Greek to Hebrew, not vice versa) my point only is that they are different words in

        Hebrew, so consideration has to be made as to why KJV translators opted for pollute. Maybe it just sounds good, if you say both words I’d probably choose pollute too if I were in some KJV committee back in the early 1600s. With my PhD in Google they’d surely assign me a book to translate or two.

        Sorry for this tangent, Joe. But if it averts (or creates ) the next Quiboloy in the Philippines. I’ll have done my job of promoting Google for Bible study, LOL!

        • The concept of languages that lose or omit or change the ideas associated with their words is very pertinent to the Philippines. And the way the Bible seems largely unread, in any version, here. I’m still waiting for i7sharp to move past mystery, trivia, diversions, and snide remarks to get to concepts. He wants me to grant him license to preach, dissect the Bible, or promote Limbaugh’s obscene ideas, and it’s just not going to happen here. He can go preach on his own FB account. I’d rather sit in complete silence waiting for the next Edgar Lores to arrive to enumerate brilliant moral insights.

          • i7sharp says:


            “I’m still waiting for i7sharp to move past mystery, trivia, diversions, and snide remarks to get to concepts. He wants me to grant him license to preach, dissect the Bible, or promote Limbaugh’s obscene ideas …”

            Provide examples, Joe.
            As many as you can find.

            • Absolutely not. That is my opinion from past engagements dealing with you on Limbaugh and scripture and your short-form links. If you do not respect my editorial judgment, just go away. You seem incapable of getting the point. I’m editor, responsible for content here. You are a contributor, welcome if you follow editorial guidelines. If you have issues, take them to your FB page where your editorial judgment is unrestrained. Making me the topic here is ad hominem and a complete waste of our intellectual energy.

              • I would add that any further belaboring of this, or continued posts that are not forthright discussion of issues pertinent to the Philippines, will not be approved for publication.

      • i7sharp says:

        caring about the Philippines, his home country,
        is the same yesterday (almost 7 years ago)
        and today … trying his best to be sharp, precise, truthful.

  8. madlanglupa says:

    More than 10 years ago, we were introduced to Facebook because of the games that came with it, and many thought the experience was just fun then, of finding friends and socializing as much as Friendster used to do a few years before.

    Then came the utilization of social media as a means of dissidents to speak their minds out and bring out to the world what was actually happening in their countries.

    However, by then propagandists discovered how social media sites could be used to give politicians the advantage, and fringers found a new audience for which to propagate their twisted ideas. Suddenly social media became more of a threat than an equalizing medium, and worse, it made mincemeat out of established newsmedia.

    As someone said, “the Gutenberg book press advanced civilization for centuries, but Facebook devolved civilization in a decade.”

    • kasambahay says:

      facebook po is doing fact check, calling out false info and misinformation and some of our govt funded web pages have been closed, that of the armed forces included.

      there is cybel libel now, anyone making defamatory remarks vs someone can be liable by law and punishable as well.

      here at this blog, joeam is our editor and can block unhelpful comment, replies and entries.

      freedom of speech and expressions are not absolute po, there is limit. cheers.

      • madlanglupa says:

        > facebook po is doing fact check, calling out false info and misinformation and some of our govt funded web pages have been closed, that of the armed forces included.

        They still have yet to shut down Banat, GRP, and other like-minded garbage. However, there persists the problem that the bulk of contractual moderators for Facebook here in this country may have been compromised by hyperpartisans, paid to NOT remove pro-government, pro-Marcos content.

    • We are smart enough to recognize that, I wonder if we’re smart enough to do something about it. Like making paid trolling illegal.

      • NHerrera says:

        Assuming that the Filipino is fair-minded in general, the trolling farm that will be employed during the 2022 election campaign will be very significant in determining the result of that “democratic” exercise.

        Short of employing the same tactic [which will surely be countered with methods, not excluding harassment, arrests, or even physical harm], the Opposition must do something effective to counter the use of troll farms. I believe this is not lost to 1Sambayan and other groups allied with the Opposition. But how? Employ when they go low, we go high?

        • Yes, a tough challenge for sure. I think they’ll take the high road and hope Marcos, Pacquiao, and Duterte split the DDS vote. And if the opposition wins there will be an ‘election fraud’ issue.

          • NHerrera says:

            In the context of the current blog topic, the high-minded among the 1Sambayan surely will not want to add to the “pollution.”

  9. LCPL_X, this is re a discussion we started a while ago:

    “A 2013 study reported there were only 62 tenured Filipino American Full Professors in the US in 2011. Out of these, only 16 were Full Professors. While a few of us have joined that club since, I’m happy to announce our two newest members, Dr. Dina Maramba & Dr. Anthony Ocampo!”

    • LCPL_X says:


      Two specific questions and then some general ones,

      Are they lumping together Filipinos and Fil-Ams in that 62?

      I’m gonna assume here that the 16 “Full Professors” (i dunno what’s the difference between full and tenured), most of them will be Fil-Ams?

      Remember the discussion was specific only to the Philippines, and more specifically of PhDs from Philippines getting out into the world to be college profs, full/tenured.

      There’s an irony in the 2013 study, if the subject is how many PhDs (Filipinos and Fil-Ams) if theres only 62, shouldn’t there be a 2020 or 2021 study or count? I mean that’s less than 100, surely a simple data base can be created.

      But Filipino PhDs (UP, La Salle, Ateneo, etc. etc.) around the world, need not be in Western EU or the English speaking schools, for example India, or Singapore, or somewhere in Africa, or the many med schools in the Caribbean.

      I’d like to revisit this discussion as it relates to de-polluting the Philippines of bad knowledge and thinking. So of that 62, do they go back to the Philippines at all to teach full or say temporarily, I believe Heyderian is a PhD and teaching there no?

      Are there others, in which PhDs teach and do public teachings via articles and shows (like Bill Nye the Science Guy)? I notice most PhDs or experts there that talk about everything of any subject under the sun, are either lawyers or priests.

      I know many lawyers and priests will have PhDs themselves, but these two specific subjects tend to do more pollution IMHO than de-pollution.

  10. Micha says:

    Biden’s plan to keep China in check relies on Manila.

    US alliance with Philippines is key to containing Beijing in Pacific but pact is under threat.

    The Visiting Forces Agreement, the framework governing the deployment of US soldiers in the south-east Asian country, has been running on borrowed time since Rodrigo Duterte, the Philippine president, terminated it in February last year. On Monday, he extended the suspension of that termination once more, but again for just another six months.

    As Duterte has moved his country closer to China despite their festering dispute in the South China Sea, the alliance has languished. Contrary to the terms of their Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), signed in 2014, Duterte has blocked the US from deploying troops and weapons in two Philippine air bases near Scarborough Shoal and the Spratly Islands — South China Sea territories where China has pushed back against the Philippines.

  11. Micha says:

    Sorry for this OT but this one is hot stuff :

    Davos is dead, and the coronavirus killed it
    The addictions and the contradictions that lie at the heart of the circus that is the World Economic Forum.

  12. NHerrera says:


    China crackdown

    Bitcoin tumbled more than 10% after moves against cryptocurrencies in China intensified. The country’s central bank said banks and payment firms must not provide payment services for crypto-related transactions. Earlier, authorities in the southern city of Ya’an stepped up action to rein in digital mining in the hydropower-rich region. Ethereum traded below $2,000 while DeFi coins remained under pressure.

    • Micha says:

      Alas, it is China taking the lead in nipping this crypto madness relegating the US as a sponge as it tries to absorb the dirt of crypto mining. Electricity consumption from these mining operations exceed the annual electricity use of the entire Philippines.

      In light of the global warming crisis brought upon by excessive use of fossil fuel, it’s imperative for all sensible nations to put a stop to this destructive activity.

      • LCPL_X says:

        Transition to Proof-of-Stake Systems
        Cryptocurrencies could move from proof-of-work systems to “proof-of-stake” systems that don’t require this same mad dash to solve complex puzzles, says eToro cryptocurrency market analyst Simon Peters.

        Put simply, proof-of-stake requires miners to front a small amount of cryptocurrency to be entered into a lottery for the chance to verify transactions. The thought is that if you’re putting up some amount of value as collateral, you’re less likely to approve fraudulent transactions that would devalue the currency and cost you your stake.

        Because proof-of-stake systems remove the competitive computational element of proof-of-work, “it saves energy and allows each machine in a PoS to work on one problem at a time, as opposed to a PoW system, in which an array of machines are rushing to solve the same problem (thus wasting energy),” says Peters.

        Ethereum, the blockchain system powering Ether and most NFTs, already has plans to transition to a proof-of-stake system. This will dramatically reduce the energy consumption of Ethereum-based cryptos and blockchains by an estimated 99.5%.

        Embrace Pre-Mining
        To avoid the wasteful computing involved in solving math problems quickly to earn digital coins, some cryptos have introduced pre-mining, a system that functionally works much like fiat currency or stocks. A central authority, like the U.S. government (in the case of dollars) or a company (in the case of stocks), creates a set amount of an item and then carefully releases it into the economy depending on what’s going on in the world or their business.

        Pre-mined cryptos work the same way.

        “Several other cryptoassets like XRP [also popularly referred to as Ripple] weren’t mined at all but were instead produced algorithmically,” says Peters. “This eliminates the need for dedicated high-speed mining equipment.”

        In these systems, transactions are still verified by a decentralized network of validators before they’re added to the currency’s blockchain record, but those involved in the transaction may have to pay a small transaction fee to compensate the validators for their effort since the currency system itself doesn’t always reward them. In the case of XRP, this fee is a fraction of a cent currently.

        Transitioning Bitcoin to a proof-of-stake or pre-mined system wouldn’t be easy: To fundamentally alter the Bitcoin protocol someone would have to convince the majority of miners to agree to the new system, a tough ask when billions are at stake and the existing system works, if slowly and electrically inefficiently. The last time a change of this magnitude happened, it was not accepted universally by miners, resulting in a so-called “hard fork” that created a separate cryptocurrency called Bitcoin Cash, which itself later hard forked into Bitcoin SV, among others.

        Micha, NH, et al.

        I’m sure if someone were to make a study of porn or gaming ‘s consumption of electricity , it would be in the measure of continents not nations. My point, we as humans use electricity for quite a lot of useless stuff. And all of the sudden we’re concerned about Bitcoin?

        It’s an obvious ploy. The choices are clear in the article, you have Proof of Stake, in which whales get the upper hand; Pre-mined its the gov’t and corporations that get free rein; in Bitcoin, the miners are only in control until the 21 Million Bitcoins are mined.

        Thus the choice should be clear, Bitcoin works better than PoW and Pre-mined.

        As more tech comes on line more electricity will be used. Sources of heat and movement are everywhere, the Sun, the core of the Earth, water, wind, waves, atomic, etc. will have to mitigate clean vs. dirty energy; and eventually until we get enough energy, superfluous use vs. useful use of energy— thankfully we’ve not rationed electricity according to use yet.

        But how do you think clean energy and saving the environment will come about, by funding it with fiat, or gold, or PoW or pre-mined (which is basically fiat but less privacy). This is where Bitcoin make the others pale in comparison.

        “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”

        China’s embrace of pre-mined fiat CBDC is a boon for American miners. Individual Americans should be allowed to use their electricity as they see fit, either by watching porn (no ROI) or gaming (no ROI) , or by mining (ROIs aplenty). I can foresee criminals hacking into the electric grid (albeit not as skillfully as many Filipinos do in the Philippines, with all the wires crisscrossing above the streets).

        But that’s a law enforcement issue, that I’m sure is an easy fix.

        The principle should be individual freedom, if Americans want to invest and pay for electricity producing Bitcoins, then the Feds have no power infringing on said right. Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness and all that good stuff; Thus it should be no surprise that countries like China can infringe on said rights of the Chinese so easily, precisely because no such rights or promise were made.

        The principle operating here is Freedom. thus it should be seen as great irony that you Micha, et al are celebrating China’s stance on this. The operating principle of their stance is Control.

        Freedom vs. Control. I have no doubt that the Federal gov’t here would like to follow China’s example, but Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness , makes it difficult for them. But as that article above points out, Bitcoin works, the system works. That should be the main take away here, Micha. The problem of energy and environment is a far bigger problem , in which cancelling Bitcoin will not even cause a ripple.

        But the possibility of Bitcoins funding the next innovations that will solve our energy and environmental problems is a better use of said tech. That’s how you think about Bitcoin. Not in terms of cancelling it. Think.

        • The more you explain, the more ‘fly by night’ an unregulated system seems to be.

          • LCPL_X says:

            That’s my point , Joe.

            People will feel one way or the other. chempo and Micha are pro-cancellation of Bitcoin; Joe too, but

            why not let Bitcoin free unregulated untouched and see where that takes us.

            Think of it this way, you’ve heard of gian’s reasoning, and its a good one; would you as Joe want to infringe on that freedom, by canceling gian’s ability to explore another system?

            Why not just leave it alone? Let it unfold.

        • Micha says:


          Bitcoin is a redundant project as far as the state is concerned. It’s being sold as a parallel monetary system in direct contravention of the “one country, one government, one money system” principle.

          What undergirds bitcoin and other forms of crypto is the libertarian ideology of hyper-individualism and anarchy.

          • LCPL_X says:


            That’s a dogma. We both know that the really rich have not abide by that principle, they’ve hidden their money in very creative ways, shell companies, art, other monies, etc etc.

            Granted CBDC will put an end to that. The flipside to that reality is MMT is the perfect system for CBDC, thus will not necessarily need the tax from said hidden wealth.

            Bitcoin/crypto will simply allow for such creativity, much like how the rich have come up with their creaitive ways and means, but now all spectrum rich to poor (well maybe not the very poor like homeless).

            We’re already familiar with CBDC because its just fiat but blockchain; but we don’t know where Bitcoin/crypto will lead us. The tech is nascent; so too the concept. Thus let it unfold. Don’t be China, Micha, is all I’m reasoning here.

            Joe agrees, why can’t you simply let Bitcoin unfold. Allow all the gians in the world their time.

            • LCPL_X says:

              As to anarchy, I’m more John Locke’s thinking who questioned Donne’s anarchy/chaos, humanity will simply find a way to order itself, because humanity in the end doesn’t like chaos. We have enough of that from mother Nature;

              but humanity is always looking for a better way, and that 2008 economic collapse (and it wasn’t really fixed then) is enough reason not to trust the financial sector, now that is anarchy. A bigger anarchy waiting to happen.

              Let’s hedge our bets, Micha. You’ve already stated time and again how economic collapse is always toyed with by Wall Street. Maybe if everyone went Bitcoin, Wall Street will behave; so to the Feds will be less gullible and more practical in how it spends other peoples money (but with CBDC it’ll essentially

              really be the Feds own money). its win-win-win for all.

            • Micha says:

              1.”We both know that the really rich have not abide by that principle, they’ve hidden their money in very creative ways, shell companies, art, other monies, etc etc.”

              What has this got to do with the principle? The crooked rich are hiding their money, yes, but their wealth are still measured in dollars, not bitcoins.

              2. “Bitcoin/crypto will simply allow for such creativity…”

              Are you suggesting bitcoin/crypto will function like fiat?

              3. “…but we don’t know where Bitcoin/crypto will lead us.”

              Bitcoin/crypto will not be leading us anywhere because it’s a hallow shell.
              Seashells at least have decorative utility. Bitcoins have less than zero utility in the way it’s being electronically mined using terawatts of electricity.

              4. “The tech is nascent; so too the concept…”

              My favorite blogger at NC put it best : blockchain is a technology looking for an application.

              5. “Allow all the gians in the world their time.”

              Well yes, of course, by all means, let them have all the time to be duped. 🙂


    • LCPL_X says:

      Correction above PoW should be PoS, Pow is Bitcoin.

  13. chemrock says:

    Damn it, just when I was beginning to accept everybody’s idea mainstream media is the truth and started to tune in to Rachel Maddow the MSNBC anchor, Judge Cynthia Bashart, an Obama appointee, said her show is not News, it “..consists of exaggeration, hyperbole and pure opinion, and therefore would not assume that such outlandish accusations are factually true even when she uses the language of certainty and truth and when presenting them”.

    Tried to learn something new so I checked up a non-profit “Youth To End Sexual Violence” founded by Hillary Clinton campaign official Joel Davis. Surely these are super clean good people unlike the white supremacists on the Right. These are good social justice warriors. Davies has just been sentenced to 13 years jail for child pornography and trying to entice a minor for sex.

    Just another day in the life of a nobody making his way through trash city. Better to retreat to my conspiracy cave which have provided me scoops that are slowly coming into the mainstream as truths.

    Yes there is trash, and there is trash. Watch what you pick up.

    • I’m not denying there is trash. I’d prefer that it not be peddled on a blog meant for enlightenment.

      • LCPL_X says:

        Wait, Joe, you’re telling me Democrats and libs are just humans too. Sound the alarms!!!

        Start from the assumption that all politicians are dirrrty. Then the fact that pedophiles will gravitate towards places where children will be; same same with hustlers who gravitate towards where other peoples money will be.

        Thus churches and run-away homes will tend to invite pedophiles; hustlers will go towards gofundme pages like the AZ recount, foundations etc. These folks will tend to be one and the same.

        The GOP with all its born agains tend to have more pedophile/leacherers/hustlers, think of all the televangelists, their embezzlements and sex crimes. Epstein for example gave plenty to the Dems and GOP.

        This stuff is as American as apple pie unfortunately, Americans tend to be gullible when it comes to money and God. But the GOP pound for pound are more susceptible to this stuff then Dems. IMHO.

        • chemrock says:

          Democrats connections to Jeffrey Epstein tells a story.
          Democrats connections to Harvey Weinstein tells a similar story.
          Jeffrey Toobin the Democrat analyst of CNN who masterbated on Zoom tells another story.

          • Micha says:

            Hey chemp, why have you suddenly taken interest in gutter politics? Could it be because your lab leak conspiracy and Arizona recount didn’t fan out as expected?

            • LCPL_X says:

              Jeffrey Toobin is a funny story. I’d like to have been part of that Zoom with popcorn.

              But chemp, your examples when compared to the GOP and conservatives, pales in comparison.

          • To generalize from specific instances to a general population is perhaps the second most popular argumentative fallacy behind ad hominem argument and reveals a basis for argument that is either unintentionally ignorant or intentionally deceitful. It is a form of argument that is prominent in social media discussions and is a big reason for the breakdown in civility and sense among otherwise intelligent people.

        • LCPL_X says:

          Personally, I’m no fan Critical Race theory, but being Californian I grew up with this. I had to join the military to be expose to other ways of thinking. But that White rage is the opposite of White guilt, in effect under Critical Race you’re suppose to either be guilty about US history or be an actual racist yourself no in between. Either- Or typa thinking.

          If they teach CRT, then you’ll have to open up the discussion based on human population variation, . And this is what I commented on awhile back when I mentioned CRT, my take okay… teach it,

          I’m with the general, its West Point after all public school, but ensure that all sides of the debate is covered which means explaining why most Plan Parenthood clinics and abortions happen in mostly black/brown neighborhoods, why 13% of US population is responsible for 50% plus of violent crimes,

          and more importantly, and chempo’s gonna love this, let’s push the envelope on Darwinism, transmutation and variants is popular now in the news re COVID19, let’s start talking about human variations in genetics. And how that all applies to morals and systems of government in history. Let’s really explore CRT, because IMHO CRT is North American based only, once you pan out farther

          And make it world-wide, spanning world history, guess what the theory doesn’t hold. Precisely becuz domination as human trait and even more general as nature ‘s process, is wide in scope and not just covering American slavery.

          So I agree with the general, that it should be tossed in the arena and CRT should be placed under farther scrutiny. But allow other ideas on the table, don’t censor opposing views. because here in California if you oppose CRT, you’re automatically deemed a racist. see how that shuts down debate?

          That’s what GOP lawmakers shoulda push for, ensure open and no holds bar argument over CRT. forchrissakes don’t cancel CRT.

  14. mundski says:

    Joe , you just triggered my anxiety with ” the clutter that enters our brains.” LOL But great ideas, though there are definitely BIGGER and more Damaging Garbage out there, than just the honest to goodness fans of conspiracy theorists and the fallaciously opinionated. The PAID TROLL farms and those who peddles propaganda because it’s their job. An article by Andrew Masigan here has the number of paid trolls at more than 100,000 ??? If this is true then TROLLS would comprise all the plastic that make up a huge chunk of the trash, i would assume. Technology got these garbage into our brains and inside our precious homes, I still think technology is the fix to flush them out. Not everyone has the aptitude of sorting out trash.

    • Sorry for the anxieties. Yes, I suspect you are right, technology is a big part of the solution. So is self-awareness.

      • mundski says:

        Yep, we need every social media spam, scam, fraud and troll detection teams up to par with the amount of lies in the internet. We need every single profile and comment coming from a real source or person. If artificial intelligence is a legitimate scary premonition, then wishing for a Troll free world IS possible. I dropped out of one of the top computer science programs in the country, but I haven’t lost faith in the science.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: