Topic: Miner cartel, Bankster cartel, or an altcoin? Your choice? - page 5. (Read 33243 times)

How about instead I tweet to Kyle and Aaron and tell them to read this.  I don't think I can edit so well right now. Did I do it?

Fuck.  Deleted the posts: heres one

We haven't begun to discuss Bohm.  Does the cia and nsa exist?  Bohm and Nash had the same insight in the 50's. 

@traincarswreck, congratulations you buried my important post with the evidence that Nash was Satoshi which is now 1 page back in the thread, because of your numerous, rapid-fire 1 line posts. Could you please edit your posts and combine all your comments into one post, then delete the redundant ones. If you do, I will delete this post. Otherwise, I will leave this post here.

I appreciate your appreciation, and I appreciate your research and tenacity, but...

Ive thought that but not many people agreed.. depends on if the right people werr reading.. it hit him like it.hit me.. makes the most sense.

Why would gaven anderson lie though about the aussie dude? So that it saves him from being interrogated? It also explains why the coins never moved and will not move. It also explains why he has never visited news groups to give input on the scaling issue which is obviously an issue in bitcoin for a long time. He used to communicate when needed before.

Some people say he deserves the darwin award for not wearing a seatbelt.  But the seatbelts weren't working.

Nash embedding theorem is really simple.  He thought of the ideal surface...and then described it.

@traincarswreck, unfortunately I am sorry to inform you, that you may have caused Nash's murder by publicizing he was Satoshi:

Holy fuck: http://web.math.princeton.edu/jfnj/texts_and_graphics/Main.Content/Various_Etc./Logic/talk.CMU/HILdos38.txt

Armstrong has posted on a recent IMF paper.

Despite Bitcoin meeting all of the stated criteria of currency in practical usage, the academic view denies Bitcoin as currency and seems to purpose it as a settlement layer. See the following section:


IMF Working Paper - The Macroeconomics of De-Cashing

Should fees continue to rise as per @iamnotback's theory, Bitcoin would become such a settlement layer. I suspect there is more influence being exerted on the Bitcoin community from without than from within.

Let's analyze John Nash's public and presentations activity to determine if could have been Satoshi Nakamoto.

@traincarswreck has pointed that removing "i am Nash" then remains 'sato' which is the most common name and 'koto' which means thing and is the national instrument in Japan, thus an implied meaning of Bitcoin is harmonious thing for the common people created by John Nash.

2001 Nov	Presented ideal money in Tampa, FL.
2002 Apr	Presented ideal money in Beijing, China.
2002 Oct	Presented ideal money in Gamble lecture at UMass.
2003 Nov	Starts research on Cooperation in Non-Cooperative Action in a Repeated Game Context (aka Agencies game theory research), for which I conjecture proof-of-work consensus is a specific case of incentives for agency cooperation wherein the Shapley value is a hashrate weighted Poisson process. He did some Mathematica programming. This was presented at Penn State where he also presented his ideal money concept.
2004 Apr	Presented ideal money at Georgetown University in Washington D.C..
2004 Oct/Nov	Uploads utility programs for transferring files to hosts on the Internet.
2005 Jul	Uploads more secure utility program for transferring files to hosts on the Internet.
2006 Apr	Presented Agencies game theory at Lindau, Germany.
2006 Aug	Presented Agencies game theory at the University of Northern Iowa in Cedar Falls.
2007 Feb	Continuing his journey towards unifying quantum mechanics and Einstein's general relativity.
2007 Feb	Presented ideal money in India.
2007 Jul	Presented Agencies game theory at Stony Brook, Long Island.
2008 Feb	Presented ideal money at NYU.
2008 May	Uploads Symantec AntiVirus (SAV) for servers.
2008 May	Presents his Agencies game theory research at ECCAD'08.
2008 May/Jun	Presented ideal money in Russia.
2008 Aug	Presented ideal money at Nobel Laureates Meeting in Lindau, Germany.
2008 Sept	Presented ideal money at Fordham University in New York.
2010 Feb	Presented ideal money at "Campus for Finance" in Vallendar, Germany.
2010 Oct	Presented ideal money at Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania.
2011 Oct	Presented ideal money in Hong Kong.
2012 Apr	Published new results of research on Agencies game theory.

First notice the periods of relatively low or no public inactivity for Nash were from May 2004 to Feb 2006, and again Oct 2008 to Feb 2010. Also note how Nash shifted from ideal money focus before 2004 to Agencies game theory research focus and didn't return publicizing ideal money again until summer 2008 wherein he did it very intensively.

Note that Satoshi announced Bitcoin Oct. 31, 2008. And it is also noted that Satoshi basically stopped being involved as of of "mid-2010".

Add to this that Szabo (re-)published bit gold Dec 2005 which described how to make a Bitcoin, except Szabo hadn't solved the Agencies consensus game theory by employing the proof-of-work and had instead only offered Byzantine agreement (Szabo solved minting and greatest proof-of-work rule but not the Agencies consensus). Wei Dai had proposed in 1999 a flawed/inadequate solution to the Agencies game theory but which would hint as to how to combine with Szabo's design. So all Nash had to do was be aware of those and integrate it with his research on Agencies game theory and he would have easily seen the solution for Bitcoin. So it appears Nash was working very intensely on Bitcoin coding in 2006 and 2007, probably teaching himself to be proficient in C++.

This ability of Nash to combine the works of others in novel ways was noted by French mathematician Cedric Villani which @traincarswreck featured as a video in one of this blogs.

Satoshi often used British English and we should note that John Nash had previously left the USA and lived in the UK for many years. And the posting time of Satoshi (presuming he was sleeping when not posting) indicated he would be where Nash was located in the USA.

It all correlates well for Satoshi being Nash.

I can barely read it.  You and Nash have blown my mind.  I can't remember seeing this.  Maybe I have but I forget for sure at least.

Let it be known...

Iamback reads sources. 

I find interesting that in 2010, John Nash was contemplating the implications of completeness being stated from a relativistic (i.e. partial order) instead of a total order perspective. This is a different way of thinking about everything including probably leading to a different way of thinking about gravity, space-time and Einstein's General Relativity, because instead of modeling the universe as if there is an total observer or totally complete model, we instead model the universe as an unbounded number partial orders each from the perspective of the observer (and clusters of observers), i.e. a fractal model of completeness. I had also been lately headed this similar direction with my TOE work. My interpretation above appears to be somewhat more abstracted/generalized (generative essence) than Nash's axiomatic mechanics conceptualization:

Ideal Money is an idea from the 50's if you think you can out think 70 years of nash you have no idea of his works.

Only 3 people in the world that could say this as Satoshi, I think szabo:

nash szabo or finney.

If the goverment or some other dark forces had created Bitcoin to maintain their centralized power over the global finance system (and the people), they would have done a huge disservice to themselves by promoting the idea of decentralized money to the people they want to govern. It must have been clear to them right off the start that altcoins will eventually emerge and improve on the flawed concept of Bitcoin.

So, no, I don't think that some evil group created Bitcoin, nor do I think that it is the work of a genius! It's rather the creation of some creative mind who just dared to combine the concepts of cryptography and game theory to build a novel distributed system. Basically, any computer scientist or cryptopunk with some basic knowledge of game theory and monetary system could have invented Bitcoin. However, most people, including high IQ-geniuses, tend to stay with what they know best and are reluctant to get inspiration from other fields of research. It's as simple as that.

Having glanced through 100s of research papers on Blockchain over the last half year, I'm consternated by the lack of creativity of most authors. Instead of exploring the whole design space (especially when it comes to incentives and game theory), they mostly just analyze current systems and suggest little improvements here and there. Aside from
some exceptions, it seems that most computer scientists are still reluctant (or ignorant) to incorporate game theoratical approaches into their systems.

To cite an old post by Vitalik:

CK @ 100MEUR.

In that paper he was describing natural boundaries for currency regimes, but I don't think his conceptual point of competing standards of value which the people can freely judge is tied to nations. In fact, I think his point is that currencies would become supranational so that users could compare currencies not bounded/restricted by national regimes.

I think you are reading it too literally and not relating the underlying concept that he was shooting for which afaics is a free market on standards of monetary value.

You'll find that Nash was working his way towards this deeper level of understanding if you review the writings on his personal webpage. Pay special attention to the last paragraph where he realizes the ICPI is not good and needs to be discarded for a relative valuation system. The ICPI is analogous to Bitcoin and the altcoins would be the multiple currencies his is referring to there.


Nash obviously realized that his ICPI would be a problem that could lead to world empire context. He realized the flaw that any one standard of absolute value such as "kilogram" could become corrupted.

It is interesting to note that I had predicted Nash would come to the above conclusion in my upthread posts, before finding that hidden writing from him above on his personal web site.

He outsmarted the global elite. Bitcoin is designed to launch many competing altcoins!

Makes sense but somehow alt coins would be related to different nation states based on dpi metric for supply.. thats why i was saying in his eyes he viewed ideal as in supply shifted based on growth of economy.

So then you understand that Nash would have only made Bitcoin so that it could be forked and modified so there are many competing currencies which users can judge which one is the most stable and has the least corruption and manipulation.

Satoshi wanted altcoins.