Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks from the Stone Age to AI, Yuval Noah Harari writes every information network tries to balance two things: discovering the truth and maintaining order. Harari emphasizes that order usually wins—institutions, religions, and totalitarian regimes routinely bend or fabricate information to keep people unified and obedient rather than to pursue unvarnished facts. His primary takeaway is that societies must actively build and protect institutional "self-correcting mechanisms" to prevent information from turning into a network of mass delusion. Harari warns against the concentration of data in the hands of a few tech giants, centralized government monopoly over data is more egregious.
Great talk here today. You & Catherine Rampell at The Bulwark are singing from the same hymnal on this, and the wide wide media hasn't even noticed, from what I've seen. Justin's frank exposition would be well understood, but popular media doesn't provide much time or depth for any serious examination of numbers, finance, economics, data such as census, voting, polling. Wish there was more effort to elevate our national conversation - I assume it doesn't sell so they avoid the effort.
Specific to the loss of trust in data, and just plain loss due to DOGE cuts, staffing reductions & skilled workers leaving for more worthwhile positions for their careers & souls - this dismantling is Project 2025 in action... dumbing down our potential for understanding & informed discourse to analyze & resolve real problems that DO exist. Deeply troubling now and for our future.
Best wishes to Megan - her students are lucky to have her knowledge, enthusiasm, curiosity, and joyous good will! I wonder just a bit if we'd only voted her graphs a bit higher... but no do-overs 🤷♂️ that's on all of us
PS to my Comment above - apologies to Megan! I mixed her up with Stacy Vanek Smith as the chart vs chart competitor. Extenuating circumstance: I often listen to shows audio only when out walking so don't have facial recognition helping me. But insufficient attention to names of Justin's partners - that's all on me. Will do better
I appreciate the breakout of votes in the states and the comparison of that number with the claimed number of non-citizen voters. The state vote is the salient factor in who won the election. The nationwide popular vote does not matter, regardless of how lopsided or how close it is. We use the electoral college. A candidate could capture every vote in the entire state of Vermont and would receive only three votes in the electoral college. A presidential candidate has to win in states with large numbers of electoral college votes. That comes down to population. Anybody who runs for president has advisors who explain this to him/her.
Despite knowing the rules, sore losers allow or even encourage their supporters and their spokespeople to argue in public appearances that the loser's larger portion of the popular vote means their candidate actually won. This cynical approach feeds resentment and creates delusions of having been cheated. People claiming that Hillary Clinton really won the 2016 election are living in fantasyland just as much as Trump is when he claims that he really won the 2020 election. Trump is darn lucky that he won both the electoral college and the popular vote in 2024.
I've been sadly suprised at the collapse of the US institutional framework: Congress, Supreme Court, the Presidential Cabinet, all people who took an oath to support and defend the US Constitution, have failed to do so.
We're living the consequences of their failing to keep their oath to the Constitution. And, unless there is a serious, capable, and objective Justice Department that would conduct serious investigations and charge violators that would result in removal from office or criminal charges, our present lawlessness will continue.
Excellent analysis, Justin!
Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks from the Stone Age to AI, Yuval Noah Harari writes every information network tries to balance two things: discovering the truth and maintaining order. Harari emphasizes that order usually wins—institutions, religions, and totalitarian regimes routinely bend or fabricate information to keep people unified and obedient rather than to pursue unvarnished facts. His primary takeaway is that societies must actively build and protect institutional "self-correcting mechanisms" to prevent information from turning into a network of mass delusion. Harari warns against the concentration of data in the hands of a few tech giants, centralized government monopoly over data is more egregious.
Great talk here today. You & Catherine Rampell at The Bulwark are singing from the same hymnal on this, and the wide wide media hasn't even noticed, from what I've seen. Justin's frank exposition would be well understood, but popular media doesn't provide much time or depth for any serious examination of numbers, finance, economics, data such as census, voting, polling. Wish there was more effort to elevate our national conversation - I assume it doesn't sell so they avoid the effort.
Specific to the loss of trust in data, and just plain loss due to DOGE cuts, staffing reductions & skilled workers leaving for more worthwhile positions for their careers & souls - this dismantling is Project 2025 in action... dumbing down our potential for understanding & informed discourse to analyze & resolve real problems that DO exist. Deeply troubling now and for our future.
Best wishes to Megan - her students are lucky to have her knowledge, enthusiasm, curiosity, and joyous good will! I wonder just a bit if we'd only voted her graphs a bit higher... but no do-overs 🤷♂️ that's on all of us
PS to my Comment above - apologies to Megan! I mixed her up with Stacy Vanek Smith as the chart vs chart competitor. Extenuating circumstance: I often listen to shows audio only when out walking so don't have facial recognition helping me. But insufficient attention to names of Justin's partners - that's all on me. Will do better
I appreciate the breakout of votes in the states and the comparison of that number with the claimed number of non-citizen voters. The state vote is the salient factor in who won the election. The nationwide popular vote does not matter, regardless of how lopsided or how close it is. We use the electoral college. A candidate could capture every vote in the entire state of Vermont and would receive only three votes in the electoral college. A presidential candidate has to win in states with large numbers of electoral college votes. That comes down to population. Anybody who runs for president has advisors who explain this to him/her.
Despite knowing the rules, sore losers allow or even encourage their supporters and their spokespeople to argue in public appearances that the loser's larger portion of the popular vote means their candidate actually won. This cynical approach feeds resentment and creates delusions of having been cheated. People claiming that Hillary Clinton really won the 2016 election are living in fantasyland just as much as Trump is when he claims that he really won the 2020 election. Trump is darn lucky that he won both the electoral college and the popular vote in 2024.
Excellent Analysis.
I've been sadly suprised at the collapse of the US institutional framework: Congress, Supreme Court, the Presidential Cabinet, all people who took an oath to support and defend the US Constitution, have failed to do so.
We're living the consequences of their failing to keep their oath to the Constitution. And, unless there is a serious, capable, and objective Justice Department that would conduct serious investigations and charge violators that would result in removal from office or criminal charges, our present lawlessness will continue.
Who wants to invest in Argentina? THE TRUMP REGIME.