- Capability
- Motivation
- Linguistics
- Physical location
This is the most robust consilience of evidence of Satoshi anywhere on the internet.
218 karma · joined February 18, 2019
- Motivation
- Linguistics
- Physical location
This is the most robust consilience of evidence of Satoshi anywhere on the internet.
This is a proposal. You are welcome to propose another candidates. Now it up to open-minded people to rank all proposals by likelihood of being true.
"Writing a description for this thing for general audiences is bloody hard."
https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/thre...
"Bloody hell, I’m going to have to write a blog. Can’t fit this into tweets."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30131095
This might change when there is sufficient public will asking him to take credit.
Hacker News crowd, get smarter!
You guys are like clueless about so much of life!
Change this by taking the perspective of people who simultaneously build things and coordinate people!
Then onwards, Musk might continue denying because priorities are SpaceX and Tesla. This reason might essentially continue on to the present. So this explains the range 2013-2022.
Now in the present, what can change the situation is sufficient public knowledge that Musk invented Bitcoin and sufficient public will that asks Musk to take credit, with the understanding that taking credit for Bitcoin will unify the positive perception of Satoshi with Musk, and accelerate time to civ on Mars.
The evidence is now beyond reasonable doubt that Musk invented Bitcoin. Capability. Motivation. Linguistics. Plus the extraordinarily specific commonalities. C++ proficiency. Location in Van Nuys, Los Angeles. Fulfilling the Exact Paypal Dream.
For a quick rebuttal of the other candidates, Nick Szabo doesn't seem to code in C++, Len Sassaman was sincerely dismissive of Bitcoin, Hal Finney was not playing games emailing himself, and Craig Wright is what you say he is.
Sufficient public will asking Musk to take credit is what matters. Not sufficient public will to move coins lol. Sufficient public will asking Musk to take credit.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n-G_PUU25wjCwBfPjAbp77_r...
Perhaps the "dark matter" of a galaxy is the rest of the galaxies of the universe.
"lost" is what I would say the people pumping it are.
Therefore, learning from their experience, the one thing that works is accurately calling the status quo's invisible blobs of noninteracting kludge as what it is.
Like what is it? Something that has no activity on HackerNews for 15 months, then first thing it says is rude and false.
For people new to the Tully-Fisher relation, the essence of it is that at galactic scale, gravity is not like v^2/r = GM/r^2.
It's more like v^2/r ~ sqrt(GM/r^2), so v^4 ~ M
- I already was not surprised by the HackerNews crowd responding with hostility.
- I am pointing the HackerNews crowd to people who have studied this at a high level for a lifetime. Moti Milgrom. Stacy McGaugh. Pavel Kroupa.
- This article is actually a blow to bad journalism. This article is also an opportunity to call out that what "cold dark matter" is, is actually bad machine learning, where academics forcefit a new blob of invisible, noninteracting matter for every galaxy, which gives cold dark matter (CDM) no predictive power. Contrast with modified gravity (MOND), which models acceleration as sqrt(GM/R^2 * cH/(2pi)), which has predictive power.
McGaugh says the same here https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dark-matter-may-b....