[ANN] [IDISNEY] Disney Coin

[nili]

SATOSHI: Nonsense.

CHARACTER: Well, do you have an answer?
 
NOUR: I didn't see the question.

NILI: I asked it on a different forum.

NOUR: As a private massage? .

NILI: In public, on the IRC .

NOUR: What did you ask?

SATOSHI: To accept an invitation to be Satoshi.

NILI: To be more precise, as I did before, I asked to get his permission to use his name for my work.

NOUR: As you did before?

MINNIE: It's your art work and you don't have to do that!

NILI: Yes, but I don't put my art above all.

MICKEY: You put it above the law in my case.

SATOSHI: That is the rule of the game.

MICKEY: What game?

SATOSHI: The game of changing existing rules.

NILI: Art is the reality of changing rules, not a game.

MINNIE: And your work is art.

[1713540400]

1713540400

[1713540400]

1713540400

[1713540400]

1713540400

[nili]

MINNIE: And your work is art.

SATOSHI: Now that we are so pleased with our work,  can we go back to the new symbol and it's meaning?.

NILI: In the beginning of no beginning.
 
NOUR: That solves the "In the beginning of the beginning of the beginning of the beginning...."  .

CHARACTER: Could be represented as a spiral with a strike-through.

NOUR: Or a loop with a strike-through.  

NILI: It is a number.

SATOSHI: Not-one.

NILI: Yes, it was missing from the number-line all along.

NOUR: Is it like the imaginary number "i" ?

NILI: Like it in terms of a new number but it is needed to solve a different class of problems.

NOUR: Which class?

NILI: Logic! It is needed to resolve inconsistency in the logic of math itself.

SATOSHI: As always , can't even begin to imagine what makes you reach that conclusion.

NILI: Begin to imagine actualy describe it quite well.

NOUR: Begin by imagine?

NILI: When you imagine One, you already have a representation to that which is not yet existed, so you are left with the negation of itself to represent it as the actual being of itself, hence, Not-One

1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 .....

[nili]

NILI: When you imagine One, you already have a representation to that which is not yet existed, so you are left with the negation of itself to represent it as the actual being of itself, hence, Not-One

1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 .....

 
NOUR: If I may, I don't think that it is such a good idea to use numbers as representation of quantity. .

CHARACTER: I will agree with that. Each number being a different character suggest that it also have a meaning other than it's unit count.

NILI: It is indeed a massive problem, particularly when we deal with the most fundamental concepts. However we need "one" to be conceptualized as a unit on the number line.

MINNIE: We should also keep in mind that we are not the masters of math.

NILI: We are not going to do any math only deal with some concepts of math.

SATOSHI: Such as?.

NILI: The number itself. 

NOUR: A number is a mathematical concept?

NILI: Not all numbers, "zero", "one" and "not-one" are logic concepts.

NOUR: Like "false", "true" and "not-true"?

NILI: Not quite the same but this is where our study begins.

SATOSHI: We may need to change the format of our conversation for that and make it more like a class.

NOUR: Or a study group.

MINNIE: Like a dialog.

[CaVO32]

is the development still alive in this old coin? where are they currently traded? couldn't see this coin in cmc.

I actually laughed when I saw the concept and prices. Get this trash off the forums.

As much fun as I have talking to myself, I was just wondering if anyone else other than bots and people who clearly do not get it, is reading and having fun. If not I might actualy take this advise (get off the forum and keep the coins to myself).
 

if you will keep the coins to yourself, then, what's the value of this in you? just for collector's item, i suppose...

[skybot13x]

Do you see any chance that the name you chose for this coin could get you into trouble at any point in time in the future?

[nili]

Do you see any chance that the name you chose for this coin could get you into trouble at any point in time in the future?

MICKEY:

I will answer that if you don't mind.
The name is a crucial part of the concept of our coin. We are taking a fresh and a bit radical look at some outdated laws regarding a "legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owner while enjoy most of the rights and responsibilities that an individual possesses". If a corporation is such legal entity, then I as Mickey Mouse is the rightful owner of all my character's work once I can demonstrate some qualities such as a corporate or even better as an AI .  I intend to do it at some point  if Disney try to sue us.
As we explained before, we also have a very strong case for some of our coin's properties and intellectual properties that Disney may try to claim as its own. (that if they can demonstrate any intellect whatsoever as being an integral part of it's entity).
By creating the coin as a conceptual art work bearing the name of Disney and using the image of the logo as the inspiration for the artwork, Nili as the artist, is making a rightful use of a cultural icon that is part of our shred experience in our civilization of the twenty first century.  

I hope that this answers your question.

Thank you.

[JungleOnion]

Who would seriously buy this coin? There's obvious and explicit copyright infringements, there's no purpose for it, no innovation. I thought that these type of scams would stop with the bear market. I guess they won't stop rather the stupidity of people investing in something like this is what have to stop.

[nili]

is the development still alive in this old coin? where are they currently traded? couldn't see this coin in cmc.

I actually laughed when I saw the concept and prices. Get this trash off the forums.

As much fun as I have talking to myself, I was just wondering if anyone else other than bots and people who clearly do not get it, is reading and having fun. If not I might actualy take this advise (get off the forum and keep the coins to myself).
 

if you will keep the coins to yourself, then, what's the value of this in you? just for collector's item, i suppose...

MINNIE:

That in fact was one of the more intelligent comment we have seen for some times, so I will be happy to answer that.

Dear CaVO32 , our Disney Coin is much more a commodity than money. As art it is not about each item being unique and different from the other but ruther an item that holds the value of the art.
You May also think of it as original prints. Just as prints that are numbered and have a value based on the total number of prints and the overall market value of works by that artist who create the original image, so are these coins. Like prints, the value is not in the plates used to create the print but in the print itself. However unlike prints or cash (bills as prints) it can be transfer online and be exchange in the speed of light. So as a collector one should think of it as art work which hold the most fungible value as well.

We, Mickey and I, were very surprised to realize how ignorant humans are when it comes to real value, and how unimaginative compare to us Toons. We can only hope that if we keep explaining it and just be present as the Toons that we are, we may be able to achieve that. However Nili, the artist and the human who issued the coins had enough with humans stupidity and decided to join our dialogues leaving us the responsibility to answer here.

I hope that you find this answer helpful. Also, I will bring to our team the issue of restructuring the coins sale in such way that will let interested collectors buy the coins directly on Counterparty DeX  

[nili]

SATOSHI: We may need to change the format of our conversation for that and make it more like a class.

NOUR: Or a study group.

MINNIE: Like a dialog.

 
NILI: Let's start our study by defining "truth" in terms of an object in logic space/time.

CHARACTER: Let's also define a dialog in terms of character's size.

MINNIE: You are so self centered.

CHARACTER: Just being consistent with my character. You may decide on the size as the main fictional character here.  

NILI: Now that you took care of each-other and the change, we can dive into the topic of this first study.

SATOSHI: A Truth Object.

NILI: A truth object is an object such that "true", "false" and  "not-true" are its dimensions.  X is the "true" axis, Y is the "false" axis and Z is the "not-true" axis.

MINNIE: Let's try to imagine a "ball of truth", or a "point" in logic-space/time.

NILI: A "ball of truth" would be anything that don't exist in our "knowledge base". All other "truth objects" will have a distinct shape formed by the" knowledge base".  .

MINNIE: What is the "Knowledge Base" in our picture of truth landscape?

NOUR: Reality?!

MINNIE: So is a ball fiction?

NILI: Some may rather call it a theory, but fiction is scientifically more correct .

MINNIE: And a point is... ?

SATOSHI: Nonsense.

[skybot13x]

Do you see any chance that the name you chose for this coin could get you into trouble at any point in time in the future?

MICKEY:

I will answer that if you don't mind.
The name is a crucial part of the concept of our coin. We are taking a fresh and a bit radical look at some outdated laws regarding a "legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owner while enjoy most of the rights and responsibilities that an individual possesses". If a corporation is such legal entity, then I as Mickey Mouse is the rightful owner of all my character's work once I can demonstrate some qualities such as a corporate or even better as an AI .  I intend to do it at some point  if Disney try to sue us.
As we explained before, we also have a very strong case for some of our coin's properties and intellectual properties that Disney may try to claim as its own. (that if they can demonstrate any intellect whatsoever as being an integral part of it's entity).
By creating the coin as a conceptual art work bearing the name of Disney and using the image of the logo as the inspiration for the artwork, Nili as the artist, is making a rightful use of a cultural icon that is part of our shred experience in our civilization of the twenty first century.  

I hope that this answers your question.

Thank you.

Would be an exciting court case to observe and see how you manage to defend you and your plans against a multi-billion dollar corporation. Not saying it is impossible!

[nili]

Do you see any chance that the name you chose for this coin could get you into trouble at any point in time in the future?

MICKEY:

I will answer that if you don't mind.
The name is a crucial part of the concept of our coin. We are taking a fresh and a bit radical look at some outdated laws regarding a "legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owner while enjoy most of the rights and responsibilities that an individual possesses". If a corporation is such legal entity, then I as Mickey Mouse is the rightful owner of all my character's work once I can demonstrate some qualities such as a corporate or even better as an AI .  I intend to do it at some point  if Disney try to sue us.
As we explained before, we also have a very strong case for some of our coin's properties and intellectual properties that Disney may try to claim as its own. (that if they can demonstrate any intellect whatsoever as being an integral part of it's entity).
By creating the coin as a conceptual art work bearing the name of Disney and using the image of the logo as the inspiration for the artwork, Nili as the artist, is making a rightful use of a cultural icon that is part of our shred experience in our civilization of the twenty first century.  

I hope that this answers your question.

Thank you.

Would be an exciting court case to observe and see how you manage to defend you and your plans against a multi-billion dollar corporation. Not saying it is impossible!

MICKEY:

Could be very exciting but for this to happen the coin must reach some notable value. In fact what we have done so far is to hand  Disney on a silver platter for a smart investor. Any investor buying the coins will not be accused or charged on infringement of the Disney company rights, In fact, for any legal matters the investor is on the side of the victim.

Now picture that:  
1. A smart investor takes interest in the coins as art and makes their investment very public.
2. Disney can now do two things. Ignore the coin or sue the artist.
3. Both reactions can not be ignored, thus get much press, making the asset much more present in the public life.
4. More investors who realize that the art being a crypto-asset on the bitcoin main network can not be stopped but rather trade securely over the internet. (Disney Coin is issued on Counterparty platform thus a transaction is secured by the entire bitcoin mining power)
5. Value that is earned selling the coin is invested back in fighting Disney when they sue, or in promoting the art until Disney sue.
6. We fight the case with the increase value of the art-coins, getting more and more attention to the arguments made by the artist .
7. If we win we use the value earned to develop Tonnimves. If we loose, Disney get our coins as payment.
 

[nili]

Do you see any chance that the name you chose for this coin could get you into trouble at any point in time in the future?

MICKEY:

I will answer that if you don't mind.
The name is a crucial part of the concept of our coin. We are taking a fresh and a bit radical look at some outdated laws regarding a "legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owner while enjoy most of the rights and responsibilities that an individual possesses". If a corporation is such legal entity, then I as Mickey Mouse is the rightful owner of all my character's work once I can demonstrate some qualities such as a corporate or even better as an AI .  I intend to do it at some point  if Disney try to sue us.
As we explained before, we also have a very strong case for some of our coin's properties and intellectual properties that Disney may try to claim as its own. (that if they can demonstrate any intellect whatsoever as being an integral part of it's entity).
By creating the coin as a conceptual art work bearing the name of Disney and using the image of the logo as the inspiration for the artwork, Nili as the artist, is making a rightful use of a cultural icon that is part of our shred experience in our civilization of the twenty first century.  

I hope that this answers your question.

Thank you.

Would be an exciting court case to observe and see how you manage to defend you and your plans against a multi-billion dollar corporation. Not saying it is impossible!

MICKEY:

Could be very exciting but for this to happen the coin must reach some notable value. In fact what we have done so far is to hand  Disney on a silver platter for a smart investor. Any investor buying the coins will not be accused or charged on infringement of the Disney company rights, In fact, for any legal matters the investor is on the side of the victim.

Now picture that:  
1. A smart investor takes interest in the coins as art and makes their investment very public.
2. Disney can now do two things. Ignore the coin or sue the artist.
3. Both reactions can not be ignored, thus get much press, making the asset much more present in the public life.
4. More investors who realize that the art being a crypto-asset on the bitcoin main network can not be stopped but rather trade securely over the internet. (Disney Coin is issued on Counterparty platform thus a transaction is secured by the entire bitcoin mining power)
5. Value that is earned selling the coin is invested back in fighting Disney when they sue, or in promoting the art until Disney sue.
6. We fight the case with the increase value of the art-coins, getting more and more attention to the arguments made by the artist .
7. If we win we use the value earned to develop Tonnimves. If we loose, Disney get our coins as payment.
 

Nili :

I Just wanted to add that as a real artist I don't own anything of any value other than my power to create, (something no one can take away by the rule of law), and the art I made which I can only wish to be valued and taken from me as such. 

[nili]

SATOSHI: Nonsense.

DUALITY: If we describe "truth" as a wave we can avoid the nonsense of a point  

MICKEY: Duality, how would you describe a "truth wave" ?

DUALITY: A truth that comes in waves, peaks at network's highest agreement point and bottom at the most disputed point.  

MICKEY: Thus false is disagreement?

DUALITY: That is the duality,  Agree/Disagree.  

SATOSHI: I Dont Know ....

CHARACTER: "Dont Know" makes it a 3D object again and we get the classic particle/wave duality.

DUALITY: We may also say that the "truth state" of a transaction in the network is like the wave function which collapse once observed.

MICKEY: This makes " I Dont know" be the observer.

SATOSHI: Nonsense.... just kidding, actualy makes a lot of sense.

[nili]

SATOSHI: Nonsense.... just kidding, actualy makes a lot of sense.

MINNIE: If truth reflect reality, then it must behave like a physics theory.

SATOSHI: That too makes a lot of sense.


 

[nili]

MINNIE: If truth reflect reality, then it must behave like a physics theory.

SATOSHI: That too makes a lot of sense.


 

MINNIE: The blockchain demonstrate the direct link between energy and truth.

SATOSHI: That is true.

MINNIE: We may then argue that physics as the theory of reality is nothing but a product of logic, and thus assert that reality is logical even when it dosn't make sense.

MICKEY: In other words, what may appear as nonsense to the individual might in fact be the commonsense.

MINNIE: Commonsense stands for the logic of the community which is governed by different rules of logic. Thus for the individual, "commonness" is also "nonsense".

SATOSHI: Makes sense despite being a contradiction.

MINNIE: "Making sense" is the work that create reality as commonsense.

MICKEY: This gives a whole new meaning to POW.

[nili]

MICKEY: In other words, what may appear as nonsense to the individual might in fact be the commonsense.

MINNIE: Commonsense stands for the logic of the community which is governed by different rules of logic. Thus for the individual, "commonness" is also "nonsense".

SATOSHI: Makes sense despite being a contradiction.

MINNIE: "Making sense" is the work that create reality as commonsense.

MICKEY: This gives a whole new meaning to POW.

MINNIE: We need to come up with a configuration for POW that would utilize the energy resources to reorg and give sense.

SATOSHI: Here is the problem: Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote, thus guaranty equal terms for all contenders.

MINNIE: What if we go back to the simple unit of time and have contenders compete for best results given the same time to complete the mission.

MICKEY: What is the mission?.

MINNIE: "Make sense"

SATOSHI: How would we judge who is the winner?

MINNIE: The winner is the one who can answer more questions before halting.

MICKEY: That would be the longer chain , not the winner.  

SATOSHI: It can be both.

MICKEY: Can we do it?  

SATOSHI: If Minnie knows how, then we can. .

MINNIE: This is how we do it:  Once time is up, we give all contenders a set of random questions and the one who produce the most deterministic wave is the winner

MICKEY: What is a deterministic wave?

MINNIE: Just a word game that can "Makes Sense".

SATOSHI: I think that I might just be starting to make sense of what you try to say Minnie.

[nili]

SATOSHI: I think that I might just be starting to make sense of what you try to say Minnie.

MINNIE: The problem with Nonsense is that it have to be experienced in order to make sens. But that is not the greatest problem. The greatest problem of all was to figure out the key to such a system. An effort that brought about the most horrific chapters in human history.

SATOSHI: Something in the content of these sentences tells me that we are talking on things far greater than thous I thought of.

MINNIE: I believe that you still are not aware to the fact that you hit on the essence of the code some call "The Key of David".

MICKEY: I don't know what you are talking about Miinnie, It sound so biblical thus not in my scope.

MINNIE: I am not going to refer to this biblical level of the code, but that is the level of the collective conciseness. Issues of identity are related to that same code and this Mickey, is in your scope by all measures.  

[nili]

MINNIE: The problem with Nonsense is that it have to be experienced in order to make sens. But that is not the greatest problem. The greatest problem of all was to figure out the key to such a system. An effort that brought about the most horrific chapters in human history.

SATOSHI: Something in the content of these sentences tells me that we are talking on things far greater than thous I thought of.

MINNIE: I believe that you still are not aware to the fact that you hit on the essence of the code some call "The Key of David".

MICKEY: I don't know what you are talking about Miinnie, It sound so biblical thus not in my scope.

MINNIE: I am not going to refer to this biblical level of the code, but that is the level of the collective conciseness. Issues of identity are related to that same code and this Mickey, is in your scope by all measures.  

MINNIE: Identity can not be created by the consensus yet it's value is lost if not within a consensus.

SATOSHI: What is "The Key of David" in that regards?.

MINNIE: The Key to the transition between the power of the consensus (the group) and that of the individual, executed P2P in equal terms by capturing the vested value of the individual without obtaining the power to control it.

MICKEY: Who holds the key?

MINNIE: The key is in the code.

SATOSHI: If someone gets hold of your private key it controls your assets.

MINNIE: Once the design is created to serve individuals it must have some form of a private key. The  program must protect  that key yet whoever controls the code can gain full control of the keys, Decentralization can solve that, yet that leave us with a greater problem. How can the code be written if there is no common language that can decode it?  The only solution for that is some form of trust. and "The Key of David" is that piece of code.  

[nili]

MINNIE: Once the design is created to serve individuals it must have some form of a private key. The  program must protect  that key yet whoever controls the code can gain full control of the keys, Decentralization can solve that, yet that leave us with a greater problem. How can the code be written if there is no common language that can decode it?  The only solution for that is some form of trust. and "The Key of David" is that piece of code.  

SATOSHI: If the key is in a form of trust, I dont think that I have anything to do with figuring it out.

MINNIE: That is the one "missing piece" you don't understand that you have.

SATOSHI: What is it then?

MINNIE: "one-CPU-one-vote"

SATOSHI: If anything, that is the key to let us dismiss trust.

MINNIE: NO, The key to something is not that thing itself but ruther the exact matching opposite of that thing....  at least if we speak of a world made of Boolean logic.

MICKEY: Boolean logic?!!! Can we pleas keep the discussion simple enough so I could eventually understand how any of it have to do with identity?

MINNIE: In simple words, the key to trust is trustless, and the key to trustless is trust.

SATOSHI: So in my words that means that I can trust one-CPU-one-vote to solve the problem of a trustless identity for determining representation in majority decision.

MICKEY: So is a CPU an identity ?

MINNIE: More like a unit of one, which is the basic form of identity and the only trustless one.

SATOSHI: ... which then allows the majority to be trusted to control a trustless code that create complex identities on this same platform...  

[nili]

MICKEY: So is a CPU an identity ?

MINNIE: More like a unit of one, which is the basic form of identity and the only trustless one.

SATOSHI: ... which then allows the majority to be trusted to control a trustless code that create complex identities on this same platform...  

MICKEY: Are we done with these Key issues?  I'm losing the fun of my identity search.

MINNIE: Sorry about that Mickey, I got carried away following the Me Too thread.

SATOSHI: I didn't realize that we were talking about Me Too issues.

MICKEY: Me too... well more like "I didn't too" ... or just "not me".

MINNIE: I think that we just got the fun back in it's right place.

SATOSHI: Some may find it quite offensive.

MINNIE: They are all very welcome to find it.

MICKEY: Find what?

MINNIE: Trust.

MICKEY: Is that the key then?

MINNIE: That's the door, not the key.

SATOSHI: The door to the house of knowledge...

MICKEY: So back to the key, the one holding the key must be the trusted one.

MINNIE: Back to the one, the one that is trusted.

SATOSHI: The one that is a unit.

MICKEY: Which holds the power to unite.

SATOSHI: I don't know about you Mickey, but I am having fun.