How do we think? If that's a question that's ever crossed your mind, then congratulations, you've spent at least some time delving into "meta-cognition" or thinking about thinking.

In metal gear, we get a taste of meta cognition, we're put through a meat grinder of it. Its put in a way that causes mental pain:

"You exercise your 'freedom' and this is the result. All rhetoric to avoid conflict and protect each other from hurt."

I can tell you right now Bitcoin magazine is not a reliable source. I have already proven that by trying to verify claims they've made. When Bitcoin Magazine posts, I ask for the source. The first party source, not third party reporting. None of that matters though when articles aren't about facts in the first place. The articles that we really get annoyed with provide no facts at all.

How do we think? In order to think, we first have to have information. We can then think on that information. What does that involve? Comparing it against other information we already have. What if we don't have any other information on a topic? Then we have no way to dispute the information we have. What if then we do find information that conflicts with what we've learned? Then we fight to protect what we think we know no matter how wrong we might be.

If I don't have an emotional attachment to information I have, I might start to think on that information around the context of my life and think about how that information might apply. The problem is, thinking is hard. It saves me so much energy when the context for that information is provided for me and suddenly I don't feel the need to think about my own context for the information provided to me.

If you don't believe that at all, then you should research how ads work.

"How ads manipulate us - and how to resist | BBC Ideas" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5WfzyR7Zzk

In fact understanding how ads work will help you entirely all by itself to understand where I'm coming from. Bitcoin Magazine is an advertising platform with the express goal to sell a very specific monetization strategy.

I wrote an article months ago now about exactly how Shitcoin Magazine is a wolf in poorly crafted sheep's clothes: #214720

In it, I was able to share this video: "What is an exit event" https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1680920921463201792/pu/vid/1280x720/V3eaZ94h09YMZQrR.mp4?tag=12

Now if I know from seeing time and time again and pushing back time and time again, and getting hit back with justifications instead of any sign of self reflection from Shitcoin Magazine that they are trying to push scams onto users and change culture to allow them to more easily push scams onto users, should I not be warning them against that? Does it really feel right to advertise on Shitcoin Magazine's behalf to get other people to read through their advertisements of exit event schemes?

Its not a philosophical question to me. Its a deep burning call to action.