They found Satoshi?

[iamnotback]

It all correlates well for Satoshi being Nash.

While a long-standing hypothesis, I don't think it fits.  Nash was too smart to be Satoshi.  There are too many silly ideas at the foundations of bitcoin for it to be invented by a guy like Nash ; unless Nash meant it to be a testbench of ideas, and that the thing got out of hand.

Bitcoin is designed to be some kind of digital gold.  Nash was against the principles of gold bugs like the Austrians.

You have not been paying attention. Read on...

From the gist of what @traincarswreck has said, bitcoin is not ideal money. It is merely an asymptotically monetary tool to stabilise the fiat monetary system.

You don't seem to understand what Nash meant by asymptotic ideal money.

Nash didn't mean an asymptotically limited money supply.

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.

The elite loved what Nash was saying about ideal money because the Rothschilds thought they would be the one to control the weightings of the IPCI which all the nations' currencies will float against. This is why there has been talk of backing the SDRs with a weighting of national currencies, precious metals, and commodities as Nash had written about.

But Nash was fooling them. He knew damn well the IPCI wouldn't be stable in the world empire context. So that is why he wanted an asymptotic number of stable currencies that would develop via an evolutionary process. He wrote those exact words, but the elite weren't exactly understanding that that entailed.

When Nash created Bitcoin, Rothschild rejoiced because of the math I showed that Bitcoin will eventually become concentrated in one entity. But Nash had fooled them, because he had figured that Bitcoin's open source release would set off an evolutionary process in altcoins (guaranteed by the very genius immutable game theory he designed that prevents Bitcoin from being "upgraded").

You guys are failing to read my posts carefully.

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!

The free market "fails"¹ where there are winner-take-all power vacuums in the structure of the organizational paradigm.

I have showed mathematically that Bitcoin and fungible money are winner-take-all power vacuums.

So we are not displacing/eliminating government. We are simply replacing the power vacuum of democracy (because voting is not cost free) with the power vacuum of fungible finance. Actually these two have always been intimately interlinked, i.e. the banksters own the government.

Bitcoin ultimately changes nothing EXCEPT that it enables unregulated experimentation in altcoins. Which appears to be Nash's brilliance, as I had been stating since 2014 that Satoshi had outsmarted the elite.

¹ Actually it destroys the paradigm (often with much collateral damage to participants) in a creative destruction to keep experimentation of dynamic, resilient fitness moving forward to find a better fit paradigm.

[1714707322]

1714707322

[1714707322]

1714707322

[iamnotback]

You can kill a man, but not an idea or a protocol unleashed.

Murdering Nash (assuming he was murdered and he was Satoshi) would obviously not be to stop Bitcoin, as Bitcoin is already released.

The point of murdering is so that it can't be confirmed who Satoshi was.

The elite think they will control all of the Bitcoin per the math I showed that shows all Bitcoin would become concentrated in one entity if it were the most stable money. So they want the people to think of Satoshi as some mystical God. And they want the people to whoreship Bitcoin as some sort of ideal idolized money. It is part of the NWO plan.

But as I explained in my prior post, I think Nash outsmarted them any way. So the murder of Nash was entirely unnecessary. But the elite aren't so smart.

There is a potentially simpler explanation for why Nash would be murdered before he could be confronted about whether he is Satoshi. That is to prevent any reduction in the mysticism/idealism/idolism that keeps flocks of greater fools coming into Bitcoin.

If we know who Satoshi is, then Bitcoin becomes just another altcoin or blockchain. It is reduced from magical to just technology. I think this is why I've been attacked/vilified for presenting this evidence.

Also murdering him would relieve him of perhaps being kidnapped and tortured and worse things than way he died instantly.

i always wonder how much longer does it take before they start accepting the fact that Satoshi chose to stay anonymous and it will stay that way until Satoshi decides otherwise.

No one is perfect or absolutely undiscoverable when they leave so many information tracks.

I suppose you were one of those who would have killed any one who was intellectually curious about the earth not being flat.

Yawn...it's all just signature spammer fud...as usual.

You'd think the campaign managers would look at the crap people spew to scam campaign funds.

Have you even clicked my signature. I am not being paid anything for posts.

You lie about me, because you are a WHOREshipper of the idol Bitcoin.

You've been manipulated like a dumb cow.

[iamnotback]

Regardless, iamnotback is clever enough to realise that his belief that John Nash was Satoshi won't make everyone else believe it.  There was an article on bitcoinpricelive and an an article on CoinDesk arguing that this was a likely possibility years ago, but people didn't jump on the train because the "circumstantial evidence" provided is not, in fact, quite strong enough to prove that he was Satoshi and it can't actually be reasonably proven without Nash himself signing a message with the Genesis block (which he can't - he's dead).

My purpose is not to prove or to convince, but rather to measure the behavior of Bitcoin retards. To document it as a form anthropology and market research.

The lack of attention to detailed due diligence and thus the nonsense spoken and voted.

Most of you haven't even begun to scratch surface of analysis of this issue.

My vindication always comes later. Such as when I warned about the centralization of mining in China last year and was told I was crying chicken little. Then I was correct and everyone admits it now.

I have a vindication coming soon on a recent altcoin analysis I made.  

Nash designed Bitcoin so that it would be replaced or competed with.

[iamnotback]

Who is satoshi? Nobody know who he is and where he is living? Perhaps he will never be present at this world . He can live with many many bitcoins which he is owning and just that's enough for him to have a very very rich and beautiful life so nobody can dream like him . The rumors are only rumors and we continue to buy and sell bitcoins everyday.

Satoshi has never spent a single BTC.

I laugh at the comments people make when they get all their basic facts wrong.

Nash was conscientious. He would have destroyed the private key before he mined the coins.

Has anyone tried to check if Satoshi's addresses correspond to an unspendable public key?

but as someone else pointed out (sorry forgot who) wouldnt nash known of that potential problem and  publicly burned the coins as they were mined. xfer then to an unspendable address or something. i mean if perfect money were the intent it shouldnt have the risk of a price crash built into it.

As I wrote before as quoted above, I think he'd probably left it as a puzzle to prove that his addresses are a hash of an unspendable public key.

Because he'd want it to be known later, not in the initial stages of Bitcoin. Something people would get around to later, perhaps much later if computation would be intractable now.

[Carlton Banks]

*ahem*

Okay but only ultimately with a world central bank. Yes I agree. But not in an unregulated chaos. That short-lived chaos will end up just like what happened to the USA after the 1800s. The banksters will aggregate power as other banks fail with bank runs. The banksters whales can manipulate the public and cause bubbles and busts.

Rothschild created Bitcoin.

You've changed your tune since, when was it, less than 2 weeks ago?


One day it's "Rothschild created Bitcoin" the next it's "John Nash was Satoshi"


What's next? I suppose you're going to tell us that Rothschild (the whole family ) is, er, was, John Nash?

I'm genuinely looking forward to your explanation of this, as it's proof positive that you talk so much rubbish that you can't even remember your own nonsense from 2 weeks ago  

[krishnapramod]

Hey mate, nothing against your circumstantial evidence that John Nash is indeed Satoshis, this is not the first time the conclusion has been drawn that Nash is Satoshi. I am not too much familiar with the technical aspects of bitcoins so will point out the basics only.

1. The comparison between Nash and Satoshi is drawn because of Nash's theoretical notion "ideal money"

2. Nash has been working on the mathematical and economical aspects of implementing ideal money.

3. John Nash has made contributions to different fields of math and he might have been well versed in encrypting algorithms or cryptology.

There is a book written by Andreas Antonopoulos, The Internet of Money, it mainly deals with the social and philosophical implications of bitcoin, likewise IMO Nash was more into the mathematical or economical aspects of ideal money or lets assume bitcoin, but not technological/technical.

What should I say about his death due to "firebombed", controversial theory is the most apt way to make our hypothesis sound factual to ourselves first and then others

[iamnotback]

Again some little pointers to help the lazy who don't quite grasp the evidence in totality.

@OP you may have put so much time to make that evidence but for me non of them are convincing. And i think many other also feel same about your evidence.

Here we go again! another serious research thing about Satoshi? but your research was quite accepting with the evidence you have presented and the number of time he is involve in certain and major transaction between different country that will certainly pump up is idea currency and presenting the good benefits it has with the economy, I think you had a point in your research but there are still a big question mark in these, the real truth if Nash really is Satoshi? well one man can not certainly take a step in saying it and change our beliefs right?

No my evidence is based on the timing that he wasn't active publicly presenting was precisely the timing when Satoshi was active publicly.

And also on the focus of his Agencies game theory research being exactly what was needed to see the way from Szabo and Wei Dai's work to Satoshi's PoW solution.

Nash's Agencies research was on Cooperation in Non-Cooperating Repeated Games, which is precisely what Satoshi's PoW is!

And also because the timing when he went silent to work on coding Bitcoin was right about the time that Szabo (re-)published his bit gold, which was probably the key development that gave Nash the final insight on how to apply his Agencies research to his ideal money concept. Then the evidence shows he went quiet at that time, until right before he launched Bitcoin.

It all fits far too well.

You guys are too lazy to read carefully what I wrote in the linked research.

[iamnotback]

I'm yet to read the thread, I disagree that it will crash the price, the opposite imo.
I feel more confident holding something that wasn't cooked up by one of the alphabet agencies.

It is amazing to me that they now have a great man to assign to the creator of Bitcoin, but they'd rather WHOREship an idol of mysticism (see the reaction I've been getting).

The human race hasn't graduated from being cows managed religion.

[krishnapramod]

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.

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".

Yeah points noted, bitcoin announced 2008, satoshi stopped being involved with bitcoins since mid-2010. Nash shifted his focus from ideal money to game theory research (April 2006 and then back to ideal money in Feb 2007) Now since 2008 till 2011 Nash was really active (apart from 2009) presenting his concept of ideal money. Bitcoin was made open source in 2009, the point I am missing is if Nash is indeed satoshi why would he go to Germany, Pennsylvania and Hong Kong presenting ideal money, bitcoin has been made open source, what is the purpose of it, might sound illogical, but still

[manselr]

How can John Nash be satoshi? he was too old, I doubt he couldn't even code, he looks like the type of guy that reads a ton of books but doesn't code much. Satoshi was a single guy that combined existing work including by John Nash and then released BTC. I dont buy the conspiracy theories.

[iamnotback]

I doubt he couldn't even code

You haven't studied the evidence. There is evidence of him doing coding. Also I think you fail to understand how capable Nash was. @traincarswreck documented that his collegues were amazed at how much he gotten into computers lately.

I linked to an evidence where Nash had remarked at the importance of computers in proving Fermet's Last Theorem.

Nash wasn't 86 in 2006. He was in his 70s.

Also Nash's son is also a genius and was in is 40s at that time and lived in the same house with Nash.  

Johnny Nash may hold the key to finding out, but it is purely speculative whether Nash's son would be involved in any way (probably not).

[stompix]

*ahem*

Okay but only ultimately with a world central bank. Yes I agree. But not in an unregulated chaos. That short-lived chaos will end up just like what happened to the USA after the 1800s. The banksters will aggregate power as other banks fail with bank runs. The banksters whales can manipulate the public and cause bubbles and busts.

Rothschild created Bitcoin.

You've changed your tune since, when was it, less than 2 weeks ago?


One day it's "Rothschild created Bitcoin" the next it's "John Nash was Satoshi"


What's next? I suppose you're going to tell us that Rothschild (the whole family ) is, er, was, John Nash?

I'm genuinely looking forward to your explanation of this, as it's proof positive that you talk so much rubbish that you can't even remember your own nonsense from 2 weeks ago  

Wow, excellent find.
But There still might be the possibility that John Nash is a Rothschild.

Now seriously I spent a few minutes on this (to be read wasted) and the amount of evidence is just astonishing, probably one of the worst case about a "Satoshi" persona.

How about we let this guy alone.
Maybe when the time travel machine will be invented we will find out that his mysterious disappearance was a damn car accident (hope not).

[iamnotback]

Okay but only ultimately with a world central bank. Yes I agree. But not in an unregulated chaos. That short-lived chaos will end up just like what happened to the USA after the 1800s. The banksters will aggregate power as other banks fail with bank runs. The banksters whales can manipulate the public and cause bubbles and busts.

Rothschild created Bitcoin.

One day it's "Rothschild created Bitcoin" the next it's "John Nash was Satoshi"

But There still might be the possibility that John Nash is a Rothschild.

No I already explained how both the elite and Nash are both involved.

You don't really think anything Nash was doing wasn't being monitored by the NSA and/or CIA do you.  


P.S. I have Carlton on Ignore. He knows that. So I can only read if someone happens to quote his nonsense. You can see once again he failed to read before posting.

[iamnotback]

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.

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".

Yeah points noted, bitcoin announced 2008, satoshi stopped being involved with bitcoins since mid-2010. Nash shifted his focus from ideal money to game theory research (April 2006 and then back to ideal money in Feb 2007) Now since 2008 till 2011 Nash was really active (apart from 2009) presenting his concept of ideal money. Bitcoin was made open source in 2009, the point I am missing is if Nash is indeed satoshi why would he go to Germany, Pennsylvania and Hong Kong presenting ideal money, bitcoin has been made open source, what is the purpose of it, might sound illogical, but still

Note that Nash didn't really switch entirely back to ideal money promotion until summer 2008 when he went bezerk promoting it like crazy right before he launched Bitcoin. I can see he was very excited about the Bitcoin he was preparing to unleash onto the world.

You guys still don't understand the cat and mouse game Nash was playing with the elite who knew what he was doing. I already explained it.

So Nash had to promote ideal money so the elite would think that Bitcoin was good for the elite. He was fooling the elite!

Analogously, I had also documented that the scientists had lied to DARPA in order to get the Internet started.

[stompix]

Okay but only ultimately with a world central bank. Yes I agree. But not in an unregulated chaos. That short-lived chaos will end up just like what happened to the USA after the 1800s. The banksters will aggregate power as other banks fail with bank runs. The banksters whales can manipulate the public and cause bubbles and busts.

Rothschild created Bitcoin.

One day it's "Rothschild created Bitcoin" the next it's "John Nash was Satoshi"

But There still might be the possibility that John Nash is a Rothschild.

No I already explained how both the elite and Nash are both involved.

You don't really think anything Nash was doing wasn't being monitored by the NSA and/or CIA do you.  


P.S. I have Carlton on Ignore. He knows that. So I can only read if someone happens to quote his nonsense. You can see once again he failed to read before posting.

This is my personal opinion so you should take it as it is
Once you have people on ignore you can't argue about having a true discussion.

Now from my point of view, every time I hear about CIA  NSA stuff I tend to yawn...
How about we stop.Simply stop.

I want so much to hear a story about satoshi without the CIA NSA 13 bloodfamilies (is tomtom still around?)  and other.
Cause in my humble opinion there is a bigger chance the satoshi saga is in reality a pretty dumb story

[iamnotback]

Once you have people on ignore you can't argue about having a true discussion.

I pleaded with Carlton numerous times to stop making insulting ad hominen. I gave him about 10 chances. He will never come off Ignore.

Now from my point of view, every time I hear about CIA  NSA stuff I tend to yawn...
How about we stop.Simply stop.

I want so much to hear a story about satoshi without the CIA NSA 13 bloodfamilies (is tomtom still around?)  and other.
Cause in my humble opinion there is a bigger chance the satoshi saga is in reality a pretty dumb story

You tell me not to Ignore, then you stick your head in the sand. Lol.

As if the CIA and NSA do not exist and do not do such covert shit. It's like their mission orders do covert monitoring.

You guys are so rational.

[franky1]

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

[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.

[chichigirl]

I heard a lot and seen a lot of movies where in the scene, a rich guy proclaimed dead but just hiding to protect and to have his privacy. I dont believe on this drama. The bitcoin creator is alive, just hiding himself.

[layoutph]

Yeah right, OP, the story looks like fabricated. Its so easy for a billionaire to buy an unclaimed dead body from mortuary, dress it like satoshi, insert it to a car. And put a lot of explosive materials.

Once the bomb explode, body is very hard to recognize. Bitcoin owner is now free from allegations and death threats.