|
traincarswreck (OP)
|
 |
February 03, 2017, 01:20:46 AM |
|
I may understand some of your words, basically what's doing by john nash is a theory and no more. there is nothing were linking into bitcoin. John nash has encouraged the basic idea of the decentralised computing, but he was never pushing it to be the real form.  You haven't read anything and you clearly aren't strong with the english language. John Nash spent 20 years defining the intricate details of how and international e-currency with a stably issued supply would arise to usurp the central banks control over our money quality. 20 years he spoke and wrote and you just made an ignorant comment against his works which you have no clue even exists. He encouraged the idea of decentralized computing? This was essentially before computing existed nearly 70 years ago when he was barely in his 20's. I showed he had all the components needed to realize bitcoin and I showed that his paranoia was really him coming up with the idea for ideal money, causing him to flee the US. And that the government DID come after him. You say there is nothing connecting him? Wtf is connecting Craig Wright, other than outrageous claim after outrageous claim from something who has a wholly opposite demeanor than Satoshi and the FACT that he doesn't understand the limits of pgp cryptography? How is it that a man that spent 20 years talking about an international e-currency and how the parameters need to be chosen for it to be come relevant, is seen as so irrelevant that its not even worth reading his argument, and a pyschopath who consistently and constantly say things that are clearly unfounded and go against conventional economics is rather see as your savior? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The network tries to produce one block per 10 minutes. It does this by automatically adjusting how difficult it is to produce blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
Newmine
|
|
February 03, 2017, 06:33:28 AM |
|
I may understand some of your words, basically what's doing by john nash is a theory and no more. there is nothing were linking into bitcoin. John nash has encouraged the basic idea of the decentralised computing, but he was never pushing it to be the real form. You haven't read anything and you clearly aren't strong with the english language. John Nash spent 20 years defining the intricate details of how and international e-currency with a stably issued supply would arise to usurp the central banks control over our money quality. 20 years he spoke and wrote and you just made an ignorant comment against his works which you have no clue even exists. He encouraged the idea of decentralized computing? This was essentially before computing existed nearly 70 years ago when he was barely in his 20's. I showed he had all the components needed to realize bitcoin and I showed that his paranoia was really him coming up with the idea for ideal money, causing him to flee the US. And that the government DID come after him. You say there is nothing connecting him? Wtf is connecting Craig Wright, other than outrageous claim after outrageous claim from something who has a wholly opposite demeanor than Satoshi and the FACT that he doesn't understand the limits of pgp cryptography? How is it that a man that spent 20 years talking about an international e-currency and how the parameters need to be chosen for it to be come relevant, is seen as so irrelevant that its not even worth reading his argument, and a pyschopath who consistently and constantly say things that are clearly unfounded and go against conventional economics is rather see as your savior? You provide zero evidence of anything linking him to Bitcoin or its technical concepts. Your entire post is based on your interpretation of the word "ideal", which you have completely wrong. Oh wait, he talks about e-currency or something similar like 1000's of other people over the past 20 years. I have to admit picturing an old man like John Nash hovering over his keyboard on this forum for over year is fucking hilarious. Your idiocy is quite entertaining. |
|
|
|
|
|
traincarswreck (OP)
|
|
February 03, 2017, 06:44:05 AM |
|
You provide zero evidence of anything linking him to Bitcoin or its technical concepts. Your entire post is based on your interpretation of the word "ideal", which you have completely wrong. Oh wait, he talks about e-currency or something similar like 1000's of other people over the past 20 years. I have to admit picturing an old man like John Nash hovering over his keyboard on this forum for over year is fucking hilarious. Your idiocy is quite entertaining.
Hey fuckhead. There is no evidence for satoshi. suck is the premise. wright provides none. the only evidence wright provides is he is a psychopathic idiot. 1000's of people? Name 5 you fuck. my interpretation of ideal? how about, I am using the standard conventional definition. Did you pass grade 5 english? My idiocy? I was smarter than you when I was in kindergarten. That isn't an exaggeration its observation. |
|
|
|
|
|
traincarswreck (OP)
|
|
February 03, 2017, 06:47:11 AM |
|
Name five you fuck idiot piece of shit scum of earth reason this world sucks, because people like you are barely smart enough to tie their own shoes. And barely can speak and use English. Honestly, you are too stupid for me to address. I will call you, spit.
Hey spit, you are an idiot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
traincarswreck (OP)
|
|
February 03, 2017, 06:48:03 AM |
|
It is John Nash now who created bitcoin? The last time I checked it was Steve Craig? Lol! There are lots ofpeople who are claiming that they are Satoshi Nakamoto and they are the creator of bitcoin.I don't know what they can gain from doing this kind of jokes!
Well you are a fucking idiot that commented with out reading the content. do you live your whole life being so fucking retardedly ignorant? |
|
|
|
|
|
traincarswreck (OP)
|
|
February 03, 2017, 06:48:48 AM |
|
It is John Nash now who created bitcoin? The last time I checked it was Steve Craig? Lol! There are lots ofpeople who are claiming that they are Satoshi Nakamoto and they are the creator of bitcoin.I don't know what they can gain from doing this kind of jokes!
I hope you don't have a significant job in this world, asshole. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andre_Goldman
Sr. Member
 Offline
Activity: 322
Merit: 253
Property1of1OU
|
|
April 09, 2017, 06:03:55 AM |
|
Josh Nash sounded like a mathematician rather than a creator of bitcoin. If compared to Craig Wright, wright is more reliable than John Nash and If i were to select between the two it would be Wright that I will vote. But as of now neither of the two is Satoshi Nakamoto since they fail to establish enough evidence and proof that they are really the creators of bitcoin.
Lemme ask you something. It is said Craig claimed him and 4 or more others created bitcoin, why are you calling HIM Satoshi? And do you believe Gavins bullshit lie that one can prove they are Satoshi by signing with Satoshi's private key? I got puzzled when I saw Graig signing a message to Gavin ... why he added more characters on Gavin's original msg? |
Patent1number: ****-****
|
|
|
YuginKadoya
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1169
|
|
April 09, 2017, 06:12:59 AM |
|
Yes he is a great man and even if Nash is keeping pushing that kind of ideal it doesn't mean that he is truly Satoshi, even if they have many evidence that he is truly him many people would not believe it or buy anything like this, it sounded like they are pushing him to be satoshi, I think Nash is a remarkable guy and done a lot of thing to the community but we can really never know who is satoshi, and I think do we have to know the truth bitcoin is doing well even if he is not around. |
|
|
|
|
|
quake313
|
|
April 09, 2017, 07:39:08 AM |
|
Yes he is a great man and even if Nash is keeping pushing that kind of ideal it doesn't mean that he is truly Satoshi, even if they have many evidence that he is truly him many people would not believe it or buy anything like this, it sounded like they are pushing him to be satoshi, I think Nash is a remarkable guy and done a lot of thing to the community but we can really never know who is satoshi, and I think do we have to know the truth bitcoin is doing well even if he is not around. I'm surprised this topic was not moved to the speculation sub  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
raven7886
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1041
|
|
April 09, 2017, 08:08:49 AM |
|
But it had happened by mid 2015 but we were searching Satoshi Nakamotto from late 2010 itself. (I am not going to say he would have been active till his end of days). Here is more info on John Nash: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Forbes_Nash_Jr. I am not finding much interest on chasing a man who is no more. I want Satoshi to be unveiled and he needs to be active here in this forum for some guidelines through which I believe bitcoin will get wide spread to new people. |
|
|
|
|
centralbanksequalsbombs
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 378
Merit: 278
Bitcoin :open immutable decentralized global fair
|
|
April 09, 2017, 08:29:28 AM |
|
...
I am not finding much interest on chasing a man who is no more. I want Satoshi to be unveiled and he needs to be active here in this forum for some guidelines through which I believe bitcoin will get wide spread to new people.
Ya, he died 2013, have you googled David Kleiman? |
|
|
|
|
dinofelis
|
|
April 09, 2017, 12:06:10 PM |
|
20 Years Ago John Nash Re-defined Our Understanding Of Economics (Again) and We Still Haven’t Realized It
[ great overview of Nash's life and genius ]
This is exactly why Satoshi cannot be Nash. Satoshi's creation contains too many blunders (mathematical, cryptographic, economical, game-theoretical and programmatic) to be made by a genius like Nash. Contrary to what many in the bitcoin world believe, Satoshi wasn't a genius at all (or he was a very evil one hiding what he was really up to). Satoshi DID have some bright ideas. And he also did mess up quite a bit, and as such, he did demonstrate he didn't deeply understand certain aspects of what he was doing. Nash can't be that silly. Or his high age had deteriorated his genius. I already indicated several of these silly errors in bitcoin. One more: the true protection of a bitcoin signature is NOT the elliptic signature scheme, but rather the hash function that transforms the public key into an address. If a bitcoin address is only used once, the cryptographic security of the digital signature scheme doesn't need to be strong at all. There's no need to go to 256 bit elliptic curve signatures: in fact the signature scheme only needs to withstand attacks during the time the transaction is broadcast, and is included in the block chain: so at most an hour or so (unless full blocks  ) and even 10 minutes is good enough. The reason is that the public key is only made public when signing a transaction. Even a very cheap signature scheme would be good enough: it will withstand 10 minutes to an hour. The public key is invisible as long as the hash function is secure. I said somewhere else that it was totally utterly stupid to have 256 bit signatures but only a 160 bit hash. But the complexity of the elliptic curve signature scheme was total overkill. A genius like Nash would not even be capable of thinking of such a blunder. Satoshi did have bright insights, he wasn't an idiot. But he wasn't a genius (I see a genius as someone with very profound, deep insight in matters that nobody was understanding at that point). This is often a confusion: people think that "successful" people are genius. Genius is rarely successful, because the deep insight also shows the genius all the limitations of a possible creation, refraining him from going ahead. A successful person has a bright idea with limited understanding, over-estimates his view on things, and hence doesn't realize that his creation has serious flaws. This allows him to focus all his energy on his half-failed idea, which, with sufficient luck, becomes a temporary success. This is also why the elite is not very bright, but has had some successful ideas and mainly a lot of luck. It is why they are arrogant, and mess up things: because of their limited understanding of things, and their confusion between the fact that they were just lucky to be successful, thinking erroneously that it is caused by their "genius" they are in fact totally lacking. The successful elite are lottery winners that think that they know better than anyone else how to win at lotteries. True genius is not like that. Satoshi has made a successful invention with a lot of profound errors (like most successful things), because he had some bright ideas and was totally lacking the profound insight of the system he had created - lack of insight which allowed him to persevere in his creation of bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
YuginKadoya
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1169
|
|
April 09, 2017, 12:33:37 PM |
|
Yes he is a great man and even if Nash is keeping pushing that kind of ideal it doesn't mean that he is truly Satoshi, even if they have many evidence that he is truly him many people would not believe it or buy anything like this, it sounded like they are pushing him to be satoshi, I think Nash is a remarkable guy and done a lot of thing to the community but we can really never know who is satoshi, and I think do we have to know the truth bitcoin is doing well even if he is not around. I'm surprised this topic was not moved to the speculation sub Maybe you are right in moving this topic in speculation but I think it is still OK that it is here in the discussion, there are really many allegations regarding who Satoshi is, and many in this forum are very curious and would like to really know the true identity of satoshi. |
|
|
|
|
|
BitWhale
|
|
April 09, 2017, 05:11:06 PM
Last edit: April 09, 2017, 06:51:39 PM by BitWhale |
|
Lol this guy, TRAIN: stop with the personal attacks. Its absolute insanity to think that all the people here have not read the material and have each come to the same conclusion.
If 30 people are telling you that your evidence is circumstancial at best and proves nothing, it doesn't mean we don't know the english language, it doesn't mean we don't see the clues you are trying to tie into, or that we're idiots that haven't read your material. It means that we are taking in the SAME INFORMATION that you are, but we are not coming to the SAME CONCLUSIONS as you. I'm sorry dude, but I think it is YOU that is being the close minded retard at the moment.
Why are you so emotionally invested in this? You think that makes us want to listen to you?
It makes me laugh at every comment you say because you literally say the same shit over and over about how no one is reading the material, despite the fact that people are literally quoting text from said material.
You might THINK you got Satoshi pegged, but so does 100 other people. That's the thing about circumstantial evidence, it's circumstancial... lol.
Stop being such a whiney lil douche. You will never prove whom Satoshi is unless you can get a Satoshi sig on a relevant block, and because of this, no one will ever give you the recognition you oh-so-desperately desire, no matter how EARTH SHATTERING (that's debatable) your circumstancial evidence is.
Sure Nash does look like a great candidate, fuckin' prove it though, idiot lol you never will.
You might as well be looking for big foot and calling anyone that is a skeptic an idiot. Is it the skeptic or the person whose spending his precious time searching for big foot thats the idiot, hmm?
Until you can prove it (which is an impossible task), you are just as big of an "idiot" as anyone that is skeptical about this because you are full heartedly believing in circumstantial evidence (evidence that would be thrown out so quickly in court its not even funny) which is completely unproven and honestly pretty fringe-theory at best.
Sorry to rain on your ego parade.
|
|
|
|
|
manselr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 868
Merit: 1004
|
|
April 09, 2017, 07:22:36 PM |
|
If John Nash was so smart and he invented bitcoin then why didnt he foresee that a chinese cartel would arise and centralize his entire project? this doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jordan23
|
|
April 09, 2017, 08:35:07 PM |
|
Let this guy go. He has no proof and obviosuly gets zero pussy. You mad bro? LOL
|
|
|
|
|
jonald_fyookball
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1004
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
|
|
April 09, 2017, 08:38:48 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback
|
|
April 10, 2017, 04:08:18 AM
Last edit: April 10, 2017, 04:33:35 AM by iamnotback |
|
Satoshi's creation contains too many blunders (mathematical, cryptographic, economical, game-theoretical and programmatic) to be made by a genius like Nash.
I have refuted you in another thread. You had some really dumb errors in your analysis such as claiming that RIPE160 reducing security. No it only reduces the space of addresses increases potential collisions but only astronomically small probability yet saves a lot of scaling space. If John Nash was so smart and he invented bitcoin then why didnt he foresee that a chinese cartel would arise and centralize his entire project? this doesn't make sense to me.
The game theory of Bitcoin is a crab bucket mentality Schelling point and nobody can change the protocol, they can only block changes to the protocol. Which is exactly what is happening. Chinese cartel doesn't control Bitcoin, the protocol controls itself. The Chinese are protecting the protocol precisely as the game theory expects they would. It is difficult for me to have a discussion with the idiots here in these forums. You guys don't assimilate everything I write. Lol this guy, TRAIN: stop with the personal attacks. Its absolute insanity to think that all the people here have not read the material and have each come to the same conclusion.
If 30 people are telling you that your evidence is circumstancial at best and proves nothing
Thirty idiots who can't assimilate detailed technological research are basically just noise. I have already explained that Nash was obviously (but likely unwittingly) involved and explained why. Idiots are not worth my time. |
|
|
|
|
|
