Also I feel the experiment suggests split brains would most likely become 2 very different (new?) entities with different behavior after losing integrity.

It was a social evil has rightly been banned but slavery was both a social evil and individual maliciousness on part of people who partook in it - and there were a few black folk too in that group who were selling their own people. No society 'mandated' slaverer to sell people as a way of life. There were always other professions if it didn't fit well with their conscience. No one would make your life hell for not actively selling slaves by making you into a social outcast.

Also the only way to claim it works as expected at any scale is to test it out. This allows scientists to claim that the theory checks out at this scale too.

Limited bitcoins doesn't make it any less vulnerable to being marketed (yes, there is a lot of marketing $ behind it) as a get rich quick scheme. In fact, the growth of fiat value of bitcoin is the biggest reason people see it as an investment vehicle. Bitcoin system might be helpful in countries with oppressive governments and no trustworthy party, but I don't see largest orders of bitcoins coming from North Korea.

https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/24/politics/fbi-economic-espiona...

I read Nobel in Economics as 'Nobel in maths (largely statistical optimization) and behavioural psychology'. I personally believe the field adds significant value to society.

That said, I do think the award is rather liberally given away. We credit scientists only when their theories test out in practice with sufficient evidence whereas we are more willing to give economists a pass in the name of 'not enough data' or 'valid under certain conditions' . I think we should award only the fundamental time tested truths (statistical or otherwise) which are so entrenched in the way of the world that its discovery has little or no bearing on its exact function. This would award Nash/Selten but not Merton/Scholes. The basic option pricing ended up being just a bunch of really cool but limited equations which tend to be self fulfilling prophecies until when they don't.

Them credentials!

Yes, in this case what is good for public also aligns with what is good for GOOG and FB. So what? It's like saying you're not convinced about children getting good education because it aligns with 'big money'.

Cattle can digest fiber and can eat tons of fodder to extract sufficient protein - both of which humans are incapable of. Eating meat is then consuming refined and concentrated version of that fodder.