Quote

So you are saying you can win just by looking at the image? You can look at the image you posted and find it?

And OP's reply:

Quote

Absolutely.

So just by looking at the picture one should be able to solve, according the OP.

I must confess that something doesn't seem right. The solution cannot be rationally found just by looking at the picture.

Ambiguity is the word. Clearly the OP doesn't realize how much ambiguity is in this puzzle.

I can start pretty much anywhere but let's take a closer look at some of the given clues - they might as well have never been mentioned since they cannot avoid the overwhelming ambiguity.

OP won't believe me when I mention ambiguous clues. This is a normal cognitive reaction, since my position seems equivalent to someone incapable of solving the puzzle. But not quite. That WOULD have been my position, IF the puzzle wasn't broken by the incredible amount of ambiguity.

There is no ill intention here from the OP. He simply did not realized he gave ambiguous clues.

Here is just one proof of ambiguity - I have at least a dozen.

One of the given clues was:

Code:

lost transaction costs almost users

Another clue was:

Code:

00212121

And another clue was:

Code:

Think in pairs

The words transaction costs, just like they were given in the clue one next to each other, do not coexist within the puzzle. But they can be found in the original Satoshi paper, as a nice little pair, one next to each other.

Where?

Count exactly 21 lines of text when you include the title and you will find them. 21 lines of text!

https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

However, since we are only supposed to look at the picture, as stated by the OP, the fact that the two words from one clue are found on line 21, or the fact that the words appear as a pair in the same paper should not be followed as the correct way to progress. It is simply a coincidence translated here as ambiguity.

If it's not a coincidence, then the OP made a mistake when he confirmed that simply looking at the image is enough to find the solution.

Again, this is based on everything the OP has stated so far.

Finally, I would like to make one more remark.

Neuroscience is teaching us about the limited field of expectations when it comes to human actions, and it can be calculated using probabilistic tools with a fair amount of accuracy. See 'Superforecasting' by Tetlock and Gardner or Daniel Kahneman's work.

After the reddedit post was closed due to inactivity, one expectation was that the OP will start a new post, orderly state the valid given clues, and perhaps give a new hint since those already offered failed to achieve their purpose.

clue = helpful

But almost three months past and there is really no reasonable explanation for this silence.

People spend their time for something like this so there is a certain responsibility that comes with the action of initiating such a project.

And the common argument 'if you don't like it, do something else', is extremely weak. It does not remove whatsoever the social norm of 'assuming the responsibly for your actions'.