GP's point is more narrow than you are taking it. You think he's saying: > There is a mode of communication in which true statements can be expressed easily an

GP's point is more narrow than you are taking it. You think he's saying: > There is a mode of communication in which true statements can be expressed easily and false statements cannot be expressed. Which would be nice, sure, but cannot exist, hence your confusion. But what GP is actually saying is closer to: > There exist some forms of communication for which some statements are so trivially proven that lies are pointless because they'll be disproven almost instantly. This makes no claim about which statements can be expressed like this, let alone all of them, just that it's possible to have some statements expressed like this; which is a necessary precondition to inventing something more generally applicable.