Quote from: TheMage on June 20, 2016, 11:37:19 PM

If this is certainty true, this "attacker" is pretty brilliant. Not that I encourage it, but he is playing game theory fairly well.

Also do you know who he is? You stated in a previous post you know him.

Mircea Popescu (aka MPOE, MP, or MPeX) is brilliant:

Quote from: JohnnyBTCSeed on June 19, 2016, 02:55:23 PM

VS

Fight!!!!

Quote from: yefi on June 19, 2016, 03:13:08 AM

Judging by this, the maverick Mircea Popescu seems to be taking credit:

http://trilema.com/2016/to-the-dao-and-the-ethereum-community-fuck-you/

Quote from: AnonyMint on March 19, 2014, 01:38:59 AM

Quote from: MPOE-PR on March 18, 2014, 12:09:46 PM

Quoth MP:

Quote

Bitcoin is a sovereign. Accepting this matter of fact is a sine qua non prerequisite for playing. No exceptions.

Please tell me why the next G20 meeting can't address this email exchange as a serious threat to their collective authority and resolve to make necessary decrees from the EU to provide the necessary legal authority to prosecute MPOE.

Also MPOE you are taking a huge personal risk here. You better not have the slightest mistake as they might find it easier to take you down with a trumped up charge.

If all else fails, a fiery car accident.

I admire people with balls but combined with some basic common sense. It does me no good to associate with people who are so careless so as to actively seek their own destruction.

You seem to feel very indignant about this and have the sort of Paul Revere attitude of "give me liberty or give me death".

I just think there are much smarter ways of fighting than out in the open. The quality of ones weapons and strategy determines if they are the victor, not the quality of resolve alone.

The Apaches were never defeated because they didn't fight in the open:

http://www.starfishandspider.com/preview/02.html

I think you would have been much better served to have replied that you need to be legally indemnified before releasing private data. That is all you needed to say. You talk too much. Although you are articulate, you are clearly not an attorney and you should hire one immediately and STFU.

Note I was banned from tortilla's new forum cryptocrypt.org for essentially stating the prior paragraph.

Edit: essentially you are doing political grandstanding. You can't beat society at its own game. Politics is not the successful strategy.

Above "tortilla" was rpietila.

Below I found "MPeX" trying to prove P ≠ NP:

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on December 15, 2015, 05:07:51 PM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on December 15, 2015, 10:02:38 AM

I still believe there is some insight to gleem from the observation (conjecture or proven?) that converting deterministic intractable problems into tractable problems makes them nondeterministic and unbounded in entropy, but I am not seeing yet how to frame it in a way that proves anything. Perhaps proving that the conversion must be unbounded would prove P ≠ NP. I need to contemplate that.

On proving P ≠ NP, I do not understand why it can't be proven that the algorithmic Kolmogorov complexity of the "traveling salesman problem" is at least O(n²(2ⁿ-n-1)), i.e. an exponential lower bound, which is just below the O(n²2ⁿ) of Held-Karp algorithm which is the best known algorithm Huh

My logic is so simple, that I must be missing something.

At best the algorithm can cache so optimal computation of each grouping of cities will only be computed once (i.e. the number of unique times), by Reed's law we get 2ⁿ-n-1 groupings of cities. And for the first leg of the path possibilities, Metcalf's law tells us there are n² possible unique links between cities.

Afaics, it is definitionally impossible to compute at fewer algorithmic steps than the Kolmogorov complexity, because that is the minimum information content of the algorithm, i.e. the entropy.

Even if we applied some heuristic such as grouping cities in clusters, this would not be an absolute assurance of the optimum path. There is no way to get the assurance while reducing the deterministic algorithm complexity below the Kolmogorov complexity.

Since this algorithm is NP-hard and the related NP-complete problem can be reduced to it, then every problem in NP has the same lower bound. The Independent Set on a planar graph is listed an exception of NP-complete problems being EXP, but this is for edges of the graph that can't intersect, which obviously the "traveling salesman problem" can't be reduced to without some exponential blowup remapping because the links between cities can overlap.

All the NP-hard (and NP-complete reduced on them) problems revolve around exhaustively searching an exponential set of unique possibilities for an optimum. The Kolmogorov complexity can't be reduced to polynomial, because there can't exist a short-cut that destroys information and still is optimum. Once the computation is below the threshold of the Kolmogorov complexity, the result can't be deterministically optimum.

Here is a nearly duplicate proof, but he fails to multiply by n².

One of the similar attempts at a proof I've seen is this one which also attempts to prove a lower bound of the algorithmic complexity. And in his 2014 update, he mentions Kolmogorov complexity as the justification.

Another paper on quick glance appears to try to prove all NP-complete problems are a clustering problem that can't be solved in polynomial time.

This is very well written.

P.S. I was amazed to stumble onto an attempted proof by our very own cohort MPex.

Edit: A possible reason my idea about doesn't work in a proof, from the researcher who discovered the NP complexity class:

...

Quote from: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 11:58:26 AM

Quote from: Natoliant on June 19, 2016, 11:51:18 AM

If the "attacker" exposes him/herself and he/she is in the US as he said in the open letter, I think he could be sent to prison for the hacking with bad intent.

MP is the person who drained the DAO. Did you read my post above where I wrote to verify the Keccak hash?

MP is the antithesis of Craig Wright. He does not bullshit. MP is the one who did this. He is surely capable of it.

Trivial factoid: MP and rpietila were enemies since before 2013. And in 2013, MP sent AnonyMint a private message offering collaboration.

AnonyMint has grown to respect MP as a maverick peer, and in some respects in awe of MP. MP's support of Blockstream could end up causing a conflict between MP and AnonyMint at some point in the near future. Grin

Titans will do battle. Prepare your cupboard supply of popcorn.

I am confused by MP's support of Blockstream, because I thought he was for small blocks and was willing to kill XT to defend the status quo (i.e. Classic):

Quote from: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/exclusive-full-interview-transcript-alleged-dao-attacker/

DA: The people behind ethereum are deceptive, for example everyone with a clue (Adam Back, Gregory Maxwell) knows that there is 0% chance for CASPER proof of stake to work, but yet they advertise it.

Note TPTB_need_war was the first person pointing out that Casper wouldn't work in the Ethereum Paradox thread and also on Reddit. Yet MP gives Blockstream credit for TPTB's research. Angry