Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[sidhujag]

The published piece to read would be: 'Ideal Money', John F. Nash, Jr.,  Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 69, No. 1 (Jul., 2002), pp. 4-11.

If someone can't get access and has a public repository where I can put a copy, I'd be glad to.

As for Nash being Satoshi ... very doubtful (the incomprehensible video starts with: "Bitcoin might not be it ... but gold or silver ..."). But he, like Hayek before him, has been talking about a nationless currency whose supply is outside of political control.

i'd not heard this one before today:  Satoshi Nakamoto = IAmNash sato koto

interesting...

Yup.. and also Szabo is a word in Chinese spelled Nash backwards or something.

He talks about ideal currency and hints that USD with central bank inflation targetting is ideal but not really ideal...just good enough for now because there is no alternative and smart money is searching for the asymptotically ideal currency which offers a better more stable token based on non political control over supply... hello proof of work (owing debt) based on the efficiency of energy can't get a better source of a commodity that can't be manipulated. Unless you can create free energy, proof of work will always be worth atleast the amount of energy put into it (although it doesn't right now because of speculative pressures).

[Melbustus]

One of the stranger Satoshi theories: Satoshi == Nick Szabo == Wei Dai == John Nash.

What if one person used all four of those aliases, then decided to obscure the trail even further by passing one or more of the identities to a successor, DPR-style?

There's that quote from Szabo from the early '90s where he comments on how building rep for his various online identities takes a lot of work...

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

i'd be interested. 

http://www.mediafire.com/view/aql2lsu7713pq55/nash_ideal_money.pdf

[cypherdoc]

The published piece to read would be: 'Ideal Money', John F. Nash, Jr.,  Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 69, No. 1 (Jul., 2002), pp. 4-11.

If someone can't get access and has a public repository where I can put a copy, I'd be glad to.

As for Nash being Satoshi ... very doubtful (the incomprehensible video starts with: "Bitcoin might not be it ... but gold or silver ..."). But he, like Hayek before him, has been talking about a nationless currency whose supply is outside of political control.

i'd not heard this one before today:  Satoshi Nakamoto = IAmNash sato koto

interesting...

Yup.. and also Szabo is a word in Chinese spelled Nash backwards or something.

He talks about ideal currency and hints that USD with central bank inflation targetting is ideal but not really ideal...just good enough for now because there is no alternative and smart money is searching for the asymptotically ideal currency which offers a better more stable token based on non political control over supply... hello proof of work (owing debt) based on the efficiency of energy can't get a better source of a commodity that can't be manipulated. Unless you can create free energy, proof of work will always be worth atleast the amount of energy put into it (although it doesn't right now because of speculative pressures).

and it's more than just the electricity + hardware that a gvt would have to overcome.  there's the unfactored costs related to sweat equity, entrepreneurship, and ancillary supplies put into mining.  take my word for it, there are numerous cables, heatsinks, extra power supplies, risers, racks, AC, fans, etc that need to be bought and assembled.  there's the knowledge factor of programming all that hardware to maximum efficiency.  and all the time and frustration.  i have a busy day job yet i was willing to put in the time at night and on weekends to get my hardware up and running.  and that doesn't count the problems that take more time troubleshooting or going in on weekends.  that's all voluntary and uncompensated when doing the calculations for ROI.

i'll tell you what drives that; the profit motive.  massive profit motive as we've seen since 2011.  mining BTC with expectations that they will increase in value as digital gold and possibly as a replacement reserve currency.  how many gvt workers would be willing to put in all that time and effort towards launching a 51% attack?  answer:  none.  many of them probably own some BTC and would be somewhat reluctant.  and this doesn't account for Bitcoin miners holding some hashrate back to protect against such an attack.  i'm holding back an admittedly smallish 2TH/s to bring online in case of an emergency.  how many others are doing the same?  anyone who wants to attack the network better factor in at least another 50% HR in costs if they dare do such a thing.  

and if Gavin is right about stuffing such an attack quickly and easily, who's gonna take the blame for wasting $100M of taxpayer money or whatever the # is?  there is such a thing as suing the federal gvt that needs to be considered as well if they mess with private property outside the law.

[cypherdoc]

well isn't that purdy.  all that talk about the Bitnodes Incentive Program and that cool new Bitnode plug & play:

[lunarboy]

well isn't that purdy.  all that talk about the Bitnodes Incentive Program and that cool new Bitnode plug & play:

could be suspicious  

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/30ay6u/almost_10_more_full_nodes_since_this_morning/cpquf15?context=3

That's odd: all 600+ new nodes came online with the user agent "/Satoshi:0.10.99/Gangnam Style:v4.01"

[sickpig]

The published piece to read would be: 'Ideal Money', John F. Nash, Jr.,  Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 69, No. 1 (Jul., 2002), pp. 4-11.

If someone can't get access and has a public repository where I can put a copy, I'd be glad to.

As for Nash being Satoshi ... very doubtful (the incomprehensible video starts with: "Bitcoin might not be it ... but gold or silver ..."). But he, like Hayek before him, has been talking about a nationless currency whose supply is outside of political control.

i'd be interested.  look likes their a paywall...

It's not a paywall it's the paywall. The one that Aaron Swartz had tried to unlock with an act of civil disobedience that unfortunately had cost him his own life.

[cypherdoc]

well isn't that purdy.  all that talk about the Bitnodes Incentive Program and that cool new Bitnode plug & play:

could be suspicious  

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/30ay6u/almost_10_more_full_nodes_since_this_morning/cpquf15?context=3

That's odd: all 600+ new nodes came online with the user agent "/Satoshi:0.10.99/Gangnam Style:v4.01"

Could be a bunch of Bitseeds being tested.

[sickpig]

well isn't that purdy.  all that talk about the Bitnodes Incentive Program and that cool new Bitnode plug & play:

could be suspicious  

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/30ay6u/almost_10_more_full_nodes_since_this_morning/cpquf15?context=3

That's odd: all 600+ new nodes came online with the user agent "/Satoshi:0.10.99/Gangnam Style:v4.01"

Could be a bunch of Bitseeds being tested.

or another chainalysis.com in the making....

[NotHatinJustTrollin]

As for a financial company? The innovation of the blockchain (inseparable from bitcoin) is being increasingly acknowledged by all and sundry as a technological and financial breakthrough.  If it is anything like the internet revolution, we're talking multi trillion dollar economy. Just one company (AAPL) is poking through the $750bn mark.

It's "inseparable from bitcoin" only according to pyramid schemers like you.

Bitcoiners: "So we have this blockchain thing, it's a distributed ledger and it has potential but bitcoin is a necessary component, you are forced to adopt it if you want the blockchain"

Everybody else: "Ok, but we don't need this bitcoin currency, only drug dealers, paranoid libertards, scammers and ponzi speculators do"

Bitcoiners: "We don't care. You want the blockchain? You need to adopt bitcoin"

Everybody else: "Alright, then we will create a blockchain/consensus/distributed ledger thing that doesn't force people to adopt, use, and give a high value to a new currency they don't need. If it's a little centralized it's not a problem, cuz decentralization is for libertards."

Bitcoiners: "You can't. It's impossible™"

Everybody else:
http://www.newsbtc.com/2015/01/22/blockchain-things-bot-not-internet-things/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkYVc1YsGCc


More coming soon.

[chriswen]

Gold Up , Bitcoin Down.

[NotHatinJustTrollin]

The funny thing is that you proponents of the "omg errybody will use teh blokchain for these smart contracts things, bitcoin to the moon" don't realize that there have already been similar attempts to build services that use the Bitcoin blockchain but they have faced some serious resistance from Bitcoin core developers who consider this type of activity as “blockchain spam” and in some cases made attempts to block and inhibit these activities.

In the future nobody will use the *bitcoin* blockchain for these things.
Sorry.

Hint: VCs usually talk about the potential of "blockchain technology", not of the bitcoin blockchain or of the [insert your favorite scamcoin here] blockchain.


Bitcoin and shitcoins are technological dinosaurs. We all know what happened to dinosaurs amirite?

[smooth]

Everybody else: "Alright, then we will create a blockchain/consensus/distributed ledger thing that doesn't force people to adopt, use, and give a high value to a new currency they don't need. If it's a little centralized it's not a problem, cuz decentralization is for libertards."

Bitcoiners: "You can't. It's impossible™"

I don't think anyone said it was impossible if you are creating something that is centralized.

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

Not impossible. Just utterly pointless.

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

The published piece to read would be: 'Ideal Money', John F. Nash, Jr.,  Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 69, No. 1 (Jul., 2002), pp. 4-11.

If someone can't get access and has a public repository where I can put a copy, I'd be glad to.

As for Nash being Satoshi ... very doubtful (the incomprehensible video starts with: "Bitcoin might not be it ... but gold or silver ..."). But he, like Hayek before him, has been talking about a nationless currency whose supply is outside of political control.

i'd be interested.  look likes their a paywall...

It's not a paywall it's the paywall. The one that Aaron Swartz had tried to unlock with an act of civil disobedience that unfortunately had cost him his own life.

Exactly. Knowledge that has already been paid for, and whose only purpose for being generated is to be disseminated, reproduced and applied, is restricted and appropriated for profit. Hindering the advance of science and perpetuating epistemic unfairness across the globe.   

It is a scandal and an outrage.

[smooth]

Not impossible. Just utterly pointless.

Largely agree. The only reason I qualify it is I don't rule out some sort of unknown variation on the theme that makes it useful. I haven't seen that however.

[ErisDiscordia]

Exactly. Knowledge that has already been paid for, and whose only purpose for being generated is to be disseminated, reproduced and applied, is restricted and appropriated for profit. Hindering the advance of science and perpetuating epistemic unfairness across the globe.  

It is a scandal and an outrage.

Intellectual property is a scam. But that's what you get when you start running out of tangible things to monetize in order to prevent your economy from exploding in an inflationary spiral of doom because it is based on the presumption of infinite exponential growth.

Not even the most deluded bitcoin bulltard assumes bitcoin is going to grow exponentially forever yet we are asked to believe this about the global economy at large.

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

Intellectual property is a scam.

Let's just remember that, in the present case, neither Nash nor the SEJ nor Princeton are making a penny for the paywalling of the article. Monies go to Wiley Publishers, who did not pay the author, edit the journal, or referee the article. They simply put it in their database.

[Ivanhoe]

Intellectual property is a scam.

Let's just remember that, in the present case, neither Nash nor the SEJ nor Princeton are making a penny for the paywalling of the article. Monies go to Wiley Publishers, who did not pay the author, edit the journal or referee the article, but simply put it in their database.

Wiley does have a shitty paywall though. Just type in the header of the article through google scholar and then click on the "download pdf" button in the right column without accessing the website. There you go.   

[sidhujag]

The published piece to read would be: 'Ideal Money', John F. Nash, Jr.,  Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 69, No. 1 (Jul., 2002), pp. 4-11.

If someone can't get access and has a public repository where I can put a copy, I'd be glad to.

As for Nash being Satoshi ... very doubtful (the incomprehensible video starts with: "Bitcoin might not be it ... but gold or silver ..."). But he, like Hayek before him, has been talking about a nationless currency whose supply is outside of political control.

i'd not heard this one before today:  Satoshi Nakamoto = IAmNash sato koto

interesting...

Yup.. and also Szabo is a word in Chinese spelled Nash backwards or something.

He talks about ideal currency and hints that USD with central bank inflation targetting is ideal but not really ideal...just good enough for now because there is no alternative and smart money is searching for the asymptotically ideal currency which offers a better more stable token based on non political control over supply... hello proof of work (owing debt) based on the efficiency of energy can't get a better source of a commodity that can't be manipulated. Unless you can create free energy, proof of work will always be worth atleast the amount of energy put into it (although it doesn't right now because of speculative pressures).

and it's more than just the electricity + hardware that a gvt would have to overcome.  there's the unfactored costs related to sweat equity, entrepreneurship, and ancillary supplies put into mining.  take my word for it, there are numerous cables, heatsinks, extra power supplies, risers, racks, AC, fans, etc that need to be bought and assembled.  there's the knowledge factor of programming all that hardware to maximum efficiency.  and all the time and frustration.  i have a busy day job yet i was willing to put in the time at night and on weekends to get my hardware up and running.  and that doesn't count the problems that take more time troubleshooting or going in on weekends.  that's all voluntary and uncompensated when doing the calculations for ROI.

i'll tell you what drives that; the profit motive.  massive profit motive as we've seen since 2011.  mining BTC with expectations that they will increase in value as digital gold and possibly as a replacement reserve currency.  how many gvt workers would be willing to put in all that time and effort towards launching a 51% attack?  answer:  none.  many of them probably own some BTC and would be somewhat reluctant.  and this doesn't account for Bitcoin miners holding some hashrate back to protect against such an attack.  i'm holding back an admittedly smallish 2TH/s to bring online in case of an emergency.  how many others are doing the same?  anyone who wants to attack the network better factor in at least another 50% HR in costs if they dare do such a thing.  

and if Gavin is right about stuffing such an attack quickly and easily, who's gonna take the blame for wasting $100M of taxpayer money or whatever the # is?  there is such a thing as suing the federal gvt that needs to be considered as well if they mess with private property outside the law.

Im not talking about that its assumed govt cant control energy efficiency. Im talking about using it as an index like cpi to dtermine economy.. Rather than interest rate targeting done randomely it seems. Anyways it lines up well with the notion of work which requires energy.. When you pay someone you are transfering work for proof of work... Makes total sense, the amount someone is willing to exchange is the price which is determined by how expensive it is to mine a bitcoin.. Even as it becomes more efficient... There is incentive to increase efficiency in mining which becomes a power problem rather than an asic algo issue.. Kinda like silicon hitting its hard limits on cpus and now having to solve the real problem of making things smaller in electronics while decreasing power usage and increasing calculations per second...