Satoshi Nakamoto: Difference between revisions
Ā |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
|content=The reason I was interested in it was more complex. If Bitcoin was digital gold, and gold was a quantum mechanical wave, then some group had created a: Ā | |content=The reason I was interested in it was more complex. If Bitcoin was digital gold, and gold was a quantum mechanical wave, then some group had created a: Ā | ||
1) Novel | 1) Novel</br> | ||
2) Locally enforced | 2) Locally enforced</br> | ||
3) Digital | 3) Digital</br> | ||
4) Conservation law | 4) Conservation law | ||
| Line 600: | Line 600: | ||
|content=First of all, I am concerned that the paradigm of being scientifically or technologically ācenturies aheadā is all wrong. This came up in a phone call with our buddy @SamHarrisOrg. | |content=First of all, I am concerned that the paradigm of being scientifically or technologically ācenturies aheadā is all wrong. This came up in a phone call with our buddy @SamHarrisOrg. | ||
Q: How many centuries ahead is 1952-3 from 1900? Iād have guessed āmanyā (not .5) and been wrong. | Q: How many centuries ahead is 1952-3 from 1900? Iād have guessed āmanyā (not .5) and been wrong. | ||
| | |media1=ERW-X-post-1404131494289760259-1.jpg | ||
| | |media2=ERW-X-post-1404131494289760259-2.jpg | ||
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021 | |timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 620: | Line 620: | ||
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein | |usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein | ||
|username=EricRWeinstein | |username=EricRWeinstein | ||
|content=Itās not physics exactly. But Edward Witten w support from a small number of folks rewrote Quantum Field Theory as geometry. If Einstein geometrized gravity, then Witten geometrized Quantum Field theory (everything else). | |content=Itās not physics exactly. But [[Ed Witten|Edward Witten]] w support from a small number of folks rewrote [[Quantum Field Theory]] as geometry. If Einstein geometrized gravity, then Witten geometrized Quantum Field theory (everything else). | ||
Now, all that change has so far unlocked exactly nothing. | Now, all that change has so far unlocked exactly nothing. | ||
| Line 839: | Line 839: | ||
A crazy strong claim, but my memory is in error. | A crazy strong claim, but my memory is in error. | ||
Apologies. | Apologies. | ||
|media= | |media=ERW-X-post-1434304086766088195-E-er9p9VUAEjifL.jpg | ||
|timestamp=11:55 PM Ā· Sep 04, 2021 | |timestamp=11:55 PM Ā· Sep 04, 2021 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 873: | Line 873: | ||
|content=But weāve been working together behind the scenes. I so appreciate @Breedlove22 coming to Chicago to witness what I hope will be the beginning of an attack on abuses of perhaps the second most dangerous printing press in Washington as inflation heats up. | |content=But weāve been working together behind the scenes. I so appreciate @Breedlove22 coming to Chicago to witness what I hope will be the beginning of an attack on abuses of perhaps the second most dangerous printing press in Washington as inflation heats up. | ||
Thanks #Bitcoiners: LFG. | Thanks #Bitcoiners: LFG. | ||
|media=ERW-X-post-1461432608923914241-FEgNNkoVEAAcdGr.jpg | |media=ERW-X-post-1461432608923914241-FEgNNkoVEAAcdGr.jpg | ||
|timestamp=8:34 PM Ā· Nov 18, 2021 | |timestamp=8:34 PM Ā· Nov 18, 2021 | ||
Latest revision as of 07:46, 17 February 2026
2021[edit]
The Nakamoto Collective is almost the only forward looking thing I can think of. 11 years ago, I was unable to get our Prime Broker to take seriously that a small Hedge Fund wanted to speculate on some new concept. It was so cumbersome that I gave up and wrote an essay instead...
Bitcoin at the time felt totally sketchy as a financial instrument as it was tied to contraband. But I didnāt see it as money. If I did, I would be unimaginably wealthy if I didnāt lose it all to digital theft, accidental loss or spending it . But I am an idiot in these matters.
So, Satoshis if youāre out there, you havenāt needed fame or been eager to cash in. That is likely because you get where this is going. Please find me or someone who can explain how AU works as a wave in a bundle. Letās build a new digital physics around local conservation laws.
And I hated the blockchain. What the Satoshi collective had done was genius. But there should be no ledger. Gold, as a wave, doesnāt tell you where it has been. So instead I dreamed of meeting the Satoshis and getting rid of that damn implementation by using digital bundles.
Can you imagine. Some group was creating as-if physics inside the network. Bitcoins to me were āwavesā propagating not in vector bundles, but on networked computers as substrate.
This was genius. I reasoned at the time that it didnāt make sense to me as a medium of exchange.
The reason I was interested in it was more complex. If Bitcoin was digital gold, and gold was a quantum mechanical wave, then some group had created a:
1) Novel
2) Locally enforced
3) Digital
4) Conservation law
Called the blockchain. And money was but one thing it could be.
Thank you. For everything. And congratulations. Not on your wealth, but for giving us all the means of escape. For creating something truly new. And for having it up for for so long and proving the naysayers wrong. I have no words.
What you created wasnāt money but hope. š
I wrote this 11 years ago. I always thought youād read it & come find me. You werenāt rich then. You were either a government project, a collective or a lone genius. But you inspired me like little in our time. This was my attempt to get you to reach out:
No. Your job is to liberate physics.
Mine, to liberate you. Presumably some of you understand the peril weāre in. We canāt stay here.
I didnāt mention Geometric Unity to the š from the early-mid 1980s until 2013. Letās see if the Satoshi collective can go that long. #TimeToGo
But Bitcoiners must stop fetishizing the BTC/USD exchange rate and wealth. Set your sights higher. Become the numeraire. Time to fund the worthy outside your communities. There arenāt many. Become our adults.
And also look for an update from me around April Fools day. Hopefully.
I would however come to any credible meeting about freeing Satoshiās genius from the loss of anonymity to the ledger that is the blockchain.
Bitcoiners are the logical saviors of physics. And post-Einsteinian space travel and local digital conservation laws are out best hopes.
I have contributed nothing to the vision of distributed computing. I donāt talk much about the essay even.
Iām not a Bitcoiner. Keep me apart from that discussion and I will always support you all.
People confuse the new as-if physics for money. So I stayed out to do my vision.
Itās time. Put distributed computing on a bundle. Stop worshiping the initial blockchain innovation. Time to move to full digital physics with space-time replaced by the networked computers in distributed computing, and by the Observerse in actual physics. We canāt stay here. š
Unfortunately, I canāt live under either. So each of the warring parties thinks Iām against them & for the other team. In their mentalities if you arenāt on their simplistic team you are, de facto, working for the other side. Thereās no basic concept of *responsible* heterodoxy.
The entire war over fact checking is a war of 2 low resolution teams.
One team wants absolute freedom to spread wild eyed theories that just about everything is a psyop or a false flag.
The other team wants to impose institutional consensus reality on everyone via media & tech.
Thanks for the invitation. I can try to explain my concern.
There really *is* a problem w MAGA, Trump, Qanon & conspiracy theories running rampant. And it will result in death & destruction if it spins out of control.
However it is being fueled by those who claim to fight it.
These are the folks who tell you āmasks donāt workā rather than āsave masks for doctors as we forgot to restock them and moved all manufacturing to China like moronsā. They will then spin on a dime to tell you āOnly bad dumb people donāt wear masksā. This is the worst of Harvard.
When they wanted to cut our Social Security payments & raise our taxes they opted to try to change the CPI rather than pass legislation. When they wanted to pay less for scientists they knew to keep *silent* about NSF Labor Shortage claims even though such shortages donāt exist.
Having spent a good portion of my 20s at Harvard, I know *exactly* how this game works. Our betters sit down and try to figure out how to control others behind closed doors. They see themselves as the intrinsically enlightened people who need to do the thinking for all of us.
No the Freemasons do not run everything on behalf of pedophile reptilians who faked Sandy Hook with crisis actors.
Yes there are/were conspiracies behind Epstein, H1B, @MSNBC, PPE, climate science, the āGreat Moderationā, Great Reset...everywhere institutions want a āconsensusā.
Managed Reality ā¢ has a weak spot. Itās not run by our A-team anymore. Fauci isnāt Francis Crick. Biden isnāt Elon. Janet Yellen isnāt Satoshi.
In general, the A-Team is going independent because tech/media/Ed are enforcing way too much conformity through personal destruction.
I cannot live in Managed Reality ā¢ because I think it defeats the purpose of being a human being. It negates being an American. It abdicates responsibility for our children.
I have defeated Harvard about half the times we have fought. How? Because they just arenāt that good.
So, my belief is that anyone who rejects/questions Davos, Consensus Reality, Institutional Narrative, Public Health Campaigns, High Immigration, Peer Review, Primary Election Coverage, Trust & Safety...will be treated as Alex Jones sooner or Later.
This is Managed Reality ā¢.
So I donāt want Alex Jones and Qanon nor do I want @TwitterSafety, @msnbc and @Harvard. I see them as very different forms of the same thing: people who want to take away our ability to see clearly.
And, I assure you, @Harvard tries to paint anyone it canāt control as dangerous.
Thanks.
If I were a tech guy Iād retreat into wealth. If I were a professor Iād shut up and collect my salary with job security. If I was a politician or journalist Iād follow the other sheep.
But Iām a science guy, an American and a dad. And I want my kids to have a particular future.
So why am I worried?
Well, Iāve been trying to save the institutions. Itās probably doomed, but almost no one is trying to do what I do: rescue the institutions from their death spiral by reinserting their critics in positions of prominence (eg Chomsky at MIT).
Hence my fear.
@alexbilz @DavidBCollum True
Yes. But it is āYou pl.ā My co-discoverer is @PiaMalaney who Maldacena sourced but didnāt (originally) cite.
You can read all about the discovery and burial of Gauge Theoretic economics by the Boskin Commissioners on the Harvard Economics Faculty in āThe Physics of Wall Street.ā
You can read all about this attempt to disintermediate legacy economics in the final chapter and epilogue of this best selling book from a few years ago by Jim Weatherall in the time before Satoshi:
What was funny about Allenās medium piece was that he didnāt catch that he the bitcoiner was being the credentialist. Allen was happily quoting our own original ideas back to us..but via Juan Maldacena. A legacy of credentialism and a failure of āProof of workā. Hilarious really.
How can a political Left be:
Pro-billionaire and anti-worker?
Pro-empathy w āfragilityā accusations as its response to pain that cashes out in sky high differential suicide rates.
Pro-Science by not permitting questioning of public health/climate?
Pro inclusion, anti white.
Things that are different: Elon, Satoshi, JRE, ML, Bio-Hacking, etc.
But dammit, we canāt just burn all the institutions now headed by an extractive leader that we canāt figure out how to fire. Weāre *playing* at Revolution when we have to figure out how to oust the extractives.
The simple answer is we have to stop taking multiple choice solutions. This whole menu of options is wrong from stem to stern.
Every day, my main thought is āNone of this. None of the above. Itās just the same recycled 15 unworkable ideas that wonāt die from the same people.
Many of you didnāt flee to the Left because of Trump. You stayed and said what needed to be said. Trump wasnāt wrong about everything; he was right about a lot. But he was a real problem.
Well Biden/Harris arenāt wrong about everything either. And they represents a real problem.
Letās be honest at least: This isnāt the Left. This is a hostile takeover of everything the principled thinking compassionate Left has ever stood for. Period.
And to my conservative friends, thanks for the invites. But Iād rather you help get our home invasion under control.
Anti-McCarthyist, Pro-Cancelation blacklisting.
Pro-Diversity w zero-tolerance for viewpoint diversity.
Have a Magazine called Mother Jones and spit āDeplorablesā on those coal/steel families for whom Mother Jones fought.
Want āNo more policeā protecting. our most vulnerable.
Rant over. The madness is just getting to me. Thx.
@PrometheusAM The bitcoin maximalists donāt care for me & are pretty awful to deal with. But they arenāt wrong because they are dicks. They are dicks because it is an amazing invention. Something truly new. You canāt say itās just same old same old. Itās not my religion, but itās *astounding*.
@PrometheusAM Respectfully. Iām not one of the BTC fanatics.
@allenf32 That is about right. We appear to still be divided on toxicity but not on substance. I was trying to say this if I understand you correctly. I also understand that your community has needed to defend itself. Donāt stop as I have been fighting your same enemies. But, Iām not them.
@allenf32 I just wanted not to have the worldās digital currency barking anonymous transactions to those in control of violence. Iām not for lawlessness but I am for privacy and donāt want BTC vulnerable to angry state actors when nations awaken to the threat to fiat currency & C-banking.
@allenf32 Remember this: those in control of the printing presses which devalue fiat currency through seigniorage are also in control of the guns needed to enforce the use of fiat currency.
And Iām not even a libertarian. Just a soul who hates being controlled by economists who lie to us.
@btcede @allenf32 No. Iām not telling you something you donāt know. Iām trying to think about what technology might lack this vulnerability and on what theory it would be based around. But...Letās leave that for a while.
@btcede @allenf32 Happy to think in those terms as well. Will need teachers. Canāt do toxic. But otherwise, yes. However Iāve been on gauge theory and markets since the early 1990s and that has been our baby since well before Satoshiās masterstroke. Why not assume itās additive and not rivalrous?
@btcede @allenf32 Have to switch gears for a bit now.
@StopAndDecrypt @allenf32 Will do in a bit. Thx.
@luecki23 @allenf32 Iām not against that.
Iād want @witten271. Whatever my differences w him have been, Iād put them aside in a minute to get our best people on this [Heād bring his dad as well. ;-)] Nima Arkani-Hamed might by my 2nd pick.
Iād take Simons, Alvarez-Gaume, Weinberg, Yang, Maldacena & Seiberg, etc as well.
Biologists/Naturalists Iād take Bob Trivers, @BretWeinstein, Mark Ptashne, David Attenborough, Liz Blackburn and some others.
Iād make some picks many wouldnāt get: Chuck Hoberman, @lishali88, Peter Thiel, @edfrenkel, @thegoodtomchi, Esther Perel, @SamHarrisOrg, Satoshi, etc...
@FThousandaire @JaredBlm @BretWeinstein @lishali88 @edfrenkel @thegoodtomchi @SamHarrisOrg Shhhhh. Not so loud.
Dear @michaelshermer,
Thanks for this. Very sober. I myself also donāt find the authenticated videos so far released compelling. But I do find your challenge of āno isolated discontinuous innovationā quite interesting!
Might I propose a friendly debate among friendly skeptics?
Next challenge: doesnāt your line of reasoning prove that āRenaissance Technologiesā is either a fraud or a front? Their Medallion Fund is otherwise a long term unbreached secret, discontinuous from any other know investment fund seemingly thousands of years ahead of competitors.
First of all, I am concerned that the paradigm of being scientifically or technologically ācenturies aheadā is all wrong. This came up in a phone call with our buddy @SamHarrisOrg.
Q: How many centuries ahead is 1952-3 from 1900? Iād have guessed āmanyā (not .5) and been wrong.
But itās not that nothing happened in physics. While we were pretending that string theory was working, Witten & Co revolutionized our mathematical framework. Think of it as an enormous amount of unrealized gains. Pent up genius & power looking for its 1st application to the š.
Itās not physics exactly. But Edward Witten w support from a small number of folks rewrote Quantum Field Theory as geometry. If Einstein geometrized gravity, then Witten geometrized Quantum Field theory (everything else).
Now, all that change has so far unlocked exactly nothing.
And that brings us to theoretical physics. Beginning around 1982 , the son of the worldās top employed anti-gravity researcher(?!) of the 1950s turned in what may be the most impressive 15yr output in the history of the subject by my estimation. How can I begin to explain this?
You are, to me, arguing powerfully that certain people canāt exist: Rodney Mullen, Edward Van Halen, Bob Beamon, Dick Fosbury, Hiroji Satoh, Satoshi Nakamoto, etc.
They all exhibited the āa little unlocks a lotā paradigm with Zero-Day exploits that were each decisive.
Next: there are really two metrics on innovations.
Metric I: How big the incremental jump in difficulty.
Metric II: How big the jump in what is unlocked.
The great fear is that a small jump measured by 1 leading to an ENORMOUS jump in as measured by II.
Now Iāve had the odd question about Renaissance (front not fraud) for just this reason. But either way, itās either a counter example to your claims on discontinuous innovation if it is merely a fund or a counter-example to your secrecy claims if it is our secret physics program.
If CCP could today repeat what Witten (& friends) did building off Geometric Quantum Field Thy, the US would have Zero clue what it unlocks. Even by your own incrementalist theory. It might unlock absolutely nothing. Or passage to the stars via additional degrees of freedom. š¤·āāļø
[Digression: If the US were smarter, weād do it by setting up a mythic secret $B hedge fund that employs top differential geometers, theoretical physicists & ML experts by a national lab & an off brand university w/ inexplicably strong geometry & physics. But enough crazy talk..]
If I thought like CCP, Iād create a lavish secret theoretical physics program modeled on the Russian Sharashka system. The key would be to get it to look like something else. A boring Tech company or some weird Chinese fund to disguise the reason for the secretive lavish campus.
Now let me show you how I could get discontinuous innovation if I were China or Russia. I donāt know those systems as well so Iāll use the US example.
We know most of the top minds. We pretend that there is a lot of subjectivity about this for social reasons but China wouldnāt.
If you gave us E Witten, J Simons, I Singer, CN Yang, M Atiyah, D Quillen & G Segal, in a quiet program in 1975, I could argue that they didnāt need much more. In fact you donāt need all 7 but for the sake of argument I can make the case using this. But Witten is the main engine.
Discontinuous innovation is always unlikely. But never impossible.
We are both skeptics. But this UFO story is weird beyond belief Michael. I canāt think of a single story to fit to these reports Iām hearing about.
I welcome your thoughts. As always.
Warm regards,
Eric
Which is to say weāre not monitoring. Maybe we think thatās a waste of taxpayer dollars. Maybe we think that a Grisha Perelman of physics is impossible.
How much does a phone call cost if a researcher is wrong vs not bothering if theyāre right? Price the Type I & II error. Nuts.
You donāt have to take a position on me or GU. You can ask Wolfram or Lisi or Barbour or Deutsche or anyone outside the system whether such calls are placed. They are not. No one *in* the system believes in wild discontinuous change from *outside* the system. As per your article.
One last point. I released such a theory. Could well be wrong.
But I can tell you I should have received a call from DOE. Because calls are cheap and relevant trained PhDs are *very* finite. The US should track every geometer, General Relativist, and Particle Theorist working.
@trevorchodge Ohā¦.I didnāt say that. You did. ;-)
The virus appeared to learn a few tricks in Wuhan that really surprised me. We have been assured by Dr Fauci that this was in no way Gain of Function related.
Whatever happened in Wuhan *looks* like directed natural selection. Iām worried that this virus not quickly learn again.
@satoshishinosak Well, @BretWeinstein has been warning about lots of things about which he is simply and easily absolutely correct. Like the simple fact that vaccines change the adaptive landscape and will drive selection and viral adaptation.
Crazy seeing people arguing them to invalidate him.
@satoshishinosak @BretWeinstein As to the Ivermectin, spike protein as toxin, or danger from trials issues, I canāt say because I canāt evaluate that. But people are now trying to demonize everything we can say to avoid the conclusions he reaches on other issues.
But heās CLEARLY right about many many things.
@satoshishinosak @BretWeinstein I have pushed him to separate his points and not to hybridize his views with others. He is usually at his best alone as a thinker. One manās opinion.
@satoshishinosak @BretWeinstein Thatās not against his guests on his podcast. Itās about the idea that many of Bretās points are very subtle. The rigors of inviting someone you partially agree with but donāt know all that well make it important to be socially appropriate as host. And that leads to ambiguity.
I wanted to check my recollection. It is slightly off. Fauci says āvery very strongly leaning toward this *could not* have been artificially or deliberately manipulatedā Emphasis mine.
Not āwas notā, but ācould notā.
A crazy strong claim, but my memory is in error.
Apologies.
@AdamMcAdamson That was what I remembered. Crazily strong statement. But he did leave a tiny escape route. So I am in error. Even if a formal one.
We donāt always agree. Iāve no idea how Satoshi took aim at I) above. And I donāt yet know how to explain the importance of gauge theory to Gold (physical Gauge Theory), Prices/Quantities (abelian GT), Trade (non-abelian GT) and Utility (infinite dim GT): https://t.co/16D1phhNTC
But weāve been working together behind the scenes. I so appreciate @Breedlove22 coming to Chicago to witness what I hope will be the beginning of an attack on abuses of perhaps the second most dangerous printing press in Washington as inflation heats up.
Thanks #Bitcoiners: LFG.
Bitcoiners, open minded economists & math/physics folks: we have a serious problem navigating world markets using indicators that currently rely on *preposterous* assumptions (homotheticity, law of one price, stable tastes, etc) Economics needs more eyeballs on it from outside.š
Lastly when we trade with nations that have a different currency from ours, how can we measure inflation of both separate currencies relative to two baskets (imports & exports) without artificially assuming the law of one price?
We *must* innovate here:
#bitcoin #Crypto #nft #Blockchain #Decentralization #DeFi #web3 #inflation #cpi #Trade #gaugetheory
2022[edit]
freedom
@SatoshiBreedlo1 Every year. Same meal.
2023[edit]
@NathanB60857242 FranƧois Divisia or Ken Arrow or Paul Samuelson or Satoshi or Ronald Coase etc.... would be easy to defend.
But Graciela Chichilnisky or Bert Balk would be more interesting offbeat choices I could defend. I don't think they got their due for what is coming in mathematical econ.
@NathanB60857242 But perhaps the most interesting choice would be George Soros. He told me he didn't know how to express himself mathematically...so he never got his due. I believe that the participating and cognitive functions of Reflexivity are actually waiting to be formalized. Sic Transit...
@ks_kulk @NathanB60857242 Itās an odd issue. My impression is that Nash upgraded the Brower fixed point theorem that Morgenstern & VonNeumann had already applied to two player scenarios to the Kakutani. As such itās a more practical, but less brilliant contribution than V-M closer to a market than a game.
@ks_kulk @NathanB60857242 Iād give the edge to VonNeumann for applying topology in an unexpected way. But donāt get me started on the Nash embedding theorem. A singular, towering freakish achievement. Like a Devilās tower of metric geometry standing alone. https://t.co/uBzAzcgDCd
@Oracle_Inspect @NathanB60857242 Strong contender. Particularly for breaking the Phillips curve. Also, appreciated his work with savage. Didnāt love his political conclusions.
@GMLFle @NathanB60857242 He was very supportive of me. If I had to make a single choice it might be him or Samuelson.
This article is a stub. You can help us by editing this page and expanding it.