I'm sorry about that. I used to like bitcoin, and I used to believe that it could have been good money. It turns out it isn't. But it is a great gambler's token, and it is a great reserve currency for unregulated sleazy big business (but not for the normal user, only for the big sleazy guys). This is why I don't like it. I think Satoshi created a monster, and that, together with a lot of technical clumsiness of the design, makes my have some doubts about him being Nash. But I'm not emotionally invested into this. In other words, when I see the work, I think it cannot be the work of a genius, or at most of a genius in a bad day. Simply because the result doesn't look very well constructed, not because it has something to do with my "world view". Bitcoin turned out to be clunky and quite ugly. If you think that a genius created something clunky and quite ugly, be my guest. I'm just pointing out that for a math genius, things don't add up, and I haven't seen any explanation of why it doesn't add up. Your "you are wrong" are not arguments, but just expressions of your un-argumented opinion.
To me still from the day I sensed bitcoin was not really moral or good currency in my standard lol
Only because it's based on reward and probability, and game theory, it's the kind of stuff to dance with the devil, and no matter how you think it's going to work out, it always lead to amorality .
Actually I hate the principle of game theory and probability math lol
I remember I read about this before, but i didn't make the connection before lol
But all the mathematics and economic theories always stem from philosophy or sociology deep down.
Game theories come from dumb philosophy theories. It's known since plato and the very inception of rationalism,idealism, mathematics, and republic / democracy that people who only fit on this model of reward and greed are opposite to idealism, intelectualism, and often are very short sighted regarding consequences. And will be anti law, anti morality, anti gov, anti anything that prevent them from maximum personal reward. Morality is always a constraint.
Now Nash was very aware of this, and I think his thinking is that it's possible to "game the game" , specially by exploiting this short sighted view and ignorance of long term to design system in sort to do some kind of jiu-jitsu with short sighted greed to trap them into acting in a certain manner for short sighted seek of reward, but the law if the game have other implications who turn the system into some equilibrium, even if all individuals are only thinking for themselves in short sighted view.
And there are things that can lead me to think btc is this kind of jiu-jitsu to game the game theory based on proba and tieing two logic together through the system of pow/reward/coin emission all tied together.
But to be sure, would need to do the maths lol need to find someone good with proba and algebra and market economy to put the equation together to see if some prectible behavior is supposed to emerge through some factor who is made to be kept constant in the equation, even if it's seemingly random and clumpsy.