Quote from: slaveforanunnak1 on September 11, 2014, 01:28:35 AM

I don't understand why most people dismiss the Shinichi Mochizuki connection so easily?

1. He is Japanese
2. He speaks perfect English since he moved to the US at age five and managed to graduate from fucking Princeton with a PhD at age 23 or 25 or whatever it was!
3. He likes to just leave brilliant paper on the internet and does not like going through proper channels (his abc conjecture papers)
4. He is so fucking brilliant that he has created his own mathematical framework in order to explain something that can't be understood using the existing tools.
5. Almost all of his papers found on his site start with "Abstract" and he uses the term "we" (just like the bitcoin paper) even though no one else really understand what the fuck he is talking about, but him !
6. The bulk of his work seem to revolve around.. you guess it, Elliptic curves!
7. He is not a computer programer, hence why the code was written fairly poorly. (but hey.. it worked!)

To me he seems like a prime candidate for Satoshi! To me, he seems so smart, that it's like he thought of the Blockchain while taking a shit and decided to spend a bit of time getting it going before he went back to his real love which is Mathematics and number theory. If anyone knew that secp256r1 was compromised, it would be that dude!

I've looked into them, not much on them but definitely seems real ha. Interesting tho another student from princeton, and I think they attended at age 16 so possibly wouldn't have gone unnoticed to faculty. I have zero concept of how big a university like that is though.

However I don't think the math is the same style as the bitcoin pdf. Bitcoin's solution is more of an elegant realization rather than a complex type of new math requiring years of verification. It would be fun to have some technical people respond, but isn't bitcoin, simply put, a product of raising the security bar in relation to the level of attacker? This is the whole equality that holds the structure together and creates this new technology isn't it? Once you organize computing in such a "highly parallel fashion" and put a perfectly impenetrable security scheme the resulting changes are just a natural result.

This is the exact mechanism described in letters Nash sent to the NSA:

Quote

The significance of this general conjecture, assuming its truth, is easy to see. It means that it is quite feasible to design ciphers that are effectively unbreakable.

And then we might consider that he tried to ascertain there knowledge on the subject, but the NSA likely knew he was "sniffing" and so effectively it was just a brag:

Quote

Also we should try to keep track of the progress of foreign nations towards unbreakable types of ciphers.

They wrote back and told him they already knew these things. I bet higher level peoples at NSA looked at each other and were like "He's good"

Watchin Ted Nelson's video naming Satoshi made me think he either knows he is wrong or hes not giving the full truth, I don't know if i am the only one with that feeling. My limited understanding of project xanadu is (if we haven't already implemented some or all of it) we should or are heading towards the visionary idea. So I would believe all are involved. But I am inclined to believe that one could have conceived this idea 50 years ago. Milton Friedman and Hayek both described a decentralized monetary system ran by computers. Nash was pointed towards Hayek by a collegue at princeton, Szabo references and praises Hayek a ton. Bitcoin is simply Austrian economics.

What's also interesting is that bitcoin.pdf was not so much the creation of bitcoin, but the "lighting" of a beacon that called all like minded peoples through anonymous chat group links on dai's website. So since 2009 (and obviously well before) like minded people have been flocking to an anonymous conversation orchestrated by whomever is (or multiple people) Satoshi. I wonder if we all agree then that most or all intelligence agencies were involved. And so in an intelligence battle with (at that time) someone they hadn't identified yet were eventually incredibly interested in. Keep in mind this was crucial to be secret but seemingly only until it took hold in society.

But it means that it is very possible "satoshi" or "szabo" was able to use "intelligence" as "assets" by using the internet in a sideways fashion. All of the confusion you see, is because its the only way around the barriers. And what's probably amazing is it was probably ALL perfectly LEGAL. But its all incredibly interesting, I don't tend to enjoy "conspiracy" theories and stories, but for all I can understand this is all truth and reality Wink

Think about what you would do if you have the bitcoin whitepaper in 2009, 2000, 1995, 1960, 1950 (obviously at this point only the rough concept would be presentable). Think about how much people who don't understand bitcoin naturally dislike it. How many people say its a scam and don't understand real money is a scam. We didn't truly know this until "Satoshi" yet one man said 20 years ago:

Quote

"Keynesian" economists, have sold to the public a "quasi-doctrine" which teaches, in effect, that "less is more" or that (in other words) "bad money is better than good money".

Those words were gibberish to everyone back then but they ring perfectly clear now. We now know about good money and bad money, and understand the importance of stable printing schedules and we are talking about what we expect out of "money"

You can't just walk into society and present bitcoin because they will chase you with torches and pitchforks. We ALL had SEE bitcoin and use it WELL before we could ever talk about what it actually is. And I hope we are interested in this conversation because what it is, is something far beyond a change in our financial system and something to bring wealth to the world. There is so much more, I'm afraid I don't present it in an agreeable fashion though, but I also believe we are conditioned not to accept such drastic change.