Forgive me. I am guilty of first learning to understand “political motivation” and also essentially deceptive tactics. Although it is a subjective view to whoever espouses it, there is the possibility that balance in this regard is valuable. To see both sides in the face of an overwhelming opinion to only one that is mass adopted.
I came to bitcoin differently, and I realize completely now that I will always have an inability to explain the flash of insight I had when I realized what bitcoin could be for our civilization. I think some people have understood me from the beginning, and I truly expect many to more to follow as time goes by.
This change is happening now I believe, as many of us TRULY begin to understand the dangers, implications, and importance of the block-size debate. I think we are ready to understand something. I see my posts are gathering steam from confident and well-learned followers of the bitcoin movement.
I don’t wish to manipulate the voting process, but if you see this to be an intelligible post, I wish you to help levate the content, to those that might not yet fully understand what I mean to say and the incredible significance of the content.
Admittedly, I also must compress what I say, but rest assured, I have done my homework (citations and quotes on my blog), and I dare say I am the most knowledgeable person in the world right now on the subject of Ideal Money and its relation to bitcoin (even Satoshi won’t confront me publicly on this!).
Many people want to point out Ideal Money is not about bitcoin-they have missed the most significant point of their lifetimes. WHAT… does the lecture Ideal Money mean, in relation to bitcoin? Have we explored this? I want to explore it together.
In order to do so. In order to give Nash’s works the attention and awareness it so deserves, we have to at least make room for the possibility that there are SUPER-ORDINARY peoples in this world. Here is Hal Finney re: Nash: John Nash, proto-Extropian? John Nash, proto-Extropian: http://extropians.weidai.com/extropians.1Q02/3146.html
We have to make room for the possibility that the narration Nash gives about how Ideal Money will come about IS relevant TODAY.
I believe (this could be a mis-quote) that Nick Szabo suggested bitcoin will hit its true relevance in about thirty years (perhaps its been 7 already). Forgive me, but I don’t agree. He cannot have planned for the psychology of the people, which is exactly related to the phenomenon of Ideal Money.
This discussion is going to change, if not specifically because I will it to. We need to discuss, in bohmian dialogue, the validity and value of bitcoin as a settlement mechanism. And as we do so, the subject of what Ideal Money is will earn its proper place in the discussion. Put in Bohmian language: it must be “re-levated”.
The paper and lecture Ideal Money is the most significant works in the history of man. But it must be held up to the proper light in order to see this. It is an epilogue that will stand the test of time for many thousands of years I have no doubt. Ideal Money is an enthymeme for bitcoin. It is the cradle in which bitcoin as a settlement layer perfectly sits. Do we understand the significance of all this?
It reads very clearly for the general public it was written to, but you must also bring a clear mind, free from prejudice to see this.
I don’t know how he did it, but it doesn’t matter. Nash already had this argument with HIMSELF, the master of game theory, in various lectures and papers over a span of 20 years. Perhaps completely unbeknownst to Satoshi and the whole gang. It doesn’t matter.
Briefly put, Ideal Money is an asymptotic process that begins with the introduction of an international currency of comparable stable QUALITY. Beyond this the gravitation it brings especially in relation to the psychology of the people, we expect our money systems to naturally evolve to a money that is COMPARABLE to money that is stable in relation to a CONCEPTUAL ICPI.
I urge us to open the conversation, levate the subject of Ideal Money, and then turn towards Bohmian Dialogue, NOT “discussion” or “debate”, on the relevance of bitcoin to Nash’s works. But this takes incredible sincerity and open-mindedness. It takes co-ordination from those that know and are sincere.
Once we can approach this subject as a group then we will begin to understand how this man has furthermore revolutionized our understanding of Einsteins works on relativity (I have just as much to present on this as well): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3103618/Had-Beautiful-Mind-just-finest-work-Mathematician-Nash-told-friends-devised-equation-replace-Einstein-s-famous-theory-just-DAYS-died-car-crash.html
But with all the infighting, with all of the ignorance towards higher level order, I cannot by myself make these things relevant. They need special consideration and “re-levance”.
It took over 40 years for us to recognize when Nash revolutionized our economy and all sciences with his discoveries in his 20’s. Let us not wait so long this time, its already been 20. Hold Nash’s words up to the light, let us hold dialogue on what is re-levant:
>…this parallel makes it seem not implausible that a process of political evolution might lead to the expectation on the part of citizens in the “great democracies” that they should be better situated to be able to understand whatever will bet he monetary policies which, indeed, are typically of great importance to citizens who may have alternative options for where to place their “savings”.~John Forbes Nash, Ideal Money