They found Satoshi?

[Dorky]

Waste of time on false pursue.

[1714951795]

1714951795

[iamnotback]

Bitcoin is Nash's very clever plan of providing a reserve currency for altcoin experimentation, which could have the potential to create asymptotically ideal money. I had stated back in 2014 that I expected Satoshi was so genius that he had outsmarted the elite who were tracking him.

I know you are going to say that all the clumsiness in bitcoin was on purpose, will have a game-theoretical, desired effect at a certain point and/or served to keep the suspicion away from Nash and so on, but as I said, at a certain point that becomes non-falsifiable.  Anything, and its opposite, is then "proof of the statement at hand".

You can't just devalue the significance of Nash's frantic ideal money rampage which was also a lifelong ambition. And the timing of his research on Cooperation in Non-Cooperating Repeating Games which is precisely coincident with the one advance needed to go from the prior art of Wei Dai, Szabo, and Finney's RPOW to Satoshi's PoW system of consensus.

There is a confluence of many coincident factors.

It is also quite peculiar that Nash never commented extensively on Bitcoin. It seems ridiculous that he avoided elaborating on Bitcoin when asked, except by instead pointing out that gold and silver wouldn't work. So in effect, he was saying we don't have any other good option.

That to me is a HUGE factor.

Finney was visible, so Finney can't be Satoshi. Ditto Szabo who is now a real person seen in YouTube videos. Also both denied being Satoshi.

So it occurs to me to think that that which is not achieved by a grand action of establishment by “fiat” may alternatively tend to come into existence as a consequence of a process of evolution. And of course, after a certain degree of progress by “evolution” the rest of the progress could possibly be realized by a convention or a process of “fiat”.

[iamnotback]

prolific coder like Szabo

My understanding is that Szabo is not much of a coder.

Also Szabo can't be Satoshi because he is in the public eye of the ecosystem.

Also Szabo doesn't understand game theory well enough, which is why he didn't get it correct with his bit gold proposal.

I have caught Szabo in several technological errors.

Szabo is not smart enough to be Satoshi. (I am not claiming Szabo is stupid, just not genius enough to be Satoshi).

However it is possible that some group created Bitcoin based on careful study of Nash's work, but why did Nash go quiet during the times he did? And why did Nash avoid talking about Bitcoin?

When Bitcoin came about, Nash as the researcher/progenitor of Ideal Money should have wanted to immediately write about it.

But of course he wanted to downplay Bitcoin because:

1. He didn't want to be associated as its possible creator.

2. To make the elite think he was playing along with their plans for Bitcoin.

3. To not alert powerful entities to kill Bitcoin in its infancy.

Szabo can code.

Not a disciplined enough coder to make Bitcoin. I've never seen Szabo write significant code or a large project.

Nash was very disciplined and stuck with projects over a long time frame to refine and complete them. Which is the trait a coder needs. Szabo is a writer and researcher.

[Dorky]

Please refer here ---> https://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2013/06/21/is-the-national-security-agency-behind-bitcoin/

Recently a 1996 NSA report surfaced, ‘predicting’ a crypto-cyber unit eerily close to Bitcoin. So eerily close, that, knowing their M.O., the question arises whether this report is a prediction, or a plan.

Also refer here ---> https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2014/07/26/flashback-1988-get-ready-for-a-world-currency-by-2018%E2%80%B3-the-economist-magazine/

Title of article: Get Ready for the Phoenix
Source: Economist; 01/9/88, Vol. 306, pp 9-10
THIRTY years from now, Americans, Japanese, Europeans, and people in many other rich countries, and some relatively poor ones will probably be paying for their shopping with the same currency. Prices will be quoted not in dollars, yen or D-marks but in, let’s say, the phoenix. The phoenix will be favoured by companies and shoppers because it will be more convenient than today’s national currencies, which by then will seem a quaint cause of much disruption to economic life in the last twentieth century.

Forget about Satoshi. There is no such person in existence.

There are 2 ways the shadow elite can bring forth its phoenix currency.
1) Announce it as the currency of the shadow elite, and end up receiving backlash from the public.
2) Announce it as the currency from Mr. Anonymous that can be used to fight banks and tyrants, and receive mass adoption.

If I were from the shadow elite, I would definitely go for option #2.

Only the blind / foolish / naive fail to see thru this facade, and instead keep focusing on Mr. Mysterious as if that's going to matter a lot, as if finding out the answer would come the recognition as some brilliance of sort.

[iamnotback]

There are 2 ways the shadow elite can bring forth its phoenix currency.
1) Announce it as the currency of the shadow elite, and end up receiving backlash from the public.
2) Announce it as the currency from Mr. Anonymous that can be used to fight banks and tyrants, and receive mass adoption.

3) Allow John Nash to do it for them, by exposing him to certain information. So its creation can be appealing to the world.


But... John Nash outsmarts and puts a game theory in it that achieves the opposite of what the elite wanted.

[FunkyDuck]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=28684

More interesting evidence. Based on this new theory that Satoshi wanted altcoins, lets examine one of the original altcoins, ixcoin.

The dev , thomas naskioto (anagram for satashi nakamoto) hasn't been heard from since early 2015. The ixcoin.org domain expired shortly after in june. It would make sense that this was also Nash.

[Dorky]

There are 2 ways the shadow elite can bring forth its phoenix currency.
1) Announce it as the currency of the shadow elite, and end up receiving backlash from the public.
2) Announce it as the currency from Mr. Anonymous that can be used to fight banks and tyrants, and receive mass adoption.

3) Allow John Nash to do it for them, by exposing him to certain information. So its creation can be appealing to the world.


But... John Nash outsmarts and puts a game theory in it that achieves the opposite of what the elite wanted.

There is no such entity as "John Nash" in the equation.

[Dorky]

In case it is still too hard/complicated/sophisticated to understand the whole issue, then please read and re-read the statement below repeatedly for numerous times until you understand. Thank you. With regards.

Only the blind / foolish / naive fail to see thru this facade, and instead keep focusing on Mr. Mysterious as if that's going to matter a lot, as if finding out the answer would come the recognition as some brilliance of sort.

[iamnotback]

So if you are trying to make an argument "Satoshi wasn't Nash because code is too stupid" it is a weak argument because the contra-argument would be "code was actually written by or advised by an extremely street smart and deceptive software consultant". Nowadays entire large consultancy corporations exist through providing such deceptive advice.

Or more simply it was written by Nash who wasn't an experienced coder.

This argument that an expert group (of the global elite or whatever) coded Bitcoin doesn't make any sense. Unless they tried their best to make it look like the code was created by amateurs. Did they try to pin this on Nash's back on purpose? But then why does Nash refuse to talk about Bitcoin when asked about and instead basically answers in a cryptic way by saying gold and silver wouldn't work.

Nash was expert in theory, and had to do the coding by himself in order to keep it secret.

Simplest explanations are the best according to Occam's Razor.

[Dorky]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUyCO3FXHS4

John Nash: "The bitcoin might not be it..."

The ideal money is no money at all, as monetary exchange only exists among humans that are unfair to each others and yet emphasizes fairness from each others.

When humans finally learn that prosperity does not need money, then the money god will die.

[iamnotback]

If @Dorky will continue spamming this thread, then I will just repeat my same post over and over also.

@Dorky please stop trolling.

Bitcoin is Nash's very clever plan of providing a reserve currency for altcoin experimentation, which could have the potential to create asymptotically ideal money. I had stated back in 2014 that I expected Satoshi was so genius that he had outsmarted the elite who were tracking him.

I know you are going to say that all the clumsiness in bitcoin was on purpose, will have a game-theoretical, desired effect at a certain point and/or served to keep the suspicion away from Nash and so on, but as I said, at a certain point that becomes non-falsifiable.  Anything, and its opposite, is then "proof of the statement at hand".

You can't just devalue the significance of Nash's frantic ideal money rampage which was also a lifelong ambition. And the timing of his research on Cooperation in Non-Cooperating Repeating Games which is precisely coincident with the one advance needed to go from the prior art of Wei Dai, Szabo, and Finney's RPOW to Satoshi's PoW system of consensus.

There is a confluence of many coincident factors.

It is also quite peculiar that Nash never commented extensively on Bitcoin. It seems ridiculous that he avoided elaborating on Bitcoin when asked, except by instead pointing out that gold and silver wouldn't work. So in effect, he was saying we don't have any other good option.

That to me is a HUGE factor.

Finney was visible, so Finney can't be Satoshi. Ditto Szabo who is now a real person seen in YouTube videos. Also both denied being Satoshi.

So it occurs to me to think that that which is not achieved by a grand action of establishment by “fiat” may alternatively tend to come into existence as a consequence of a process of evolution. And of course, after a certain degree of progress by “evolution” the rest of the progress could possibly be realized by a convention or a process of “fiat”.

[Dorky]

If @Dorky will continue spamming this thread, then I will just repeat my same post over and over also.

@Dorky please stop trolling.

I understand the word "trolling" is an overrated word.
May I know what exactly is the meaning of "trolling"?

So if I am very sincere and honest in sharing what I know so that may somewhat broaden your knowledge and might be of help to your decision-making, and as so it happens to be not agreeable to you, thus I am trolling?

[jonald_fyookball]

lol.  OP is the same guy as 'traincarwreck' and 'dinofelis'

nobody knows who is Satoshi.  could be Nash or many others.  Anyway nash died in 2015.  

next.

[avikz]

Without going in to the proofs you have presented in your actual post, I will say, whatever happens, bitcoin will not die. Even if I believe that Nash had actually created bitcoin, but the growth undertaken by bitcoin was purely possible because of public trust. Many people around the globe has entrusted bitcoin with their own hard-earned money. And that's where the bitcoin magic lies.

It will have no effect on bitcoin pricing because people who have heavily invested in bitcoin will step forward to save the fall. The creator of bitcoin will have no effect on pricing I believe.

[iamnotback]

My more down-to-earth idea is that Satoshi was a clever guy, but not a genius, who had some limited insight into monetary aspects, who had some, but limited, grasp on game theory (his talking about "honest nodes" and about "consensus" as something that the community would want - the dogma that is still propagated by most bitcoin maximalists, shows that he didn't understand the fundamentals of the emergent properties of non-colluding antagonists - or was lying through his teeth about it), had some notions of cryptography and fucked up other things (like the way too small nonce).  He did do a great invention, the cryptographic block chain.  He screwed up other aspects.  I have a hard time believing that that was "genius" that "implanted this" on purpose to deceive his evil masters in the weapon of mass destruction they ordered him to make, so that it blows in his own face.

Bitcoin is far too amazing to be created by a clever guy. And to be able to pull it off as Satoshi did.

You've never accomplished a million user viral s/w project in your life, so you have no comprehension of the genius it required. And he got it right the very first time he attempted it, with no prior coding nor marketing experience. But that sometimes makes me think it was an expert group, but then why does Nash refuse to talk about Bitcoin? Could it be that Nash knew of a secret group and was the secret consultant?. But Nash couldn't have trusted just anyone because his sanity could be questioned again if he ended up being exposed as working with some scam or what have you. They would have to have shown him credentials that he would trust.

And the game theory in Bitcoin is genius, can't be done by a clever person.

And ideal money was Nash's lifelong ambition. He wrote that if humanity can't learn to cooperate we would go extinct.

But as I said, that's an unfalsifiable claim, and hence can be true too.  But I simply don't think that a smart guy like Nash would lend himself (at his age !) to such a game.  He was bloody 80 years old in 2008.

Nash was working on crazy new ideas until his death.

And the coding and research for Bitcoin was started when Nash was in his 70s.

And too much of a mathematical genius to commit the simplistic errors that Satoshi made.  (yes, yes, to deceive...).

What game theory or math theory errors are there in Bitcoin?

I see none.

You are referring to your pet peeve about conflating distribution with security, but it was genius because Bitcoin is designed to be a settlement layer, not other things you think it should be.

[jackson00m]

I don't really know what to think about this, but the whole story of the "phantom" founder of bitcoin is so interesting. I wonder if we'll ever get actual proof if satoshi exists or counter proof how someone faked it. Excited to find out one day

[cpfreeplz]

I honestly thought you'd have more evidence than basically he wasn't active with another project during the time that bitcoins were being developed and or implemented. I also wasn't doing any active projects then. Am I satoshi?

Get an education.

The thought process is beyond your level of intellect.

You have not correctly summarized the evidence.

So now we understand that many (most?) of the voters are too lazy and too stupid to vote rationally after spending some hours digging into the evidence.

We live in a soundbite generation where people are more misinformed about everything than cows are about eating grass.

Ah and the truth comes out. OP is just a trolling kid with too much time. Try getting out in the real world sometimes child. Maybe you'll actually accomplish something rather than rambling threads that make no sense on a bitcoin forum.

TL;DR: he didn't find Satoshi. We already knew that though, didn't we? What an idiot.

Reporting all your bump after bumps btw, L2bitcointalk.

[iamnotback]

Ah and the truth comes out. OP is just a trolling kid with too much time.

And you have added no substantive information other than complaining about your dick size. Your post was entirely vacuous. Do you have anything to say?

[iamnotback]

im still laughing from when "iamnotback" was arguing with himself "trainscarwreck"

lol.  OP is the same guy as 'traincarwreck' and 'dinofelis'

How much BTC would you like to lose in an escrowed bet on that?

Make the bet, or STFU. Because I am not @traincarswreck nor @dinofelis.

I'll give all the BTC won to @traincarswreck, to entice him to participate and prove he is not me.

You guys can't discern reality from fiction.

[Dorky]

I just don't understand why "Satoshi" is so important to OP, as if he is OP's long lost biological father.