Pages:
Author

Topic: John Nash created bitcoin - page 3. (Read 22261 times)

hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 19, 2017, 10:48:07 AM
There ARE truly, idealistically motivated people, and bitcoin DID most probably have such a crowd.  As I told you, I know what it is like.  Afterwards, you feel stupid, true  Grin  But when you are engaged into it, you think you're going to "save the world" and "have a message to bring".   There are such people.  I used to be like that.  I knew other people like that.  You have no idea of the energy that you are willing to put into it totally for free, because you think you have a Purpose.
Any cause that has such people to it, can move the earth, if it depends only on them.

But bitcoin could combine that with greed.  That's why I said, why do you need the Rothschilds, if you have those two unstoppable powers: idealistic enthusiasm and greed, combined !


That's why I believe the rothschilds have done a very good job with bitcoin.

Bitcoin vs tyrannical governments.
Bitcoin vs financial banksters.
What's not to feel passionate about?

But why do you need the Rothschilds (financial banksters ?) in this story ?
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Best IoT Platform Based on Blockchain
April 19, 2017, 10:47:30 AM
There ARE truly, idealistically motivated people, and bitcoin DID most probably have such a crowd.  As I told you, I know what it is like.  Afterwards, you feel stupid, true  Grin  But when you are engaged into it, you think you're going to "save the world" and "have a message to bring".   There are such people.  I used to be like that.  I knew other people like that.  You have no idea of the energy that you are willing to put into it totally for free, because you think you have a Purpose.
Any cause that has such people to it, can move the earth, if it depends only on them.

But bitcoin could combine that with greed.  That's why I said, why do you need the Rothschilds, if you have those two unstoppable powers: idealistic enthusiasm and greed, combined !


That's why I believe the rothschilds have done a very good job with bitcoin.

Bitcoin vs tyrannical governments.
Bitcoin vs financial banksters.
What's not to feel passionate about?
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 19, 2017, 10:45:39 AM
If John Nash was so smart, why wouldn't he have predicted the current problems that bitcoin is facing? (assuming that John Nash was indeed satoshi, which is I theory I doubt to be true).

So, according to John Nash, his vision of Ideal Money was a money that can only be used by extremely wealthy people in the long run? Doesn't make sense to me.

I believe satoshi didn't realize the current problem would arise, and if he thought a network of centralized nodes on datacenters can be called p2p digital cash, then he was wrong.

I agree with you, but the last part he literally said himself (see his mail from 2008 in https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/dear-satoshi-nakamoto-1876752  )
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 19, 2017, 10:44:17 AM
Then you are a very different person from the rest.

There ARE truly, idealistically motivated people, and bitcoin DID most probably have such a crowd.  As I told you, I know what it is like.  Afterwards, you feel stupid, true  Grin  But when you are engaged into it, you think you're going to "save the world" and "have a message to bring".   There are such people.  I used to be like that.  I knew other people like that.  You have no idea of the energy that you are willing to put into it totally for free, because you think you have a Purpose.
Any cause that has such people to it, can move the earth, if it depends only on them.

But bitcoin could combine that with greed.  That's why I said, why do you need the Rothschilds, if you have those two unstoppable powers: idealistic enthusiasm and greed, combined !
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Best IoT Platform Based on Blockchain
April 19, 2017, 10:37:16 AM
I gave you an example, I knew personally a guy doing just that, and made a life out of that ("selling hype" I call it, but he had the ability to become *genuinely* enthusiastic about it).  Hell, I've been doing it myself for totally different technology, totally independent of anything from the industries doing it, just because of youthful idealism.  I didn't even want any connections with said industry, because it would put a potential shade on my honest enthusiasm for it, people thinking I was a shill for them.  So I know how it goes.  I most probably acted as a useful idiot back then.

Then you are a very different person from the rest.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 19, 2017, 10:33:34 AM
Yes, an idealist, somewhat naive, hoping to be on the verge of a buzz, and he was right (in fact, lucky).  You have any idea how many people run around in the world to sell an idea that doesn't work out ?   So the "dark forces of the world" sent out their agent special 007.  Wow, impressive.  You don't have Greenpeace activists running around ?  You don't have people travelling the world about many crazy and not so crazy ideas ?  So what ? That's proof that the Rotschilds are behind this ?  
I personally know a guy who has been "running around the world" to promote e-cash in the 199X.  He was tremendously enthusiastic about it.  He was in contact with David Schaum.  He was/is also an internet entrepreneur.  He had been promoting Netscape too. I've seen many such enthusiastic people.  And no, the Rotschilds weren't behind him.  I knew him since childhood.  And no, he totally missed the bitcoin train, 10 years later.

A lot of people do run around promoting their own work. That is not a surprise.

How many people do you know run around promoting a complete stranger's work

I gave you an example, I knew personally a guy doing just that, and made a life out of that ("selling hype" I call it, but he had the ability to become *genuinely* enthusiastic about it).  Hell, I've been doing it myself for totally different technology, totally independent of anything from the industries doing it, just because of youthful idealism.  I didn't even want any connections with said industry, because it would put a potential shade on my honest enthusiasm for it, people thinking I was a shill for them.  So I know how it goes.  I most probably acted as a useful idiot back then.

Is your argument that the full power of the Rothschilds consisted in sending Antonopoulos on a trip ? Smiley
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
April 19, 2017, 10:25:44 AM
There not even a single evidence to believe that John Nash created bitcoin even like we all know that Satoshi Nakamoto created bitcoin no one ever confirmed it and then they were gonna say that John Nash created bitcoin with no such evidence i do a research about John Nash and he's a smart and idealistic guy but no information that he created bitcoin but maybe he has some idea in about money.
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Best IoT Platform Based on Blockchain
April 19, 2017, 10:19:26 AM
Yes, an idealist, somewhat naive, hoping to be on the verge of a buzz, and he was right (in fact, lucky).  You have any idea how many people run around in the world to sell an idea that doesn't work out ?   So the "dark forces of the world" sent out their agent special 007.  Wow, impressive.  You don't have Greenpeace activists running around ?  You don't have people travelling the world about many crazy and not so crazy ideas ?  So what ? That's proof that the Rotschilds are behind this ?  
I personally know a guy who has been "running around the world" to promote e-cash in the 199X.  He was tremendously enthusiastic about it.  He was in contact with David Schaum.  He was/is also an internet entrepreneur.  He had been promoting Netscape too. I've seen many such enthusiastic people.  And no, the Rotschilds weren't behind him.  I knew him since childhood.  And no, he totally missed the bitcoin train, 10 years later.

A lot of people do run around promoting their own work. That is not a surprise.

How many people do you know run around promoting a complete stranger's work (not his own work, not his friend's work, not his spouse's work, not his relative's work, not his colleague's work, not his sibling's work, not his children's work, not his parent's work)?
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1252
April 19, 2017, 10:11:43 AM
If John Nash was so smart, why wouldn't he have predicted the current problems that bitcoin is facing? (assuming that John Nash was indeed satoshi, which is I theory I doubt to be true).

So, according to John Nash, his vision of Ideal Money was a money that can only be used by extremely wealthy people in the long run? Doesn't make sense to me.

I believe satoshi didn't realize the current problem would arise, and if he thought a network of centralized nodes on datacenters can be called p2p digital cash, then he was wrong.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 19, 2017, 10:03:27 AM

Real world dynamics is too complex for complicated conspirational plans to work out, or even to "see it coming", but some people will think A is coming, and some people will think B is coming.  When A is coming, the first lot thinks they are smart.  Within their lot, part of them will see C coming, others will see D coming.  If C is coming, those that saw A and C think they are even smarter.

you don't believe in machiaveli ? Cheesy

Of course.  I think everybody is following Machiavelli.  But it is not because you PLAN like Machiavelli, that things work out as you planned, simply because there's a lot of competition in applying his evident suggestions.

In fact, it is Machiavelli's universal success that makes that such plans don't work out as expected and that the world is a complicated place.

I'm not saying that nobody is making plans.  I'm saying that many people are making plans, that obstruct one another, and lead to unexpected results.
full member
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
April 19, 2017, 09:59:35 AM

Real world dynamics is too complex for complicated conspirational plans to work out, or even to "see it coming", but some people will think A is coming, and some people will think B is coming.  When A is coming, the first lot thinks they are smart.  Within their lot, part of them will see C coming, others will see D coming.  If C is coming, those that saw A and C think they are even smarter.

you don't believe in machiaveli ? Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 19, 2017, 09:37:01 AM
Hey, dinofelis. There is no need to argue over this.
If you think you are right, sure.
I am okay with that.
I am sick and tired of trying to prove others being wrong, and I am sure you feel the same way too.

I don't think I'm right.  I think that people that are sure that they know the future, are wrong, or simply lucky. 
I think I recognise certain aspects in bitcoin that make me think its design is fundamentally flawed, and its design (with hindsight) had to lead to the current situation.  And I don't believe in conspiracy theories, because they are harder to consider than non-conspiracy explanations. 

I have the impression that everybody thinks that it is obvious that bitcoin will be the world's currency.  I think that this is FAR from obvious, and that half a miracle would be needed for that to happen ; and that the world in which that were true would be quite terrible where a few guys like Roger Ver would be able to buy up the whole of Africa, say and become king by their financial power.

hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 19, 2017, 09:32:09 AM
Who did so ?

Andreas Antonopoulos. By right, you should be familiar with him that you do not even need to ask this stupid question.

Yes, an idealist, somewhat naive, hoping to be on the verge of a buzz, and he was right (in fact, lucky).  You have any idea how many people run around in the world to sell an idea that doesn't work out ?   So the "dark forces of the world" sent out their agent special 007.  Wow, impressive.  You don't have Greenpeace activists running around ?  You don't have people travelling the world about many crazy and not so crazy ideas ?  So what ? That's proof that the Rotschilds are behind this ? 
I personally know a guy who has been "running around the world" to promote e-cash in the 199X.  He was tremendously enthusiastic about it.  He was in contact with David Schaum.  He was/is also an internet entrepreneur.  He had been promoting Netscape too. I've seen many such enthusiastic people.  And no, the Rotschilds weren't behind him.  I knew him since childhood.  And no, he totally missed the bitcoin train, 10 years later.

Quote
The shadow elite planned for bitcoin at least back in 1988, publicly. Luck is for the sheep. The shadow elite creates their own reality through thought power.

The shadow elite is a bunch of people that have been lucky at a certain point in their lives, and then think it is their nature to be lucky.

Quote
Oh, really? Closing eh? They shouldn't be waiting for 8 years eh? They should have announce it right away and force immediate adoption eh?

"they" aren't needed to explain bitcoin.  Not more than invisible pink unicorns are needed to explain the motion of the moon.  But for all we know, the moon could be moving because invisible pink unicorns are pushing it.

Quote
Simple people don't need any master plan. And when things happen, they always never see it coming. You have naive idealism too.

Most people don't see things coming.  And those that did, by chance, think that it is because they were smart.
Look at the world soccer cup.  Select 4096 people.  Before the first match, send to 2048 people that crew A will win, or there will be a draw.  Send to the other 2048 people, that crew B will win.

If ever crew A won, or there was a draw, discard the second batch.  If crew B won, discard the first batch.
Now, of the 2048 remaining people, before the second game (between C and D), send to 1024 of them that crew C will win, or there will be a draw ; send to the 1024 remaining ones, that crew D will win.

Discard those that got the wrong prediction.

Etc..

At the end, you will end up with 4 people to which you've made 10 successive correct predictions !  You must be a hell of a smart guy to them !

Real world dynamics is too complex for complicated conspirational plans to work out, or even to "see it coming", but some people will think A is coming, and some people will think B is coming.  When A is coming, the first lot thinks they are smart.  Within their lot, part of them will see C coming, others will see D coming.  If C is coming, those that saw A and C think they are even smarter.

Etc...

Quote
Bitcoin will last.

Of course.  I didn't say the opposite.  But not as you think it will last.  Or as you think it will last.  So many people have so many different opinions, that some of them, will, by chance, be right.

sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Best IoT Platform Based on Blockchain
April 19, 2017, 09:11:57 AM
A pseudo Japanese with a fall for mathematics creates an algorithm / equation in which there are a limited number of solutions, the former are relatively easy to calculate, and then become increasingly difficult to find (= bitcoin).

So far so good but who has the brilliant idea of turning this into currency? If it is limited the first ones to enter the game are the ones that gain the most.

Only by looking in retrospect that you will have this opinion.
It's just like a technical chartist that says his technical indicator is very accurate in predicting the past, thus it should be used for the present and the future.
But when applied to the present going forward, the system turns out to be a failure.

Who knew that bitcoin would be where it is today?
You can tell yourself, "Isn't that obvious that bitcoin prospect is so bright!" etc etc etc statement based on retrospect.
Nobody is willing to humbly admit that whatever fantasy opinion they have today was all due to retrospect thinking.

sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Best IoT Platform Based on Blockchain
April 19, 2017, 09:06:23 AM
full member
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
April 19, 2017, 07:51:43 AM
A pseudo Japanese with a fall for mathematics creates an algorithm / equation in which there are a limited number of solutions, the former are relatively easy to calculate, and then become increasingly difficult to find (= bitcoin).

So far so good but who has the brilliant idea of turning this into currency? If it is limited the first ones to enter the game are the ones that gain the most.

+1 for theory like this  Grin
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
April 19, 2017, 07:04:53 AM
A pseudo Japanese with a fall for mathematics creates an algorithm / equation in which there are a limited number of solutions, the former are relatively easy to calculate, and then become increasingly difficult to find (= bitcoin).

So far so good but who has the brilliant idea of turning this into currency? If it is limited the first ones to enter the game are the ones that gain the most.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 629
April 19, 2017, 06:45:38 AM
Uh, the way I understand what you say: the bitcoin price, is the price of 1 BTC in $$, right ?  Commensurate, is proportional, right ?
Let us say that the proportionality is 0.0001.  Then that means that a fee is 0.0001 BTC, no ?  So if BTC = $1000,-, a fee is $0.10, if BTC is $1000 000,- then the fee, with the same proportionality, is $100,- , no ?

Yes, you are correct.

Or do you mean "transaction amount" instead of "bitcoin price" ?

But then the miners will only take those transactions with highest absolute fee, so only the very large transactions.  Because for them, at a certain point, including an extra transaction (and risking the loss of the entire block) will not be beneficial any more below a certain absolute fee.

That would mean miners only care about transactions that involve buying mansions, yachts, private jets, etc. No, as long as the fee is proportional to the price of bitcoin, it doesn't matter if they accept transactions for buying a private jet or a transaction for buying an apple. In a block to be mined, the total fee will be a fixed % of the total transactions in that block.

The point is that treating a transaction has a cost in terms of processing/networking for a miner even though it is small, that cost brings in a small delay that increases this miner's chance to MISS the whole block (another miner being faster) and having wasted all the hash rate on it.  So at a certain point, it is better NOT to include a transaction with a small fee, and increase slightly your speed of winning a block, rather than to want to get a small extra fee, and risk somewhat more the loss of the entire block to the competition.

And that, only if blocks are unlimited.  If blocks are limited to 1 MB (as it most probably will remain on bitcoin), then of course the room is limited, and only the highest fee transactions will ever be  included.  This is in my opinion how bitcoin's design (with 1 MB blocks frozen in now) is pushing towards the selling of the scarce resource of transaction room, making this an expensive thing.  Every byte on the block chain, being scarce, will be sold at a relatively high price: the fee needed to get your transaction included.
The price of a byte on the chain will come from the need of bitcoin holders to do transactions (they are locked into their bitcoins which are worthless without the possibility to transact) versus the hard scarcity of the block size (1MB) which can even be arbitrarily made smaller by miners spamming the chain (which doesn't cost them anything, because they get back the fee they pay to themselves).


Quote
So a miner does not need to have bias on which block to mine. A block may have just 10 transactions involving purchases of a private jet each. Another block may have 1000 transactions involving purchases of a bike each.

Point is that if the block limit remains (I think so), then if, as a miner, you can only place 5000 transactions in a block, you only take those with highest fees from the pool.  If there is no block limit, then you will take only those, that bring in net benefit (that is, higher fee than the extra cost of treating a transaction).

Quote
Something like that. But from both blocks, miners will earn similar fee and will have no bias on which block to mine.

Of course they will.  The 10 jet purchases are slightly faster to process into a block and propagate, than the 1000 bikes, so you ever so slightly reduce your chances to win the bike block against the jet block.

But essentially, at a certain point, miners will PRE-SELL the room on the chain to the highest bidder.

Quote
Ask yourself this. If you were back in 2009/2010 and you happened to mine 100,000 units of bitcoin (worth $120,000,000 today), will you travel around the world giving talks about how wonderful is bitcoin? Bear in mind back in 2009/2010, 100,000 bitcoins may be worth just $10.

Well, if you think that by doing so, you will rise the price of a bitcoin to $2,-, then you can already do some travelling.  But if you can get enthusiasts doing so on the internet, creating a buzz, that's even much better and it costs you less.  Libertarians are an easy crowd to get going (I know, I'm part of them). 

Quote
Will you fly around the world to give free speeches if you have 100,000 of bitcoins worth $120 mil today but worth just $10 back then?

Who did so ?

Quote
Did you really see it coming? You think everything is coincidence? You think the shadow elites are in power because they think it was just a coincidence for them to be in power?

Yes.  There's no such thing as merit, or the intelligence of success.  Success and power is a matter of luck.  The only "merit" there is, is to recognize the opportunity (which, in itself, is a random phenomenon, the fact that you "recognize it").  Power and success are the result of pure lottery.  But people in power like to think that they are special, have a gift, and have the intelligence.  They don't.  It is a pure lottery.  This is why they are not capable to do something intelligent with their power.

Quote
And most dumb thing is, you think some genuine whales would be interested in an almost worthless, useless and unproven digital tokens back in 2009/2010? You know back in 2009/2010, we didn't have as much bullish news of bitcoin developement that we have today. We didn't hear news of so and so corporation adopting bitcoin, we didn't hear news of countries legalizing bitcoin, we didn't hear of news of merchants accepting bitcoins. In that time, bitcoin was almost truly worthless, useless, and unproven. You think a whale wanna take a bet on that?
 I wouldn't even want to waste $1,000 even if I was a whale back then.[/b][/color]

Well, there were some believers.  There are always believers.  But these believers were worth gold, because they were naive, motivated, somewhat greedy, starry-eyed, and could make the message pass that they were going to change the world for the better.  The analogy with the internet, remember. They succeeded in creating a buzz, and the time was ripe.  The MtGox guy, Karpeles, sleazy business type on the outlook of easy money, saw the opportunity.  That's all there is to it.

Quote
If there were powerful dark forces behind bitcoin, they would have twisted Amazon's hand to accept bitcoin: the story would have been entirely different.  Bitcoin, as a payment system, is essentially a failure.  However, as a greater-fool game, it works marvellously, for the time being, like all greater-fool games, that promise quick riches (and yes, there are a few hundred of quick riches in bitcoin, living off all the donations by the "adoption" crowd).

Things are working out smoothly, not abruptly.

The window of opportunity to rule the world with bitcoin is closing.  No 'dark forces' wait 8 years to get their thing going, when it starts to show cracks.

Quote
You are underestimating the explosive combination of useful idiots believing in some libertarian dream, combined with the power of greed and the illusions of quick rich.  THAT is the power behind bitcoin.  Not "organized dark forces", but an explosive mix of foolish idealism and greed.  It is what keeps it up, and this is more powerful than any cigar-smoking "elite" making evil plans that never work out as expected.  Greed and naive idealism.  What more do you need ? What is better than naive people thinking that their idealistic nonsense is going to make them immensely rich, combined with some smart money that sees the opportunity to exploit this enthusiastic propaganda for making a lot of bucks from starry-eyed greedy idealists "adopting" their new toy ?

What evil elite plans that you even know of, never mind if you know they never work out? If you think a bunch of idiots/sheeps can be so organized and effective that they can make bitcoin to where it is today within 8 years, you are way overestimating the idiots/sheeps. You may believe what you choose to believe. You may believe the idiots/sheeps are transforming into some advanced beings that finally have the tools and power to topple all governments and bankers in the world, that the governments and bankers are just helpless to do anything but tag along like a dog. You may think that way... Anything that makes you feel good, dude.

Occam's razor.  If you don't need a master plan, and can explain a phenomenon without it, it is better than to have to think up an inconsistently sounding evil master plan that was too hard to foresee back then, that took too long, and that had too much power on one side, and too many backlashes on the other in order to be coherent.

I don't need a master plan, as the ingredients: naive idealism and greed, are sufficient to explain where we are today.

I don't know how crypto will evolve.  I think the bubble will burst at a certain moment, but niche applications will remain.  My personal impression is that bitcoin's absolute reign is coming to an end, and that in the next few years, its first mover advantage will have been consumed.  The scammy coins in line to succeed illustrate the medium future of crypto, in the line of its evolution during the last years: away from "real world economy" and more and more centered on gambling and trading.  I think block chains have shown their limits, and at the same time, their use in certain applications.   What crypto turned out not to be, is "money on the internet", except for niche applications, such as dark markets. 
full member
Activity: 322
Merit: 151
They're tactical
April 19, 2017, 06:23:26 AM
And the more i think about it, the more i think bitcoin has all quality to be a good thing for trader and big investors, as in the end, all the market value is 100% determined by investors, and they all have the same interest to see the coin rising, and there is not really anything that can truly burst the bubble because there is nothing to index the 'real value' on, all the value is determined 100% by investors, without regulation, or independant expert who can say how much a bitcoin should be worth.

Well, most speculative assets need some "bootstrapping" value.  Now, bitcoin is not entirely value-less, because it does have a (small) economic value, namely all the economic exchange it made possible or cheaper than could have been achieved with other means of payment (mainly fiat).  But apart from remittance where you might win somewhat, trying to hide from taxes, and mainly, dark markets, I don't see where the economic value of bitcoin resides.  Most of what you can do with bitcoin, you can just as well do it with fiat, and in those heralded cases where this would not be the case (say, in developing countries), bitcoin didn't really take off.  I'm truly sorry about that, because when I learned about bitcoin, I *was* part of the useful idiots being enthusiastic about that.  But as far as I can see, bitcoin has only a rather small niche application of true economic value, and its design errors/flaws make that this is exactly where it is now being hurt.  So I wonder whether this small "true, economic value" is strong enough to bootstrap the huge speculative value of bitcoin.  Moreover, I think that anonymous coins like monero are much, much better suited for this niche.

To me it still seem fundementally different from the traditional trading thing where the speculative value is still more or less indexed to the utility value, maybe the utility value is over valuated, even largely, but the main value still come from the utility value, like google or facebook.

Here anyone would be hard pressed to come with solid figure on the utility value of bitcoin, the adoption rate in developping country, how capable it is to improve on existing solution for certain market, and even more importantly, how the profits are made, and where they get at. If you look at the buisness model from different angle, taking all in account, there is not many way in which it looks really sound.

And today i do'nt think you could say it's even that the utility value is over valuated, or that the speculative value is still really pegged to the utility value at all.

And i think there are subtle difference with classical scheme even if they can look similar in some aspect like the greater fool game or classic ponzi, or speculative bubble based on over valued utility economy, it become of model of investment of its own, and as long as people keep buying it at the price, there is no reason for it to go down, and as long as you don't consisder it as investment in technology development, or based on utility value, or potential future utility value, but as a sort of poker game to keep the token price high that can be easily manipulated by brutal market force, without any kind of friction or anything that can prevent market value to be disconnected from actual speculative value, no problem of transport, or physicality of the asset, no third party or escrow for the value to change hand, still very low tracability , it has everything to be a very good profile for brutal sepculation, and not speculation based on technology developpment or future utility value.

Maybe the volatlity is not that high, but i'd say it's still much higher than with most other trading market, in the global stock market even fluctuation of 1% are a big thing Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Best IoT Platform Based on Blockchain
April 19, 2017, 04:55:10 AM
Pages:
Jump to: