As Aeschylus used to say, when teaching the children of the Greeks: “We should only remove a person’s belief if we can replace it with another, as broad and deep, as the first. hopeless person will suffer, including entering the underworld”.
At that time the underworld had a divergent concept, but when a person loses his hopes, he falls into the underworld.
Believe that the freedom of words and knowledge has this self-regulation because, always, the author becomes responsible for what he writes and says and for the people who read and listen to him and, for any reason, agree and/or believe in what the author wrote.
Beliefs come from partial certainties, because certainties are always partial and looked at from a certain passionate point of view.
Facts are the object of study, subject to scientific methodology or qualitative research which, when replicated, refutes or maintains them.
That’s why he surrounds himself with many sources, mainly divergent ones, mainly associated with classical thinkers not impregnated by religion (which is different from spirituality) and regional ideology (which is different from doing politics).
Religion and ideology presuppose belief, in adding to something partial… which, again, is neither good nor bad.
Spirituality and politics are concepts, they are experiences, which determine the balance between a person’s internal and external aspects.
In other words, each one has its own pupito to speak to itself and has its own altar to transcend by itself.
It is important to think about where we are and what we do individually and collectively, in order to bring comfort to the world.
Ghandi, with his non-violent revolution, changed his country and, to a greater extent, the politics of the world.
The harshness of the world can be overcome with words…and they do…they are always the cause of revolution…and related to who writes.
Must to see both sides and show the babalance of the world!
Who decides, in their own reality, if it is acceptable (not good or bad) is the one who reads according to their own perspective.
Freedom and laws exist because men would kill themselves without laws, with force prevailing.
Regulations are, in the same measure, norms for balance and protection. Obviously, with regard to the means of communication, one must be discerning and careful with everyone.
These networks because they are part of the source and because this scheme has broken millions of people in Asia, just for that.
Knowledge leads to wisdom, whatever it is, linked to your life.
Happy people manage to reconcile the external world view with the internal world view.
When that happens, for that person, the world is fair. Others fight for what they believe is fair to balance their worlds.
As we don’t know everything, in the community, we learn together to build what is called society.
In fact, a pact for urbanity… even with internal conflicts. And who keeps this pact? The laws!
Good or bad, whether you agree or not, the fabric of reality is supported by them.
When general discontent is sustained beyond a simple revolt, there is a revolution.
Simple as that, no goodness or badness, just logic.
Then, i write about regulation and “the hand” that write regulation in here: https://www.publish0x.com/rationality-emotionality-and-financial-markets/regulation-it-depends-on-who-writes-it-depends-on-who-interp-xppprkq.
Really, the all criptosystem dont have transparency.
Uniswap and pancake swap be example of unreal tax fee.
Regulation is, in case, good for this: balance and transparency but depends of the “hand”.
About fee, i write in here: https://www.publish0x.com/rationality-emotionality-and-financial-markets/the-not-so-transparent-side-of-the-cryptosystem-how-much-are-xdgnpzn and about invertors posture: https://www.publish0x.com/rationality-emotionality-and-financial-markets/cryptocurrency-is-not-for-amateurs-after-all-xvywlkr.
Because greed too rules there no regulation.
Nothing is good or bad…depends only the view point and that side of choose.
The cryptocurrency system, currently, is not regulated enough, it is not transparent enough, it provides a lot of deception and disillusionment.
However, over time, as Adam Smith himself puts it: the self-regulation of the market will remedy illegal activities, diversion and embezzlement, to such an extent that the investors themselves will create the code by which they will fight and determine what the future will be like.
For the welfare of the investors themselves and those who depend on them, there will be regulation focusing on the welfare in general and the credibility of the system as a whole!
To Smith, the welfare rules all the world!
And all is a relative!
