Thanks to all for your opinions.
To be very honest, I haven’t yet read the whole thesis. Like most academics these days, I simply uploaded it to ChatGPT and asked for summarization.
However, I want to get the audio version of it so I can hear the whole scholarly work when I'm at the gym, shedding more calories and contemplating energy efficiency and things.
My interest in that particular work stems from the fact that the document was obviously written from a military perspective and mindset, which differs from a civilian perspective.
I don’t fool myself into thinking that the military sector is not fully aware of the implications of Bitcoin and truly decentralized systems; after all, military research led to the invention of the Internet, asymmetric cryptography, game theory, and all the good stuff that today forms the foundation of Bitcoin technology.
I am still collecting different opinions and reviews about it to form my own.
BTC>
Topic: Bitcoin Power Projection - Jason P. Lowery (Read 148 times)
Maybe someday when the digital world has consumed us, this can happen.
Yes, I reckon it will happen during the Metaverse era.yep this "paper" fits more into the economic/cultural system of web3/meta*.. not bitcoin
*in a world where international courts(of war crimes/litigation/nation recognition/sanctions) would recognise ownership of real world property/land is competed for via registration of land/property digitally instead of physically invaded/taken over/fought over**
** in a scenario where international monetary funds of sanctions/penalties and judgements are done digitally via protocoled courts instead of human sat international courts
you are being a critic, without knowledge
i explained my thoughts on his paper because i read it and formed an opinion on what i read. and shown examples which you just quoted me of where he babbled and got things wrong
you have not even read his paper yourself.. and yet you are getting emotionally defensive without even reading it to know what you are defending
you have just got defensive with confirmation bias, acting as if its perfection without your own knowledge of the content
you have not even peer reviewed it.
you should try reading it first
dont become a cultist of idolising something without knowing what you idolise. just because "OMG its a word document so it must be good so i must default to idolise and defend it because its a word document" without you even reading the content of the paper
there have been many examples of this failure, such as ICO scams and scam tokens which silly people just blindly trust and idolise and defend because the creator wrote a prospectus/"whitepaper"
even without people actually peer reviewing the white papers content, without scrutiny, without even reading the code of the ICO/token to realise they were scams. people just blindly trust and defend authors "cos they wrote a paper, they must be legit"
i explained my thoughts on his paper because i read it and formed an opinion on what i read. and shown examples which you just quoted me of where he babbled and got things wrong
you have not even read his paper yourself.. and yet you are getting emotionally defensive without even reading it to know what you are defending
you have just got defensive with confirmation bias, acting as if its perfection without your own knowledge of the content
you have not even peer reviewed it.
you should try reading it first
dont become a cultist of idolising something without knowing what you idolise. just because "OMG its a word document so it must be good so i must default to idolise and defend it because its a word document" without you even reading the content of the paper
there have been many examples of this failure, such as ICO scams and scam tokens which silly people just blindly trust and idolise and defend because the creator wrote a prospectus/"whitepaper"
even without people actually peer reviewing the white papers content, without scrutiny, without even reading the code of the ICO/token to realise they were scams. people just blindly trust and defend authors "cos they wrote a paper, they must be legit"
its obvious that YOU are the author by your defensiveness.. as you are getting defensive and evasive shows you are more emotionally tied to this document than a random reader would..
I am not the author of this paper, as I mentioned that I am only 18 and am still learning.I don't know if you have read the paper but it is by someone who's way older and experienced in what they are talking about.
its not a thesis. its a babble of content 5x the norm to show the author has lots of random opinions/thoughts on lots of topics but never concludes them quickly
also a thesis is not something that HAD approval... a thesis is something anyone can write that is then submitted to get reviewed/tested/scrutinised
.
.
.
an average thesis is under 80 pages.. i know what theses are.
Okay, I would like to apologize for using the wrong term of "thesis". I have meant to say research paper (as it seems to be one now that I look at it once again).also a thesis is not something that HAD approval... a thesis is something anyone can write that is then submitted to get reviewed/tested/scrutinised
.
.
.
an average thesis is under 80 pages.. i know what theses are.
That, I will acknowledge.
However, I want to ask you, do you believe MIT, the number one nationally acknowledged institution for leading technology (as a university of course), will approve some random person's paper that you accuse "not being a thesis. its a babble of content 5x the norm to show the author has lots of random opinions/thoughts on lots of topics but never concludes them quickly"? If that was the case, I believe this would have been a very very hot topic amongst scientist and cryptographers and countless the science world that MIT would approve a paper to just get approved like this.
after 80 pages it felt like he was still at the intro and al i learned was that he sounded like trump would sound if trump wrote it, its all over the place
I have no idea what beef you have with Trump (and I don't care since politics is not my interest) but you need to stop with it honestly. You sound to be decades older than I am but still childish enough to be mentioning political figures as a way to convey a message that could have been said in plenty other ways. I don't know why you would also choose to argue with a 18 yr old over a topic that you sound like you don't have much clue about as much as I lol.he name drops and adds quotes but some of the quotes show he has not fully understood even those things.
he mentions Einstein about energy and mass. but doesnt understand that mass IS energy in a form... he went down a lengthy path of saying converting mass into energy as a way for him to suggest turning gun fights into digital competition
he talked about colonisation as being a form of co-operation of self interest to defend land
no colonisation is an invasion attack where the invader wins and takes over the land
even the bacteria evolution stuff he gets wrong
he mentions Einstein about energy and mass. but doesnt understand that mass IS energy in a form... he went down a lengthy path of saying converting mass into energy as a way for him to suggest turning gun fights into digital competition
he talked about colonisation as being a form of co-operation of self interest to defend land
no colonisation is an invasion attack where the invader wins and takes over the land
even the bacteria evolution stuff he gets wrong
I don't know what the author had failed to understand and interpret (as I didn't read 80 pages of this paper), but I don't believe that MIT would let this person's paper get approved to be published like this if they didn't understand what they were even talking about which makes me jump to conclusions that you yourself don't know how the content ties to idea the author is trying to explain XD.
In conclusion, please do back your claim with evidence and your thoughts about it since clearly you are trying to argue with hallow statements and vague accusations with no backing of your own knowledge.
I must remind you once again, I am only 18 and still learning, so I hope that you would not rudely scrutinize me as if I should have known everything you know and instead explain what I'm saying that you believe is wrong. I believe that's how people should interact on this forum.
Thanks for understanding!
I'm a big fan of biology/nature. I think Softwar makes some good points.
Bitcoin has a lot in common with nature's laws:
https://brandonquittem.com/bitcoin-is-a-pioneer-species/
Summer = bull run = even weak animals can survive
Winter = bear market = weak animals get decimated (weak hands, altcoins, Ponzi exchanges)
With limited resources (QT, 5.5% by FED) only the strong survives, but with abundance (QE, 0%) even the weak survives. You can't go wrong with this pattern, happens everytime.
Bonus read (from the same author):
https://brandonquittem.com/bitcoin-rhythms-of-history/
Bitcoin has a lot in common with nature's laws:
https://brandonquittem.com/bitcoin-is-a-pioneer-species/
Summer = bull run = even weak animals can survive
Winter = bear market = weak animals get decimated (weak hands, altcoins, Ponzi exchanges)
With limited resources (QT, 5.5% by FED) only the strong survives, but with abundance (QE, 0%) even the weak survives. You can't go wrong with this pattern, happens everytime.
Bonus read (from the same author):
https://brandonquittem.com/bitcoin-rhythms-of-history/
Maybe someday when the digital world has consumed us, this can happen.
Yes, I reckon it will happen during the Metaverse era. 
but to summarise
the author has an idea of a world where countries dont fight using tanks, bombs and troops to invade to take over land, property and wealth
but instead, where plots of land, wealth and property is registered digitally.. and countries would fight digitally over land, property and wealth instead of physically fight
it comes with his concepts of a proof-of-power(strength) protocol. where identity proof of property is not just a signature, but a form of strength power which can be competed for and the winner gets the ownership of the property involved in the fight
where invasions, property ownership, is changed(fought over) via proof of strength(proof of power) challenges
the author has an idea of a world where countries dont fight using tanks, bombs and troops to invade to take over land, property and wealth
but instead, where plots of land, wealth and property is registered digitally.. and countries would fight digitally over land, property and wealth instead of physically fight
it comes with his concepts of a proof-of-power(strength) protocol. where identity proof of property is not just a signature, but a form of strength power which can be competed for and the winner gets the ownership of the property involved in the fight
where invasions, property ownership, is changed(fought over) via proof of strength(proof of power) challenges
Thank you for the summary!
But what would be those challenges? Right now it doesn’t seem too likely to be effective most governments would probably just laugh at it. Physically conquering a land is also a show of power and dominance. Maybe someday when the digital world has consumed us, this can happen.
its not a thesis. its a babble of content 5x the norm to show the author has lots of random opinions/thoughts on lots of topics but never concludes them quickly
also a thesis is not something that HAD approval... a thesis is something anyone can write that is then submitted to get reviewed/tested/scrutinised
its obvious that YOU are the author by your defensiveness.. as you are getting defensive and evasive shows you are more emotionally tied to this document than a random reader would..
but ill continue to talk as if the author is someone else..
an average thesis is under 80 pages.. i know what theses are.
this gibberish/babble is 400 pages and in the first 80 pages shows its filled with 80% of random topics thrown in about things like biology, astronomy and a whole manner of things. even the summations it makes about the other things are in error and then when it does get back to the point. it then leaps away again in less than a paragraph to talk about other subject matter for a few pages more.
he name drops and adds quotes but some of the quotes show he has not fully understood even those things.
he mentions Einstein about energy and mass. but doesnt understand that mass IS energy in a form... he went down a lengthy path of saying converting mass into energy as a way for him to suggest turning gun fights into digital competition
he talked about colonisation as being a form of co-operation of self interest to defend land
no colonisation is an invasion attack where the invader wins and takes over the land
even the bacteria evolution stuff he gets wrong
there are many subject matters he added in randomly but doesnt really use the references property to prove a point or add relevance to the point via real understanding
after 80 pages it felt like he was still at the intro and al i learned was that he sounded like trump would sound if trump wrote it, its all over the place
he needs to cut the content down by 5x to get more concise
also a thesis is not something that HAD approval... a thesis is something anyone can write that is then submitted to get reviewed/tested/scrutinised
its obvious that YOU are the author by your defensiveness.. as you are getting defensive and evasive shows you are more emotionally tied to this document than a random reader would..
but ill continue to talk as if the author is someone else..
an average thesis is under 80 pages.. i know what theses are.
this gibberish/babble is 400 pages and in the first 80 pages shows its filled with 80% of random topics thrown in about things like biology, astronomy and a whole manner of things. even the summations it makes about the other things are in error and then when it does get back to the point. it then leaps away again in less than a paragraph to talk about other subject matter for a few pages more.
he name drops and adds quotes but some of the quotes show he has not fully understood even those things.
he mentions Einstein about energy and mass. but doesnt understand that mass IS energy in a form... he went down a lengthy path of saying converting mass into energy as a way for him to suggest turning gun fights into digital competition
he talked about colonisation as being a form of co-operation of self interest to defend land
no colonisation is an invasion attack where the invader wins and takes over the land
even the bacteria evolution stuff he gets wrong
there are many subject matters he added in randomly but doesnt really use the references property to prove a point or add relevance to the point via real understanding
after 80 pages it felt like he was still at the intro and al i learned was that he sounded like trump would sound if trump wrote it, its all over the place
he needs to cut the content down by 5x to get more concise
he spends most pages talking about astronomy, micro biology, elemental physics, nature,
by 'doing a trump' is not a political thing. its about how someone speaks and we all know trumps style of speaking at length
its the way he speaks when he is trying to make a point but then deviates mid sentence, to talk about something completely different and it takes pages to then get back to the point. which could have been said in just 10 words
by 'doing a trump' is not a political thing. its about how someone speaks and we all know trumps style of speaking at length
its the way he speaks when he is trying to make a point but then deviates mid sentence, to talk about something completely different and it takes pages to then get back to the point. which could have been said in just 10 words
I now understand what message you were trying to convey. "pulling a trump" or "doing a trump" isn't a common phrase and the fact that you went out of your way to mention a political figure to convey your opinion is already sliding politics into the conversation. So to further clarify my previous reply regarding this, there were several several different ways to convey the message you were trying to convey without mentioning political figures. Just a mention of a political figure or anything politic-related can spark unnecessary flames so I hope you understand that.
Back to the actual topic of this thread, like I have mentioned before, a thesis is written in that format in order to fully help the readers understand what the writer was trying to point out: this is the nature of writing a thesis. Of course, the author could've entirely wrote every necessary information needed to back up his claim beforehand and later refer to that but that would be far more irritating to read as you would have to flip (or scroll in this case of it being a pdf) back and forth to reread that certain referenced info.
This now piqued my curiosity of if you even know what a thesis is for and how it is written. Furthermore, thesis aren't just randomly published without an approval of people who are credible enough to approve such paper, meaning scholars and professors who have much extensive knowledge on the topic of the thesis'.
I asked the above question not to belittle you, if that was how you interpreted (as most people who mostly conclude to), but rather to see how much you really know about it so that I can try not to sound rude when explaining (I automatically assume that if someone makes a claim about something, that they have a certain amount of background or experience in said claim).
he spends most pages talking about astronomy, micro biology, elemental physics, nature,
then only spends a few sentences discussing using watts as a strength measure of identity of strength power over property
by 'doing a trump' is not a political thing. its about how someone speaks and we all know trumps style of speaking at length
its the way he speaks when he is trying to make a point but then deviates mid sentence, to talk about something completely different and it takes pages to then get back to the point. which could have been said in just 10 words
then only spends a few sentences discussing using watts as a strength measure of identity of strength power over property
by 'doing a trump' is not a political thing. its about how someone speaks and we all know trumps style of speaking at length
its the way he speaks when he is trying to make a point but then deviates mid sentence, to talk about something completely different and it takes pages to then get back to the point. which could have been said in just 10 words
i feel like it was trump that wrote this, due to the way he jumps into other things and not staying concise with crypto topic
I believe political stances have nothing to do with opinions on what OP was asking for, rather the resource presented having anything to do with Bitcoin or the influence on/of Bitcoin.
I understand your statement on "feeling like it was trump
Besides that, I believe that this thesis isn't some random "gibberish" being thrown around to make the author look smart. The words the author use is regular and normal terms when working on thesis' and may be understood fully by people who have actually studied them. So I also do disagree with your statement that this has nothing to do with bitcoin.
I do not know if you have ever wrote a thesis before but it requires a lot of background information laid out and then go into the nitty gritty of the main point the author is trying to make. Now, you're wondering "I've already read 80 out of the 400 pages it has and sounds like it has nothing to do with Bitcoin," only because you are focusing on Bitcoin and Bitcoin only.
I haven't read 80 pages but just by reading the executive summary, the author is wanting to emphasize that the PoW that Bitcoin uses could also be used to help advance national security's technology. The author is bringing in Bitcoin as an example of how we may already have an in-the-works technology that can be used for more uses than just cryptocurrency.
The thesis may not be mentioning anything new about Bitcoin and it's functionality, it is used to mention the possibilities Bitcoin's functionalities have for government uses.
This is as far my perception of this thesis as a 18-yr-old so if there is anyone else out there who want to correct me or clarify something I may have perceived wrong, I am very open to that and do not see myself as entirely correct as I, as everyone else, am still a human being and make mistakes and still striving to grow.
With that, I wish everyone a very good rest of your weekend!
nothing to do with bitcoin.. lots of pages of gibberish to try establishing that the author looks smart by throwing words around
(lots of gibberish to fill pages, concerning biology, astronomy, physics, anthropology and theories of predator-pray game theories and im only 1/5th (page 80 of 400) through reading it)
i feel like it was trump that wrote this, due to the way he jumps into other things and not staying concise with crypto topic
but to summarise
the author has an idea of a world where countries dont fight using tanks, bombs and troops to invade to take over land, property and wealth
but instead, where plots of land, wealth and property is registered digitally.. and countries would fight digitally over land, property and wealth instead of physically fight
it comes with his concepts of a proof-of-power(strength) protocol. where identity proof of property is not just a signature, but a form of strength power which can be competed for and the winner gets the ownership of the property involved in the fight
where invasions, property ownership, is changed(fought over) via proof of strength(proof of power) challenges
(lots of gibberish to fill pages, concerning biology, astronomy, physics, anthropology and theories of predator-pray game theories and im only 1/5th (page 80 of 400) through reading it)
i feel like it was trump that wrote this, due to the way he jumps into other things and not staying concise with crypto topic
but to summarise
the author has an idea of a world where countries dont fight using tanks, bombs and troops to invade to take over land, property and wealth
but instead, where plots of land, wealth and property is registered digitally.. and countries would fight digitally over land, property and wealth instead of physically fight
it comes with his concepts of a proof-of-power(strength) protocol. where identity proof of property is not just a signature, but a form of strength power which can be competed for and the winner gets the ownership of the property involved in the fight
where invasions, property ownership, is changed(fought over) via proof of strength(proof of power) challenges
Your thoughts ..
Softwar: A Novel Theory on Power Projection
and the National Strategic Significance of Bitcoin
by
Jason P. Lowery
M.S. Astronautical Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology (2017)
B.S. Mechanical Engineering, Baylor University (2010)
Submitted to the System Design and Management Program
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Science in Engineering and Management
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/153030/lowery-jplowery-sm-sdm-2023-thesis.pdf?sequence=1
Softwar: A Novel Theory on Power Projection
and the National Strategic Significance of Bitcoin
by
Jason P. Lowery
M.S. Astronautical Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology (2017)
B.S. Mechanical Engineering, Baylor University (2010)
Submitted to the System Design and Management Program
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Science in Engineering and Management
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/153030/lowery-jplowery-sm-sdm-2023-thesis.pdf?sequence=1
Jump to: