Nostr Web Client

I am interested in this #orangepill subject but still learning the language. Can you help me with questions about this subject?

Is there a standard definition ‘to orangepill’? I get the gist that it is some sort of transfer of understanding in or believing in #Bitcoin performed by another. When someone has been orangepilled, does that means they share the proper consensus on Bitcoin? I am partial to the description of a free market economy supported by a sound exchange and store of value, but don’t believe Bitcoin is the only path. Am I not orangepilled?

Economy, as an instrument, suggests there is an intelligence and intend behind the proper use of that tool. I try no to understand the economy as an instrument to be wielded or manipulated by intelligence, but as a consensus world within which all our individual social interactions occur. The interactions (actions, connections, edges, forces, etc) are pronounced successful or unsuccessful only by those within the consensus. I can’t get to a sharing of eternal truth from here, but I am coming to understand that sharing may be enough, if the sharing provides success. Is it necessary to assign intelligence to ‘what’ wields the instrument called the economy?

My thinking is individuals moving in our economy makes the world (similar to quanta in motion). We don’t have to assign intelligence to it, or somethings else that is keeping people dumb. The best we can do is share what we are thinking and if that sharing creates a path to new consensus, the world will change.

Thank you

#asknostr

₿itcoin 2y ago

Orangepilling in my eyes is making people understand that sound money paves way for sound economy, and sound economy boosts everyone by providing an accurate signal.

People who are not aware of this are easier to manipulate. You do not have to assign intelligence to those people, or saying it is absent. But intelligence, or rather knowledge focused on this particular matter can help understand why the system is not fair.

And people who benefit tremendously from this unfair situation, do not want people to gather knowledge about how this works, therefore keeping them uninformed about this subject.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Medici 2y ago

As a boomer trying to jettison the baggage of such notions as ‘cause/effect’, ‘intent/outcome’, and ‘intelligence/ignorance’, I am becoming afflicted with a different way of seeing things that is not easy for me to share, though I will try.

Perhaps we could agree to consider financial systems as instruments through which we (others) impose forces, the economy itself seems to me to be the arena wherein such forces are exercised, observed, felt, etc. The ecomomy is the environment wherein human action occurs, not the instrument of manipulation itself. Would it be fair to consider Bitcoin an emerging Financial System?

Being manipulated may also be understood as ‘believing’. Believing has its Pros and Cons, but it needs no assignment of intelligence or truth. People are all believers of some sort or the other. Some objective judgment on whether the economy is fair or not fair doesn’t matter to what emerges as much as whether it is acceptable to those with options. I do believe options are emerging and acceptability is being reoriented. I try to see that as based not on knowledge but based on what works somehow within a community of believers. Growing such a community seems a worthwhile human endeavor. There are many ways of participating in that endevor.

Those who have benefited from a stable complexity delivering such benefit to them may be no less manipulated than others. We all ways of protecting that stability, yet our means do vary. Change is always a threat and always a necessity to growth. The information we share in social contact might best be understood as more about ourselves than the world. That a set of such information can result in a prevailing consensus does not make it true, but it does make it possible. I think of that as a good thing.

₿itcoin 2y ago

The economy is in my point of view the social mass network (effects) of supply and demand, ask and answer, where the willingness of trade per situation can be observed by any participant of that economical situation.

A financial system is the social (forced) concensus of how this economy should be handled and when and why to take away or add economically focused rules or objects.

Bitcoin is a monetary asset that measures the economy, with rules that are established to achieve the goal of being an independent ledger that is accountable for the truth.

These rules might make it a financial system, altough it can also be argued that those rules are comparable to the physical "rules" of gold. Those physical rules do not make gold a "financial system", so it may not be necessary for Bitcoin to be viewed as a financial system either. The result is that more participants get more options amd thus an objectively greater level of choice while it stays neutral.

To respond to "manipulation = believing", manipulation can indeed be the cause of believing and it is really difficult to say what is manipulation and what not. In some way, we are all being manipulated, or we wouldn't learn certain things.

People can indeed believe certain things, and also be proven wrong. But some things are generally, historically repeative, biologically determined rules that cause history to often rhyme. Laws of nature. Those are really useful to know in most situations involving other humans or nature itself.

The result of the stable complexity that Bitcoin brings is an objective change in the financial economical decisionmaking: more choice and freedom, more local action permitted in some way, which introduces some laws of nature that were not possible at first. This can bring new oppertunities, which is our intention.