On economy

It feels that Bitcoin is related to philosophy. In the paper that was published under the name of Satoshi Nakamoto titled “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”, it was proposed in the thought that “What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party”(1) as written in the introductory part. As known, “The very first bitcoin block that was mined famously included a message containing a reference to a newspaper headline: ‘The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.'”(2)

Exchanging things between two parties at the same time has restriction. Bartering cannot happen without those two parties’ having what can be exchanged at that moment and physically being in the place. Currency and bookkeeping lifted this restriction. It enabled people to behave in a broader time scale than being limited to just the moment. As for the relationship between trust and currency, “the value of a unit of currency is not the measure of the value of an object, but the measure of one’s trust in other human beings”(3).

It feels that people need to get support from others in their daily life, or in the perspective of developing their civilisation it is efficient to collaborate with others to meet the necessity arising out of their daily life. When one gets support from another, but one didn’t have things to pay back to another, they use the currency which is in use in their community so that another can get the benefit of what they offered then.

Besides “did money serve largely as an accounting measure rather than physically changing hands, merchants and tradespeople developed credit arrangements of their own” mostly in “clay tablets” in the civilisation of Mesopotamia(4).

Apart from that two parties exchange product, one may give the money equivalent to the product received. Money as a medium works as useful, but it needs to have trust.

It is described that “Credit system, tabs, even expense accounts, all existed long before cash. These things are as old as civilization itself”(5). At a point in the latter half of 20th century, “The world’s transition to a full fiat money system took place as recently as 1971 when President Nixon announced the suspension of the dollar’s convertibility into gold (i.e., the gold standard)”(6). After 1971, one can see “a marked increase in the money supply and monetary debasement globally”(7).

In the world where capitalism prevailed, it is difficult to have a business of not seeking profit at its first priority. Perception of capitalism by people in general puts those who most earn at the top of hierarchy, and if that governs the world, it is mono-cultural. Those who wanted to be the one but couldn’t get a success in that rule need to be saved by other values. Selling goods or services towards customers outside their company and putting the priority in their sales often lead their company to look at the customers and care less about their labourers. Lack of insights into the inside of their firm undermines the happiness of their labourers. Only seeking capital is to become exploitative in some sense, what for capital is required what is the purpose needs to be in higher priority.

Those who are typically in the managing position manages the schedule and try to make their team and people around to meet the deadline even if they need to work overtime. If one works hard to meet the deadline, one sacrifices something. Does it lead to one’s happiness?

Happiness to a person isn’t what another can determine. It is what one would feel. People have different interests and from what they feel happiness is different. Empathy to another also depends on individual sense as one may feel empathy in a situation but another may not feel that way. This subjective aspect of empathy is partly related to that the reason why people behave kindly to the elderly. It is because they know when getting older they would face the same kind of difficulty the elder person in front of them is facing. They can feel the trouble as their own one. It also is that previously the kindness given from another remained in one’s heart that encouraged to behave kindly to others.

This characteristic of thinking it as one’s own comes needs thinking. It is subjective in the sense that one needs to think in oneself but it is a cycle of taking things outside into oneself through the process of thinking. Besides, anyone cannot know what another thinks as they are different individuals.

In the society of more freedom, a variety of standards is in place so that different people are valued. Even what is not measurable should be recognised as the important. Seeking profit is on the top of the list at company in capitalism, and it often makes their labourers suffer from their labouring conditions.

Economy resonates with the rapid cycle of decision-making. Increasing power of computation catches the future. In order to move things forward, people often require one step further for those who are involved to take action as demanded. That makes them feel uncomfortable and everyday labouring it accumulates stress to them. It is better to let them have some flexibility to decide by their will as, not just labouring, labourers have their own conditions of life that are not just labouring but stemming from other factors in their life.

I believe there are cases that in tiny tiny details it is correct, not wrong, to do that way but in larger scale, reflected on the original purpose, doing it can disturb the success of original purpose. Investing time and effort in that tiny details without enough consideration to the larger picture may lead to the collapse of the work in progress. One of the reasons to this could be related to the available resources. That is why thinking from the perspective of primary principle works.

Just because one is told to do doesn’t guarantee that one will follow that order. It has incentives around that order such as reward, motivation, trust. To the object it refers to, there are objects other than that which could affect the execution. Logic seems creating a dimension based on which they talk about things in line. People do not necessarily be on that dimension as they can be influenced by factors outside.

Machines that follow instructions would be evaluated more than those which halts or malfunctions. However the latter may lead to discovery of unfound aspects.

The world focuses too much on the present, or the pleasures. Rapid flow of information on the Internet excites the feelings of people, rather than spending time in tranquility, people tend more to spend time effectively. Spending time in thinking about the future may make the history of the human beings prospective.

(1) Satoshi Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”, accessed 28 June 2023, written date 21 August 2008, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3440802. Posted date 22 August 2019.

(2) Vijay Selvam, Principles of Bitcoin: Technology, Economics, Politics, and Philosophy (New York: Columbia University Press, 2025), p.121.

(3) David Graeber, Debt: The First 5000 Years (Brooklyn: Melville House Publishing, 2014), p.47. New and expanded edition.

(4) David Graeber, Debt: The First 5000 Years (Brooklyn: Melville House Publishing, 2014), p.214. New and expanded edition.

(5) David Graeber, Debt: The First 5000 Years (Brooklyn: Melville House Publishing, 2014), p.18. New and expanded edition.

(6) Vijay Selvam, Principles of Bitcoin: Technology, Economics, Politics, and Philosophy (New York: Columbia University Press, 2025), p.33.

(7) Vijay Selvam, Principles of Bitcoin: Technology, Economics, Politics, and Philosophy (New York: Columbia University Press, 2025), p.127.

Logic and rules

It is not that simple to divide the things in life into categories. Often, complexities in life are quite powerfully placed into them by the force of categorising.

Categorization causes bias by which discrimination arises. Due to its function, people memorize things easier. The function is, often, to recognise things in outer world from self. Categorization is the capability equipped in persons. Finding difference is to identify an individual. Difference matters in this world. People try to appreciate the difference among people. Contrarily, we have a vector of power that is attempting to homogenize the world. Categorisation has a bit of distance from the subjects that it refers to, categorising and grouping a set of subjects can group not only the subjects from which one began that categorising but also what will be found in the future as well as in the past which meet a set of standards.

Logical thinking is what is often centred in businesses or academics, it is what people can rely on. For instance, planning a schedule tries to narrow its possibility so that it can meet the demand among groups of people. Otherwise, it becomes more chaotic, without organising the possibility. Demanding logical act excessively make some people feel uncomfortableness. It diminishes the free sphere which tolerates diverse people.

The progress around logic has to do with the past development of logic and mathematics. The discovery of pure mathematics in 1850s emphasised that “We, start, in pure mathematics from certain rules of inference, by which we can infer that if one proposition is true, then so is some other proposition”(1).

Society seeks progress, makes attempts to move towards better world, however it requires immense efforts. The efforts required put people in a situation where they work harder to make it realised. It feels that the amount of time and cost to maintain the individual life occupies a lot. They are concerned with the labouring, in particular it has some stress in their life especially when having trouble. Making the sphere of freedom broader lets people flexibly do their labour.

The masses work for company. A large part of them work for at least 8 hours per day, 40 hours per week with often additional overtime hours. Business model requires employees to efficiently work with the aim of how they can produce efficient output in their limited time. Working more efficiently leads to the situation in which employees need to care about almost every detail to output efficiently. More impressively saying that in every minute they are required to produce maximized output without spending their time in vain. Business world orders employees to labour socialistically (or communistically) by deciding the deadline. That is to say that it is less allows people to have some room.

Capitalism shows its strong influence over the world, but the world covered by mono culture suffocates the world. In the business world, people need to be eager to move things forward. They work hard while managing their tasks by scheduling task by task. Although it in fact often needs to extend the scheduled end date if they have some problems in the situation of their tasks, but basically it is their virtue to meet the schedule of each task even if it requires them to work overtime, even at midnight or weekend. People share the notion of time in the business world so that things can be settled by the schedule that they set up, they relate their tasks to the notion of time(2).

People talk a lot about money. Companies typically care about the growth of revenue per certain period such as month, quarter, and year. Labouring hard every workday and move forward their tasks in rapid cycle may let you earn higher income, but what else is going to be with you after years?

It is absurd to see that developing one’s career makes one difficult to move to other paths, different from the current one, even in academics or professional career. Typically saying, one’s career needs consistency. Without having it, it often fails to get through application process. Some people of antidisciplinary is not within this framework as they are the ones who are interested in more than everything. They are always not limited to one discipline or another. Specialising in a limited discipline doesn’t fascinate this type of person. By growing, why not take a variety of jobs?

Utilitarianism suits in a society being more digitalised and calculated. Considering the principle of utility, it “approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever, according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same thing in other words, to promote or to oppose that happiness”(3).

Rules are in place in society, and people practice them in their life. It sometimes feel that the society at the beginning of 21st century, or it can date back to several hundreds years, asks people to follow the rules more rigidly. Not condemning specific actor of society, but society in general has tendency to make each person follow the narrow path. Some people demand that others behave properly even in tiny details. Those rules are made based on the past. Rules are made in some cases based on the frequency of its usage.

Rules already put in place cannot cover all the situations that take place in society. It requires the practical flexibility to appear to be following them. This is not particularly focusing on the cases in which practitioners claim that they follow the rules on the one hand and others in society insist it doesn’t seem to the public that they follow, but in the real world without having the flexibility to be regarded as following the rules, the rules don’t work. Not just obeying the rules literally, there’s some space between what’s written and how it is practised. Flexibility depending on situations is required to run society smoothly. It is because the descriptions of the rules cannot cover all the situations that potentially could happen, there’s always need for practitioners to make them work.

Multi-disciplined in the same space without causing major conflict protects the sphere in which a variety of people co-habits. It is not governed by one discipline erasing others which make the world inflexible to different situations of different people.

Law is subject to change both its description and its meaning or interpretation, often little by little. The description of law often compresses the cases of daily life of their citizenry to a concise description. Even if the form of law is written in one description, it can be applied to a number of cases in society. The norms are often based on culture that their society owns.

Ethics, or morality, works to some extent to limit freedom of persons as they would refrain from taking certain actions which are harmful to others based on their conscience. Regulated by conscience, being free goes toward public good. Religion plays significant role on the formation of morality, and how they think about the world. It also has been supporting people, without which they would more directly face the reality and are not able to face it continually. Ethics is a set of rules deeply rooted in persons.

(1) Bertrand Russel, Mysticism and Logic (London and New York: Routledge, 2025), pp.69-70.

(2) This sentence is influenced by p.77 of Henri Bergson, Histoire de l’idée de temps: Cours au Collège de France 1902-1903 (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2016).

(3) John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham, Utilitarianism and Other Essays (London: Penguin Books, 2004), p.65.

Logic and categorisation

By the middle of the 20th century, “logic has become more mathematical and mathematics has become more logical”(1).

Logical analysis can converge things into a certain point where things are settled instead of being ambiguous, or chaotic. Wording is to converge things into certain point. Ambiguously uttering is somewhat limiting but not in narrower way.

This convergence into a point in logic is suitable to business in capitalism where a rapid cycle of decision-making and moving tasks forward is demanded rather than continuing to thinking about a certain decision whether it is truly the best answer or not. Even though business world also requires the meta thinking to make a correct decision, it is necessary to move tasks forward rapidly. The use of logic in business world associated with capitalism is different from works that are expected to last forever, logic converges things, there are things not included at the moment logic determines.

This characteristic of convergence is used to make the future converge in a hopeful way. The word “risk” is often paid attention to especially in late 20th century. It is described that “The notion of ‘risk’ is central to modern culture today precisely because so much of our thinking has to be ‘as-if’ kind”(2). Beforehand, they recognise the risks, they make the ways by which risks are minimised. However knowing the risks may makes people difficult to take action. After recognising them, we would choose whether we take action by accepting the risks or avoid taking action so that we will not face them.

In business world, they require the labourers to be logical. Logical thinking has been one of the capacities which is recognised as necessary for each. That is especially in the first quarter of 21st century onwards required.

Analysing the things that one face and identify what is known and not. To the questions that one cannot “here and now give definitive answers”(3), “a method has been discovered by which, as in science, we can make successive approximations to the truth, in which each new stage results from an improvement, not a rejection, of what has gone before”(4).

Logic is related to accountability. It is often seen that people involved ask its explanation which is convincing enough to be provided behind the proposition that one gave. Argument equipped with logic can convince people in front of oneself. Strong logic can make people not be able to respond.

In business world, answering to a question properly is often demanded. Sometimes see people not clearly answer question is that they have other things in mind and are captured by them.

Sharing the same logic with others leads them to work in the same logic in a certain domain. People of different background may indicate that “two individuals may agree on their computations in particular cases even though they are actually computing different functions”(5).

Temper is a large factor that decides whether it is going to be successful or not. If one is not motivated to move forward tasks in a project, it has to do with the outcome of to what extent successful it is going to be.

Given this nature of logic, does it have extensibility in its nature? The extensibility is whether it is opened to the further sphere. The logic often determines the scope before moving forward.

It is a type of categorisation that people judge others by their title as such that whether one is director or just a staff. Even if those who are in the rank of banality has greater capacity in some cases, one may not be regarded so by others.

Labeling doesn’t comprehend the entire aspects of a person, but it attempts to make easier to categorise. It sometimes goes to the end that it is condemned as prejudice. Labeling is to categorise by one or a few aspect of person, sometimes the impressive aspect of a person. People are frequently labelled some as liberal, conservative, or others. It seems that the labelling focuses on an opinion or the tendency that a person more frequently expresses. Presumably a person who is labelled as liberal also has conservative opinion in other topics given the complexity of human being. Even unconsciously people categorise as it is harder for them to recognise one by one, easier to group by similarity. This labeling has negative aspect too as it may group one which isn’t easy to be categorised in one group or another.

Bias is an exaggerated aspect of an object based on one’s past experience. Categorising and prejudice are related. Some fault images accentuating some aspect excessively create the prejudice.

Persons of logic should know what is not logical.

(1) Bertrand Russell, Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy (London and New York: Routledge Classics, 2023), p.184.

(2) Ulrich Beck, Anthony Giddens, and Scott Lash, Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press,1994), p.vii.

(3) Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy (London and New York: Routledge, 2004), p.744.

(4) Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy (London and New York: Routledge, 2004), p.744.

(5) Saul A. Kripke, Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 1982), p.32.

3.2.7 On norm

People live in the narrow world. Norm is in ordinary state what people often are not aware of, or it is not what they take time and think about it carefully in their life. However, they sometimes notice that it was inconvenient, for example. In daily life, many citizens are not aware of the ceiling, some go beyond that framework, but those people described as some are limited in a few. In order to be against the stringent norm, to create a culture first with limited community towards their society is a way to spread their opinions. Historically, there are times in which people live in the world of narrow norm. Even one may live in the world of narrow norm at present. Some opinion suggests that over the centuries people come to live in the narrow norm, with things established as civilisation is built up. On the other hand, there are things that one cannot talk in one epoch, but later in another epoch those can be talked with less conflict. Even if it causes tension among people, there would be times in which for the progress of civilisation, one would have to claim for public benefit.

In the case of emergency in society, the pressure on the urgent needs narrows the sphere of tolerance. This sudden decreased tolerance often weeps out the existing values except the ones the society recognise as important at the moment. In other words, limited number of values comes to dominate society with the sphere of freedom narrow. Other values than a few of domination tend to be underestimated or ignored. It often has a force of excluding freedom and the number of people who care about freedom also decreases. If certain period of time, what has been unusual and unacceptable is forced to be put in practice, some may recognise that it is the ordinary. Not only the effect that changes are infiltrated into society consciously or unconsciously, people do forget what has been ordinary.

People sometimes say that if they get older it gets more difficult to develop their abilities than they were child. That is presumably because they become more established when getting old. Their personal norm is more established. They have a variety of factors surrounding them based on their history. If they can break the established factors apart, they can make their own way less restricted by their past establishment. They can develop their abilities unrestrictively, if without being surrounded by it. Sometimes, people are obsessed by the conventional knowledge that they got in the past. It may hider their progress.

The world history as a whole may have been on the path of progress, it is on the way of progress by breaking through the established history of themselves — in the meantime it also has been creating success on top of the wisdoms built up by the previous generations.

The divided preference, from which channel they get information, create different social groups. If people spend more in what they are interested in, they become more divided into specific domains. If society is divided and what their mainstream media covers is also divided, what people in the society believes in is also separate in two opposite positions. Americans’ trust towards media became lower as described that “Forty-five percent of Americans say there is a ‘a great deal’ of political bias in news coverage (up from 25 percent in 1989)”(1).

While maintaining the potential of diversity, it is beneficial to secure the places where people of different domains can interact. Diversity, in one sense, leads to the broader sphere in which people live in. The actual experiences that people regularly visit a place or are based on their custom create powerful intimacy which is more physical sense rather than theory.

Although it is important to have discussion in terms of whether hate speech should be regulated by law or not since legal aspect in society is one of the significant domains, discussion from other perspectives provides another insight on this issue and deepens discussion.

There’s been a discussion whether we should restrict certain kind of speech such as hate speech. Discussion on the policies is what is here regarded as environmental one. Considering the balancing of regulation in society, that is to what degree it implements regulation on expression, given the nature of contingency of freedom. This characteristic that freedom is not absolute makes it necessary to think about others in exercising freedom including freedom of expression. The necessity to care about others prevents the abuse of exercising one’s freedom and rights. Even though there’s a value that we should protect freedom and rights, it should not support that we can utter anything based on the freedom of expression we have. In order to balance this relationship between one’s freedom and its contingency upon others, the development of sentimentality is proposed. This development of sentiment underpins the part of oneself to think about others.

The way of governance is not limited to only law but also social norms exist in society. Beyond legal framework which is law, norm exists in a society. Regulation is not only laws, but also norms are. One doesn’t have to construct society only by the border between legal and illegal. Some sphere in between there, or other factors are to introduce flexibility to that regulation, norm is one besides law.

If societal norms are too restrictive, it has oppressive effect. In the meantime, the stability in a society comes from maintaining norm. Education has an effect in creating shared norm among citizens by which society maintains stability. However, it is a matter of balancing and it would be better not to leaning towards one end. For instance, securing the sphere of freedom absorbs the stresses among citizens, not always we should bind ourselves by norm. Additionally saying, norm doesn’t have to be the one which is standardised, it can be taken for granted that diverse standards coexist in a society.

Education is a type of activity that educator gives a framework to students. How students are evaluated is based on the frame of the previous generations. Evaluation in a educational course is just to look at a limited aspect of student. If students strive to get better grade, they get themselves adapted to the criteria, but not necessarily all people have to move that way. It often has potential in unevaluated areas. It may not be inevitable for evaluators to set the criteria, but sharing that the potential of each person is not limited to how they are judged by educational institution, exams, or company makes difference.

In the context of media, Japanese society (or at least those who are more in the position of activism) focused on the self-censorship of media in especially the second half of 2010s. The focus on media was partly from the aspect of freedom of the press. Through this period, the citizens in Japan on the Internet, came to recognise this media tradition and got frustrated. The traditional norm got influenced through the accumulation of voices among citizens feeling the negativeness of this situation. Since the voices among citizens were visible on the Internet, it was presumably sensed by those who work in media industry. Through not just media’s self-censorship topic but also other old structural topics in society, the norm slightly changed towards the first half or the middle of 2020s that people tend to more criticise, for example people inside the mass media such as newsreader speaks critical view towards their own company in news programme when their company was to blame.

The restrictiveness of norm depends on country. Where a country has more conservatively been built, it is narrower than other countries. Japan’s narrow norm puts people into a thin frame, compared with Europe which has wider norm. Japanese society is conservative, stable and so forth. Its norm is more shared within the entire society. That may be the cause of less progress of the country. Japanese society has been having 空気, and it has been recognised with importance at least among some people in the past(2).

The Japanese word “空気” isn’t what we can see, and the kinds of it aren’t distingushable clearly. It is what the places and persons there create, but not necessarily the contribution deriving from their positive actions but rather even passively created in some cases. That is to say, for instance, if people in a society don’t take action and stay calm for a while, that also becomes the norm.

(1) ‘Public trust in the media is at an all-time low. Results from a major new Knight-Gallup report can help us understand why‘, Knight Foundation, published 16 January 2018, accessed 4 February 2024, https://medium.com/trust-media-and-democracy/10-reasons-why-americans-dont-trust-the-media-d0630c125b9e. This sentence is also cited in Mark R. Levin, Unfreedom of the Press (New York: Threshold Editions, 2019), p.12. First Threshold Editions hardcover edition.

(2) One of the persons that focused on it is Shichihei Yamamoto. 山本七平, 「空気」の研究 (東京: 文春文庫, 2018). 新装版.

3.7 Information

The word information is frequently used in daily life. As a way of transmitting information from one to another, conversation is perceived as a type of activity. It can be conversation via speech as well as via written text to communicate with another. In communication, they use certain kind of expression such as sound and symbol. Commonly, information is recognised as what’s speeched out of one’s mouth or expressed in a written form, contrary to the background or context which is not included in those expressions. In thinking about expression, it is inevitable to care about not only what’s visible which appears in the form of expression but also what’s invisible, caring about the context of expression.

The definition of the word “Exformation is the discarded information, everything we do not actually say but have in our heads when or before we say anything at all”(1). In contrast with the concept of information which is what is communicated in the expression, exformation is what is not communicated in the expression. To recognise the concept simply, in the situation that two persons make a conversation, what they speech is the information and what they don’t speech is the exformation. The exformation could be the context in which those two persons converse, or, I would say, it is not necessarily be the communal, or shared, context. Exformation is the information discarded in the conversation among them.

On information, some knew that “information is closely related to entropy, which is a measure of disorder”(2). The concept of entropy came from thermodynamics to information theory(3). Even though “Information is something to be found in bulk in a state where entropy is great”(4) and “more information in disorder than in order”(5), far from Claude Shannon there were others headed to the idea of “Information is order”(6).

Look at speech, utterance of words out of one’s body is to convey just a tiny part of the information, there’s a vast amount of context discarded behind. Society would need to have the mutual understanding on the limitation or the fundamental of communication and symbols. One of the fundamental aspects regarding communicating via symbols is context.

When people converse, it is not guaranteed that the receiver has the enough background knowledge in their head to be able to be on the same conversation with the speaker. However, it may not be necessarily important to have the same background of conversation. What’s uttered by another could trigger the curiosities towards the world, which can be expressed that “The least interesting aspect of good conversation is what is actually said. What is more interesting is all the deliberations and emotions that take place simultaneously during conversation in the heads and bodies of the conversers”(7). In addition, even after the conversation ended, often the curious parts continue to influence them. The exformation is not what everyone can understand the same degree as their background cannot be totally same. Exformation attracts people. The background of a work is often curiously looked at such as the biography of the artist, the environment in which the work was created, what was the motivation which drove the author to create the work.

Besides the recognition that each person has different context in ultimate sense, the inspiration of ideas occurs when their context is different. This applies to reading book. It is not only to read what’s written in a book, but to think what’s not written in the book. What one expresses is interpreted in a number of ways which vary depending on its circumstance.

The statement of, for instance, saying that today is good weather as greeting to another can be interpreted in a variety of ways. When one spoke of that statement to another in a sunny day, it would be perceived as just a greeting. Another case is that one said that in a rainy day truly thinking that rainy day is good weather to another with speaker’s personal preference, however the receiver of that conversation is not aware of speaker’s rainy day preference and it may make him perceive that it is ironically said to him in the connotation with its history of whenever one meets him it rains.

Exformation at least somewhat contributes to the definition of information. Regarding the relationship between words and context, “Words are written in a context. If they have meaning, they have meaning because of that context”(8). The meaning of signs is decoded by surrounding.

Vast amount of information is discarded, compared with the information written in text. Having mutual understanding that there’s a vast amount of information discarded helps people avoid causing misunderstanding or miscommunication among them.

In the world where information can be spread rapidly, the pieces are read by peoples of different regions, contexts. Even before, many consumed information by reading newspapers, books, conversations, to name a few. Over the past years, new medium emerged. Weblog was a sphere where citizens can post what they would like to share, sometimes for changing their world better, in other times for leaving their comments as records. In the beginning of 2020s, the word influencer, a person who gains influence on the Internet and influence the world, got popular. However, it would be rather said that most of them don’t seem influencing for the public good, in some cases just for trying to gain profits for themselves. Their influence is visible in numbers, how many follows them, their posts are liked by their audience and so forth. Numbers are abundant in people’s life. Things are trying to be mathematised. It became in 2010s on the Internet that people are fanatic to get the numbers, or attentions from the Internet users. It went negative too that uploaders went quite extreme end, often, without having care about the public goods in their posts. People are not able to focus on things in the long run. Additionally, people call for particular movement which uses specific hashtag words or phrases to assemble people in support of their movement.

As technology developed, people came to be more near-sighted, this is what people are not able to think in the long run. Focusing too much on the present feels like people are floating on the waves created by themselves. Their feet are not on the ground and they are easily wavered. What enriches is the sight in the long term.

Even though the information that can be shared in language is limited in the first place, social media is more limited in sharing the context. Setting aside the question of whether people in general read long pieces of information in their life regularly in the first place, the tendency arising out of the beginning of 21^st century that by uploading posts of shorter passages or video clips, the uploaders intend to gain their profit and get the number of views.

(1) Tor Nørretranders, The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size (NewYork: Penguin Books, 1999), p.95.

(2) Tor Nørretranders, The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size (NewYork: Penguin Books, 1999), p.31.

(3) Tor Nørretranders, The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size (NewYork: Penguin Books, 1999), p.38.

(4) Tor Nørretranders, The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size (NewYork: Penguin Books, 1999), p.42.

(5) Tor Nørretranders, The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size (NewYork: Penguin Books, 1999), p.42.

(6) Tor Nørretranders, The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size (NewYork: Penguin Books, 1999), p.42.

(7) Tor Nørretranders, The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size (NewYork: Penguin Books, 1999), p.94.

(8) Lawrence Lessig, Fidelity & Constraint: How the Supreme Court Has Read the American Constitution (New York: Oxford University Press, 2019), p. 55.