2 ms·
>I paraphrased you No. And I hope the clarification is understood. The difference is between trusting that a system of checks and balances is required and tru
by harry8 3y ago
>I paraphrased you
No. And I hope the clarification is understood.
The difference is between trusting that a system of checks and balances is required and trusting some particular implementation of something calling itself a system, without verifying what is actually happening now. Close your eyes, the system is perfect, I trust the system.
I highly recommend the formal study of history and the analysis of sources in particular for all of us. There is always more to learn.
- dvzk 3y agoI mean, I didn't originally want to call out the insane claim that everyone should try to personally verify all truth propositions. I guess you truly are the ultimate skeptic, or you have infinite time to throw away. Fortunately, for all productive people, our institutions are reliable, more often than not!
- harry8 3y agoYou didn't want to because nobody made that claim perhaps? I do it when i want to. So do Dave and Mary. Abby is a professor who takes a professional interest in it as it pertains to X. And so on. It's open, anyone can. Anytime you have a doubt there it is. In cryptography we never trust secret algos, that's pretty normal. I haven't verified every open one I've used either.