RE: Quantum hacking.
Have you done any posts on what's wrong with the SHA256 algorithm @mage00000 ?
As far as science is related, I think it's very similar to what cryptocurrency is like, in the sense that we don't know everything. All we know is what's socially accepted so far in the community, and all we see are the results of experiments (with the effort to be as objective as possible, with peers reviewing our experiments with their own expertise, the flaw there is the limitation to knowledge of the various parties, which can't be solved unless we invent time travel and have the ability to look into the future and realize which presumptions were wrong and which novel theories survive the test of time). But at the same time science and concurrency both help in taking the world forward, and likewise can be used to cause a lot of mayhem and destruction (depending on who uses them with what intentions).
This is the only post, I think, in which I touch on the SHA256 algorithm.
You are right about science. No, you are mostly right. There are things in modern science that are evidently wrong but are accepted because we can not think of a better alternative or we just haven't found a better alternative or there is a better alternative but we chose to ignore it. For example, do you know how we have concluded that the Earth's inner core is of iron and nickel while there is really no way this can be verified.
Well;
Thus there are many generally accepted "facts" which have an extremely thin proof.
I can't believe that I took something like that for granted without questioning it. The second I read your response I had a flashback to science class in high school, and thought about how we take so many facts for granted without questioning what's being taught to us.
It reminds me of a great book by Bill Bryson, it's called A short history of nearly everything. The intro starts with him wondering about the oceans as he gazes at them through the window of an airplane and questions that he asked as a kid in class that were never properly answered, and he ends up writing a book that talks about the advent of Scientific thought and goes on to discuss major scientific breakthroughs till date (or like 2010 maybe, cant remember).
And I completely agree with you, inductive reasoning can sometimes be flawed, but in terms of rational thought it's still one of the best methods that we have to come to conclusions, albeit they're sometimes way off from the truth.