IBM’s Game Theory — Financial Revolution
IBM created both Bitcoin and Ethereum with Nick Szabo (& I’m pumped)
(Note: My 42nd and probably my last story here. Not much else say when I’m done but this is only about halfway through. Just hoping someone sees it and takes a chance on a good investment.)
Note: Here is an actual test of the reorganization I have described from 2014 and it was done by ABE on the testnets.
Article Intro:
I don’t even believe that dates even matter much to me anymore. When came where and why or how. The reason has a lot to do with understanding someone and how they operate. If they leave enough literature out there for me to read, as a research graduate, I tend to figure the gist of things out. This is my first experience with open source projects, but I am so glad I don’t listen to anyone but myself when it comes to financial advice. The reasons here apply as follows:
- I can figure out someones end game or at least their honest intentions pretty quickly in person, but I have developed the ability to do it from hard facts gathered from all over the internet. I’m proud of that.
- Making something abstract only seems to attract me further towards it and I don’t know why. I go with my intuition and follow up by studying the facts of the matter.
I am honestly beyond excited for the future being built. First off, I will just let you know the bulletpoints of what I know:
- Nick Szabo came up with the idea for Smart Contracts, but he also played his part in launching what would become both Bitcoin and Ethereum in the present day. IBM likely worked with Szabo in the 1990’s before launching their first POW (Hashcash) and RPOW (by Hal Finney) in the early parts of the millennium.
- “Mark S. Miller” who I also have seen called Mark Metson on the Devcoin Github, wrote a paper in 2000 that describes a lot of things he has done in his time as “markm” on bitcointalk.org. He gives special thanks to Nick Szabo at the end of the paper I am going to review here today, Capability based Financial Instruments.
- Nick Szabo’s Theory of Collectibles and the Devtome Wiki have huge parallels in their message. Covering things like shell money, scrip, and value being built over time. Finney explains in his World of RPOW website how it would take a long time for RPOW to become valuable and mentions things about servers crashing, but still coming back online. He gives a classic inform and disinform approach to let you decide by evaluating for yourself — that’s a huge part of “Game Theory” and it’s also described by markm in the Capability based Financial Instruments paper from 2000.
- RPOW incorporated Hashcash and Hashcash became Bitcoin’s preferred POW — yet Hal Finney was the first “dev” that ever debugged the software for Satoshi. The interesting part to me is that it seemed less like Satoshi actually existed, and even less like Hal existed as I read more of their interactions. They had sourcefourge posts where they would post a day early about a problem they had when I saw the data on the logs came a day later. The genesis block is obscured by not knowing if it did happen in 2008 by that one debug log, but if it did it seems like it would’ve been Hal. The genesis block connects to the prev hash which is an empty string of zeros representing the epoch.
- Hal Finney used IBM 4758 co-processing units for RPOW which to me represented something that will “co-process” dual chains, a so called alternate bitcoin chain that is clearly Devcoin after all the data I’ve show in: minting bitcoins and having script to call back the funds most likely with similar RSA-4096 keys like these. The debug log I found for Devcoin shows it exists on blk00000.dat and the first instance of a description for that is in Bitcoin ABE (more on that later). Just know that 4096*4096 is equal to 0x1000000 which the debug from Devcoin genesis says it was “pre-allocating” and somehow Devcoin already had 32.000022 in log-base2 POW. The 0x1000000 is important because it’s decimal equivalent to 16777216 ( 2²⁴). We are talking about value in bits and that explains why everything allocated up to Devcoin genesis being debugged makes up what you can format into all 16,777,216 (R, G, B) colors — which I discuss later.
- Devcoin exists in a token/coin state. It’s pegged to a recyclable type function in that it has POW from being a coin yet it can transform into tokens. It has created its own alternate blockchain and it even tokenized that. The reason why record doesn’t exist many places for its block 0 is tied to Bitcoin ABE protocol. Once something is hardcoded to the chain it doesn’t need to exist there. Currently Devcoin mints a lot of Bitcoin’s raw blocks. That was something ABE also implemented by not getting tx’s from raw transactions, but from the block itself. I will discuss that more as well. Why it ties back to Devcoin, how ABE went to Ethereum, how ABC’s Copernicus is going to help us come back, and why Ethereum Foundation gave 15,000 to ETC “OTC” — or even had ETC to begin with. It’s very connected. Even Satoshi’s Vision should really bring about the actual vision. Everything interesting with POW that I discussed in my last two entries happened in November in various years. Even early blocks were received elsewhere showing they weren’t confirmed for 5 years (2009-Nov. 2014). That is called abstraction and game theory and my review of markm’s paper will cover that process.
- Devcoin and ABE share a start (the blk.dat file is 00000 to begin the filing for ABE) and I am sure ABE has configured as such while hardcoding and removing different genesis blocks and information that was set since 2011. ABE is under the GNU license like Ethereum and it even has a coin called “Bitlieu” which was changed to be measured with 6 decimals. It could just be a set of blocks that were to be written later with Devcoin’s own data.
- Because Nick Szabo and markm are connected through “E” which is money, I tied that to Satoshi who credited Hal with E-money in Duality and knew that wasn’t quite true. I knew of B-Money and Nick Szabo made smart contracts, but then I found the link for markm’s website where he goes by Mark S. Miller and has all of his previous published work that you can find on Satoshi Nakamoto Institute’s research section. There he credits Szabo for smart contracts proving a tie again and explains a money unit called “E” which is linked here. That link provides what looks a raw ether script for a smart contract.
- DevCoin’s use as a 1.00000000 measure for everything converting through decimal to tonal. It is an exact conversion at the moment in current sValue around 655360 to Bitcoin. Because Devcoin is only changed two decimal places we need to divide the price by 10 to get one true Tonal Bitcoin, worth 65536 satoshis. If DVC is worth 10*65536 when adjusted to the current market it explains why they chose 65536 as the measure for 1 TBC — it is a divisor for 16777216. The value of the future is in both time, bits, and processing (colors). Proof of work is tied in more ways than one would think. And remember, the 4096 RSA keys from RPOW can unwind the whole formula before Web 3.0 arrives. The smart contract executes with the right keys and we see the grand plan unfold. However because of the Y2K38 problem, you will see many things going forward in Python 3, which fixes the integer overflow problem and happens to be what the Web 3.0 is building on. You can’t build a financial store of value only to have it disappear in a Y2K38 event.
- Devcoin’s value is almost approximate at Galactic Milieu, but I also want to tie mark to IBM with all of the overlaps between himself, his paper I am trying to get to explaining eventually, and through Devcoin’s connection to RPOW, POW, Bitcoin, and use of IBM products. Finney used the IBM 4758 and Bitcoin ABE uses IBM DB 2 databases and lambda calculus in it’s code. It also mentions use of switching to Python 3. Markm’s paper in 2000 explains: “E blends the lambda calculus, capability security, and modern cryptography.”
- The paper also discusses using E for the stock market amongst other assets. I am sure if IBM wanted to start an online form of currency as well as put up their own stock (which would be involved in making machines for the operation), they could find others at the Linux Foundation to get involved too — and then some. The format “pluribusunum” from Devcoin’s receiver files is in the 2000 paper too, as “E pluribusunum” and perhaps that’s because the uniting of worlds through Devcoin, RPOW, IBM, and a dual state is the truth. Also if I was wrong, consider this. Who would keep rates going on a “dead coin” and coins that have never been heard of (explained yesterday they are OTC investments)? I’m talking about the Galactic Milieu (by markm). Who would do that? And its so detailed if you can find your way to the other monthly updates. Takes some good computing and record keeping. The Galactic Milieu is Bitcoin ABE, Devcoin’s debugging, Finney, POW and RPOW, Nick Szabo, MarkM, Adam Back, Blockstream, Bitcoin Core devs like Luke Jr., and leads back to IBM.
- This link explains why Devcoin has the WWA1961 reference in its repo, which explains why MOAC has a reference decoded to the ARPANET1969 at its block 0 at the epoch it shares with Ethereum Classic. All of it is connected through Cloudflare as well via Block Explorer. Not to mention by method of OTC investment Ethereum just set back its own block 0 to the epoch as well — joining Ethereum Classic. I have no doubts DARPA money in $USD is an asset that is invested in the entire Bitcoin/Ethereum ecosystem. IBM is partnered with Stellar. No joke that’s the next distributed ledger and also why markm issues “assets” in DVC and other coins on the Galactic Milieu through “Horizon” and “Stellar”(you should buy some if you haven’t). Devcoin has a large bounty for a Rocket at devcoin.org. It makes plenty of sense.
- If you don’t believe me, try to explain why Devcoin’s early block explorers were ported to the same place as Bitcoin ABE’s IBM Database 2 (2750). Also, ABE probably uses the same “DataStrore” file as RPOW. But you can find that yourself.
- Cupertino with an “abstract” company could mean this includes Apple from the start.
Capability-based Financial Instruments: “E”
I’d like to get out of the way the fact that this is “E” and uses smart contracts. Here’s what sample code for “E” as money looks like:
It also looks like escrow does it not? You will recall that DevCoin had its own escrow service early on as I explained that is the process by which it achieves embedded value through Theory of Collectibles, by Nick Szabo. Then I explained today how ABE was tied to Devcoin and Ethereum via genesis blocks even though Devcoin had it’s block hardcoded and stored in a “DataStore” which is the same name Hal Finney used to describe the file in RPOW. Well, in this DataStore, on a shared port 2750, that both Devcoin and ABE have used is not only an updated RPOW on an “IBM DB 2” machine, but also what escrow from 2000’s “E” Money looks like in Python today:
The paper states the three types of things that encompass Bitcoin and its derivatives today in the year 2000:
objects have been strong on abstraction and composition,
operating systems have been strong on providing a shared platform in which disparate processes can interact without being able to damage one another, even if they contain malicious code, and
financial cryptography has been strong on cooperative protocols allowing mutually suspicious parties to trade a diversity of rights in the absence of a mutually-trusted platform.
This is much of the way Bitcoin works today. It’s about to all become interconnected through Devcoin’s connection to the timechain (using RPOW). Even in Duality, Satoshi writes how RSA was too large to work at the time:
It’s also just a hint/abstraction at what really happened by delaying “RPOW” but still if you read it — you might have it all click and make a great investment. Markm explains the problem in 2000:
Unfortunately, each has been weak in the areas where the other two are strong. By bridging the intuitions of these communities, we can engineer systems with the strengths of all three. The bridge described in this paper is based on a joint appreciation, across all three communities, of a common abstraction, the Granovetter Diagram.
The solution ultimately came in Math, Cryptography, and C++ according to Satoshi in Duality. However I have described here how it goes beyond that. Still, lets take a look at the diagram markm mentions:
In 2000, these were the objectives for the people who make crypto work to this very day:
I will get to each of these areas, but below the six perspectives of this “abstraction” the mission is announced:
We are building the E system [11] to unify these perspectives. E is a simple, secure, distributed, pure-object, persistent programming language. E blends the lambda calculus, capability security, and modern cryptography. In integrating these diverse features, E brings the diverse virtues of the Granovetter Operator to life.
First lets go to the use of lambda calculus and just tied Bitcoin ABE to both Devcoin and Ethereum right now:
Also I’d like to point out the lambda calculus is used to start page 200, which is for a connection to BTC block 200. Here is the actual BTC Block 200 transaction where ABE has a python file ready to go:
Check me if you’d like: 2b1f06c2401d3b49a33c3f5ad5864c0bc70044c4068f9174546f3cfc1887d5ba
The process of starting different coins, chains, or marking a future checkpoint to come back to works like this. The eventual order of the universe is playing out in the many ways I have described in previous articles. Make a branch point, start a new block, and use hardcoding on Devcoin’s blk00000.dat file before putting it in a database called “IBM DB 2" at the same port 2750 that Devcoin’s early explorer ran off :
I am sure this port was used locally many places. However, the goal is to run Global like Devcoin already does at port 52333. When everything does it will be when IBM and all who cooperated in this abstract project have in mind. It’s amazing that ABE carried out the same AuxPow that Devcoin is the parent of as well, but why wouldn’t it. In the end everything is together as one. It had to be consistent as it all was initially constructed.
The same database is carefully filed away/hardcoded:
Bitcoin ABE last hardcoded the pre-alpha and January 3, 2009 Block 0’s which are written to blk0001.dat together as I wrote about the last two articles:
Back to 2000, here is the Six Objectives explained in the paper:
Objects. The Granovetter Diagram shows the computation step fundamental to all object computation: the “message send” (in Smalltalk terminology) or the “virtual member function call” (in C++ terminology). Alice, Bob, and Carol are three objects. In the initial conditions, Alice holds a reference to (points at, has access to) Bob and Carol. Dynamically, we see that Alice is sending a foo message to (calling the foo member function of) Bob, in which a parameter of the message (call) is a copy of Alice’s reference (pointer, access) to Carol. For conciseness, we will refer to this computation step as the Granovetter Operator. Object-oriented message passing, along with encapsulation and polymorphism, enables modular programming. By designing the interfaces between modules on a need-to-know basis, we satisfy the principle of information hiding [28] that is the basis of much important software engineering theory and practice.
This is exactly what has played out today, they even pegged C++ as the language to begin from back in 2000. They keep copies of messages and use others as a pointer (like witnesses). The interfaces are only what you need to know, meaning nobody is going to go right out and say anything like I do at any point. This is to keep things secure and as the software is open-sourced they aren’t going to give away any information directly. It’s abstract and up for you to figure out. I want to define abstraction before moving forward:
Which is exactly what this first objective just said. This is how crypto is developed and will run in the future as a seamless network. You might wonder if IBM is behind “Techopedia” with a definition so identical. There’s more:
The encapsulation and polymorphism concept is word for word in the first objective quoted above. For inheritance, I will quote Nick Szabo’s Theory of Collectibles:
Kin also benefited from timely and peaceful gifts of wealth by inheritance. The major human life events that modern cultures segregate from the world of trade benefited no less than trade, and sometimes more so, from techniques that lowered transaction costs. None of these techniques was more effective, important, or early than primitive money — collectibles.
Now lets go a step further and intertwine Szabo’s description of shell currency (token currency) with others:
The American language of shell money became a quaint holdover — “a hundred clams” became “a hundred dollars”. “Shelling out” came to mean paying in coins or bills, and eventually by check or credit card.[D94] Little did we know that we had touched the very origins of our species.
Also add to the above with the mention of scrip as token money from Devtome.com:
Token currency is issued by private issuers and communities and has been used centuries. It is used more often in depressions when there is a lack of debt money.Token currencies include the Colonial Scrip, Time Bank, Christiania Coin, Ithaca Hours, and Worgl Schillings.
I covered an unknown named Andrew Dunstan two articles back because he started a project for a widely used PostGreSQL database that would be great to use for a decentralized economy. ABE has PostgreSQL. I also mentioned Andrew Dunstan named his database Build Farm and how that was on the genesis block for iXcoin but missing a timestamp with a quote by Stephen Molyneux — “to see the farm is to leave it” and that’s all tied in with the fact that Andrew Dunstant has attended Sharding Conferences with a guy named Satoshi N.! But I think that the two quotes of token money above really seals the deal:
Andrew mentions Bitcoins in addition to all of the forms of “collectibles” Szabo wrote about in his theory but would you just look at the color of those beads?
Because color, is not only the final block being worked up to/back to at 0x1000000:
Color is THE final block before the theory of “everything” finishes building the future:
So I hope you understand where Bitcoin’s get their value. Where “E” came from. It solved security issues by monetizing UNIX time in bits as well, because those hexadecimal coded colors can fit on these UNIX box, “blocks”:
And you can see why the E8 Theory of Everything is talked about and why a developer building a “Bitcoin OS” is very into quantum computing, the delta symbol, or why his website is a reference to Web 3.0 and Python (or why ABE uses Python):
And that’s why this is all true:
Might as well point out that Luke Dash Jr. made the tonal conversion that will be used for the rates markm provides on Galactic Milieu to see what a base price will be through Devcoin, for the future of “E” as well as how he implemented it all since with Devcoin and Bitcoin, etc… Luke’s client that runs tonal numbers is Bitcoin Knots (see above markm uses the knot). Markm also lists assets on this website:
http://makemoney.knotwork.com/horizon/assets/hzgrow/
http://makemoney.knotwork.com/stellar/
Where you can find assets listed on both Horizon and Stellar. The goal is for things to look simple and ABSTRACT.
My last two articles cover Andrew Dunstan and the fact markm’s Galactic Milieu is actually a vehicle for combining money to be made in open source coding, opportunity for all to figure it out like me, as well as OTC institutional grade investors. Read them both.
You can read about Andrew Dunstan on the bottom of this article:
BACK TO THE 2000 PAPER THAT IS AT THE BASE OF IT ALL:
Objective 2 is security, I will just quote it:
Capability Security. The Granovetter Operator becomes a security primitive given the following constraint: If Bob does not already have a reference to Carol, Bob can only come to have a reference to Carol if a third party, such as Alice, • already has a reference to Carol, and • already has a reference to Bob, and • voluntarily decides to share with Bob her reference to Carol.
Objective 3 is Cryptographic Protocol
Imagine now that Alice, Bob, and Carol are objects residing on three separate machines on a computer network. Distributed object systems, such as CORBA [5] and RMI [42], provide for the diagrammed message send to proceed over the network, while preserving the core semantics of the object computation model. However, these are cooperative protocols, in that they rely on the assumption that the machines involved are correctly cooperating. By contrast, a cryptographic protocol implementing the Granovetter Operator must also preserve the semantics of the capability model, including the prohibitions, in the presence of mutually suspicious objects residing on mutually suspicious machines. We briefly explain Pluribus, E’s cryptographic capability protocol, turning E into a securely distributed language. In section 4.4 we examine how the money example (from section 3.4) transparently distributes by showing how Pluribus automatically maps the pieces of the example to stock cryptographic-protocol elements.
This is IMPORTANT to understand. This is why Devcoin has “receiver files”.. the address which they disburse “shares”…. These are tied to the value of all the assets I linked to on Galactic Milieu that he’s already listed on STELLAR and Horizon… Take a look:
First of all, I have explained how this is all tied back to DARPA and the US Dollars/IBM collaboration that went into the making of the arpanet. I can’t explain again my hands are tired. Please find that article. Also there are the lists right there for all of the investors in this project as well as a way to send money correctly back through all checkpoints. Most of all, it’s all pre-calculated. That’s how easy of a call it is to invest in these coins right now from v1 merge mining — especially Devcoin, “ETH”, “E”…
Objective 4 Public Key Infrastructure
Some PKIs, like SPKI (the Simple Public Key Infrastructure [13]), interpret digital certificates primarily as statements authorizing the players to perform various actions on various resources. In the Granovetter Diagram, the message arrow foo can be seen as such a certificate, signed by Alice, stating that Bob has the authority to perform the action represented by Carol. This certificate is meaningful if and only if there is a similar certificate granting Alice this right, and so on, back to the creator/owner of Carol. Should Bob choose to exercise this authority, he would present the certificate-chain (or its logical equivalent) as proof that he has received this authorization. The enforceable subset of SPKI can be seen as an off-line, auditable, heavyweight, non-confinable, semi-capability system, with interesting contrasts to E’s on-line, repudiatable-by-default, lightweight, confinable, full-capability system.
Ready for another bomb, this is where I tie this to Hal Finney, RPOW, and IBM > all the way back to markm and Devcoin/Merge Mining. He suggested SPKI to Hal Finney in 2001:
There’s also Adam Back’s POW. Hashcash is adopted into RPOW, just as inspired by BitGold (Nick Szabo) and embedded value. I’ve written much about that the last three entries. However, this is about markm being the glue in all this through Devcoin but first from “E”.
Adam Back stopped upstream Hashcash merging indicating his newly released shell files 1.0.0.sh and 0.01.sh (which match the first two genesis block releases) — were marked for “pre-release” on November 14, 2016. The interesting part is he makes no mention of uploading the files and they are still market “old” for some reason even though the bar above says they are from that day.
Devcoin is already good to go. No need for fancy updates, thats part of abstraction. The “simple bitcoin” would move forward as the pre-release with POW and 1.0.0.sh to perform (as described in Back’s update): Unset TZ (which works well with all the python upgrades and transition from UNIX timestamps) & “FASTMINT_LIBRARY” …
This Hashcash POW upgrades are to bring up the maxcoin supply to its intended total faster than we all were told. That’s because you could’ve found the truth and verified it yourself. “Simple Bitcoin” matches front end type script from Devcoin’s early days and uses Hashcash upgraded, front end-POW on finalizing Bitcoin POW (Simple Bitcoin repo here). I’m willing to bet November will be another year of change, but a flipping over of the universe nobody expects. The fundamentals are all there.
A side note, Ravencoin Protocol is dated back to 2009 on Github and seems relevant in what its real function is. The developers are fun in the way they play the game sometimes (maybe they’re why Twitter’s CEO is so bullish):
35% say it is “because of chaos” and I agree. It’s called entropy, which is dynamic. And in a dynamic, global state, of chaos — DevCoin wins.
Objective 5 Game Rules
During a player’s turn in a board game, the state of the board constrains what moves that player may make. From these possible moves, the player chooses a particular move, which changes the board and thereby alters the moves then available to the other players. Recall the three conditions needed for Bob to receive a reference to Carol from Alice. The first two conditions are constraints on the possible moves available to Alice (and so correspond to mandatory security). The third condition is that Alice must choose to make this move (and so corresponds to discretionary security). If Alice actually does choose to make this move, she thereby changes the moves available to Bob — afterwards Bob may both send messages to Carol and send messages to yet other parties introducing Carol to them, whereas previously he could not.
Okay this is about state confining everyone to the way things are now. I can’t send Devcoin to Ethereum yet. However, there are scripts I covered out there that will allow me to receive escrow value as a Devcoin holder on Bitcoin. I showed how some show a little information on Blockchain.com, with more updated information usually at Blockcypher, including updated dates of confirmation years from when they were relayed first. That’s two moves on that contract script to send money escrowed from Devcoin raw blocks, to Bitcoin raw transactions, and back to Devcoin. Alice is the one who must let go and sign off on the escrow. If she (say, Craig Wright tries to hijack core as a “bad guy” in this game)but all the hash power in trying fork the chain wakes up Bob (or an RPOW IBM 4758 with power problems) wakes up and uses it to make a ton of executions on scripts allowing a completely dual-state. Yeah, probably gonna happen. Finney’s code says his co-processors need power and guess who will try to use power in a fake attempt to win the game? Craight Wright, Roger Ver — Idk (he’s just an actor in it even if he’s involved). I don’t care I’m just taking you through the Game Theory. It still makes me wonder how so many people believe in one Satoshi and all the anarchy crap.
Attempts to formalize the semantics of computation, including secure computation, have failed to capture the core intuitions of computer security practitioners. Fundamental to these intuitions is the notion of mutually suspicious, separately interested agents, interacting within a framework of rules, under constraints of partial knowledge, each in order to pursue their own interests. The formal tools for capturing such intuitions are to be found in non-zero-sum, partial-information game theory [33]. The Granovetter Diagram expresses the core game-rule governing secure capability based distributed multi-agent computation, viewed as a vast multi-player game. We have yet to exploit this perspective in order to apply game theory to computation in this manner, but we hope this explanation may point the way. We do not explore the game perspective further in this paper.
This is just indicating the purpose of merge mining was to abstract Bitcoin. It abstracted Ethereum, everything. I only picked up on it after months of research. There’s witnesses in script embedded in merge mined chains. You can see how they are listed on Horizon already in the link I gave earlier (I0C, IXC, DVC, etc).
Objective 6 Financial Bearer Instruments
If Carol provides a useful service, then the ability to send messages to Carol may be a useful right. Perhaps Carol answers questions from a store of knowledge that she alone is privy to. Perhaps she can affect some aspect of the external world, such as pixels on a display or the cash dispenser of an automated teller machine. Any secure system of electronic rights must solve at least three problems:
• How to represent who currently has what rights.
• How to enable rights holders to exercise those rights they have, and no more.
• How to enable rights holders to securely transfer these rights. The static reference relationships among objects exactly represent who currently has what rights. Since a right is exercised by sending a message to an object that embodies the right, such as Carol, the rule that you can send a message to any object you have a reference to, but no others, provides for the exercise of those rights you have, and no others. Finally, the transition shown on the Granovetter Diagram is both the secure transfer to Bob of the right to pass messages to Carol, as well as the exercise, by Alice, of whatever right Bob may represent.
Some other sections to cover:
1 The remaining feature often thought to be defining of object-oriented programming is inheritance. Though we do not view inheritance as a fundamental ingredient of object computation, its widespread use in object-oriented programming practice motivates its inclusion in E. However, E’s reconciliation of inheritance with capability security principles [26] is beyond the scope of this paper.
The facts above are why so many distractions were presented while switching from the first merge mined coin the whole time. We aren’t talking about hiding crypto to pull a fast one on people and say “oh that’s Ethereum now!” or hey “there’s the true Bitcoin hah!” — we are talking about the platform to build the future security of all financial transactions and that includes centralized institutions as well (sorry Mr. Anarchist-crypto guy). We had to have something like block chain not just to scale the internet. Think simple economics. Then I will tell you that there was a problem block chain solves through shifting from a UNIX based time system to Python language and Linux software so that integer overflow problems wouldn’t wreak hell on the world economy. I heard people mention time to time about the prospects of a worldwide depression if the internet crashed because it ran out of places for storage (which block chain fixes). I heard that without scaling energy would be drained from the metropolis, but I didn’t fear it. Yet, the passing thought of “thank God people like MarkM and Nick Szabo figured out things like this” - the financial ecosystem could’ve crashed because of a stupid integer overflow problem… and then people would’ve seen the first world wide depression. So when they write about altruism I pick up on it. I appreciate altruistic people who don’t have to give a shit about a guy like me. We don’t appreciate our leaders that work like the daemon behind the scenes for decades trying to fix a problem just so humanity can continue on a tech-enhanced life. We don’t understand, but we should care.
Moving on…
Inheritance is a reward for being early in on crypto, but also putting your money in the right spot. I know as I write I have seen no return but I am certain that I will. I know I will. That’s the beauty of understanding open source code, white papers, journals, everything people could’ve kept from you and I. I saw an opportunity to know. Here is an opportunity I have taken to share. You put your money into a coin that was “dead” for years and don’t care. People call you an idiot and you smile. The people who made this happen have gone so far to just let you know where the right play is in this “game” — and it can be good if you tune out the noise and listen to the people who are right. Conversely, if you buy into pettiness you will get thrown through a loop by the trollverse or do something stupid like sell at the bottom of bottoms. Or trade at all? I mean trading is a very impatient thing to do. It’s great if you’re good at it, but I think that people would’ve made more money using Github than Binance, using their search bar to figure out C++, python, java, hexadecimals, other measures — freaking TONAL Bitcoin. I mean seriously that was a mind… ;) But I did it and it was because I saw an abundance of wealth out there to learn from some pretty darn cool people. And then there’s understanding the concept of Duality… when you realized the people that wrote it were the people who wrote the code or literature you studied that day. Mind boggling, but a leap of faith that is back up with facts. Or that the shell money is not just true but it makes a lot of sense why powerful codes are being executed in shells (Hashcash, Luke Jr.’s sh files):
sh files are unix (linux) shell executables files, they are the equivalent (but much more powerful) of bat files on windows. So you need to run it from a linux console, just typing its name the same you do with bat files on windows.
I knew what a BAT file was because I fiddled around with a few trying to mine before I realize I wasn’t that savvy. However, a light bulb clicked. Once more, for a guy who just explained “Delta” to you I added this part after because — SHELL money, shell executables (for scripts), scripts all over to send things back where I have followed them out and around the internet… they come after “BAT” goes to the Coinbase:
And I absolutely am not jumping on “the pump” but I do receive the message loud and clear. Right after “DEVCON 4” and right after writing about shells, scrips, and token money which I very much understand the embedded value of — in script. There it is. Right there once again for anyone who listens. I am telling you the money in this system does not allow you to pump against math. This isn’t a bunch of wasted time and garbage to swindle my friends or internet people. It’s quite the contrary. I know it will reflect well on the people who helped it happen. So I think them, and sometimes they give you a nod of approval and it means a lot, because these guys do care:
So @NickSzabo4 on Twitter, the Delta, D = Eth, the parallels in code, the exodus in ABE, the Ethereum Foundation paying the exact equivalent of the fee they owed back to the coinbase tx on the epoch, yet “OTC” to Ethereum Classic to invest back in the ETC Block 0, which isn’t really “Ethereum Classic” but the start of the ARPANET and the beginning of UNIX time… its all things I’ve found my way to but also picked up on in places like Github or old Bitcointalk.org posts from when I was still in college. I grew up as this was coming to a close without ever knowing it existed but they caught my attention. I lost some money trading but I saw the opportunity elsewhere. Not to find the next Bitcoin. I just didn’t know where the value was coming from.
After mapping out the sequence through merge mining, simplistic numerical counting that anyone could do, and proof of work I started to get it. Yesterday when I started looking at (r,g,b) colors I realized that colors cost your processors energy. Still, not “bits”… but naive as I am I still knew that hex-encoded bits where being sent back to the coinbase on block explorers. Then I realized that bits and colors meshed through processing power and UNIX time. I honestly didn’t tie it all together until yesterday. I could feel embarrassed or I can feel fortunate. I feel the latter. However even though I knew they did all of this to create the future of technology, finance, and were very invested in it with all of the code and clues left for people like me — I didn’t realize the most amazing asset of all. The ability to basically seed invest in what saved BANKING. Not crypto, BANKING. So yeah, they played the game too because I doubt a bank wanted their whole institution to crash on January 19, 2038. Everyone needs this! Python and Linux are still abstract to me but I am seeing everything going forward on it for every repository out there that is getting ready for the next phase. This thing is going to soar. If it’s truly decentralized I look forward to it. I can’t really even grasp that kind of freedom. The value is, everyone needs this to survive in the modern world.
Markm’s paper brings about the “A” and “B” Bitcoin block chain concept I have found and seen in a lot of code, especially when it comes to POW/RPOW and scripting. OP_TOALTSTACK “flipping the script to an altstack on execution” exists on Bitcoin but people don’t ask questions because you know they don’t look at the numbers, go to Bitcoin Wiki, look at the math of it, understand it, and wait — alternate Bitcoin block chain? Here it was in 2000:
3.2 Patterns of Cooperation Without Vulnerability
The capability model is, in a sense, the object model taken to its logical extreme. Where object programmers seek modularity — a decrease in the dependencies between separately thought-out units — capability programmers seek security, recognizing that required trust is a form of dependency. Object programmers wish to guard against bugs: a bug in module A should not propagate to module B. Capability programmers wish to guard against malice. However, if B is designed to be invulnerable to A’s malice, it is likely also invulnerable to A’s bugs.
That’s why “DevCoin” was first a token that was created in 2011 through debugging as coming first, blk00000.dat — and it showed up again in ABE. The idea of storing it in an IBM database or hardcoding it to the chain makes more sense to me today than ever. Once “hardcoded” it can be a part of a chains POW by RPOW — and afterall, those run on IBM 4758 co-processors. That puts the roots of this project as deep as these papers say they are. I have seen RPOW files on Github from January 1, 2001. So what if “A” or “B” have different values. Guess what 21 Billion means in relation to 21 Million? Not much. It evens out very well and you can’t beat the FreiExchange rate (for long):
The code above shows you ABC -> now Copernet/“Copernicus” has been getting ready for this with ways of testing B’s value in both directions. In the end you still have to realize the rates have been available all along. You just have to believe them or understand the math. I didn’t until this week but I knew Devcoin was great. It didn’t have to be Tonal Bitcoin for me to be happy. Turns out, unless I’m off in my math, it’s more like 10*TBC because it started out with two less decimal places than Bitcoin. That was done to make sense of the math in the end. It was supposed to lose all of its value. That was the abstraction. Then again I’d been thinking like Copernicus for some time about things.
First off, Copernicus is a hint that the universe isn’t how most people see it. But one day you get up and say, hey the Earth does revolve around the sun and in fact so does this entire universe! I’m willing to stake my name to that being the case with DevCoin in its complete nature as well as RPOW. First off, here is what DevCoin’s hex 0x1000000 means in its decimal form:
Here’s the beauty of the picture above, it expresses a proof of work, it expresses an amount of bit/seconds in the end, and the 1.0.0.0 “dotted” decimal is how to describe the software version. There’s Hashcash 1.0.0 shells to execute scripts, there’s 1.0.0 pre-alpha Simple Bitcoin’s. I mean Bitcoin’s pre-alpha was the first debug log release in November 2008 but the timestamp was actually September 10, 2008. It’s just amazing watching everything syncing up and knowing how big its going to be for the world. No one has a clue yet. They will know.
The clues are abundant. I can trace the 16777216 number to math, programming language, and even Copernicus:
But we are trying to find the center of ground zero and block one for Bitcoin and Ethereum plus the entire ecosystem like Stellar (it’s immense). So it looks just like the math of revolution. The kinda math that shakes things up:
The clues are out there, for example when you look at Bitcoin ABE’s developer avatar at Github:
You notice the colored block of all colors, the genesis block from Devcoin’s debug, the funny fact that the developer authored it and then committed to it because of its double entry properties. An entrance and exit from wherever the block chain was built next. It’s of course, in Python.
Markm’s paper also knew how to protect the genesis coin as well:
Only Connectivity Begets Connectivity. Consider all the ways Bob can obtain access to Carol. Only three possibilities are allowed:
• Connectivity by Introduction. Somebody sends Bob a reference to Carol, as shown in the Granovetter Diagram — If Bob and Carol already exist, this is the only way Bob can obtain access: via a third party, such as Alice, under the three conditions stated in the Perspectives section above.
• Connectivity by Parenthood. Bob creates Carol — Any object system must have an object creation primitive. Should Bob use this primitive to create Carol, Bob then has the only reference to Carol, unless and until he sends this reference to someone else. In the earlier example of a PointMaker creating a Point, the PointMaker at that moment has exclusive access to the new Point.
• Connectivity by Construction. If Bob’s creator has access to Carol at the time of Bob’s creation, Bob may be created sharing this access — In essence, Bob is born holding a reference to Carol. Referring again to the PointMaker example, the PointMaker, with access to x as a parameter, creates a new Point that has access to x as part of its initial endowment.
Remember even, a daemon is made by forking the child. It doesn’t have to be linear in the way computing works. That’s the point of block chain. Relate to the time chain, but don’t run by its rules or adopt its problems. They have succeeded in these relationships.
Here is the idea of “two purses” rather two currencies being the same in nature (a subtle wink to TBC conversions that make DVC work outside of decimal?):
3.4 Simple Money Before presenting the following simple example of capability-based money, we must attempt to head off a confusion this example repeatedly causes. We are not proposing to actually do money this way! A desirable money system must also provide for:
• blinding, to maintain the anonymity of cash [2],
• non-repudiation, i.e., reliable receipts [30],
• accounting controls, so the mint (issuer) can be caught if it cheats [1], and
• backing (redeemability) by assets that are already widely valued [12].
….A mint can make purses that hold new units of its currency, thereby inflating that currency. A purse can report its balance and make a new empty purse of the same currency. Given two purses of the same currency, you can deposit money into one from the other.
The conversions should be seamless. And fair, beyond fair.
This is really the best allusion to the future:
4.1 Distributed Objects
Objects are aggregated into units called vats. Each E object exists in exactly one vat — we speak of an object being hosted by its vat. A vat typically hosts many objects. Similarly, each vat exists on one machine at a time, but a machine may host many vats. A good first approximation is to think of a vat as a process full of objects — an address space full of objects plus a thread of control. Unlike a typical OS process, a vat persists (that is, its state is saved to persistent storage when its hosting process is terminated or interrupted), so think of a particular vat-hosting OS process as an incarnation of a vat. The vat main
And the first description of script execution as a part of a multi-step process:
To enable objects in separate vats to send messages to each other, we must bridge from the world of local, intra-address-space language-implementation technology to the world of network communications protocols. Our first step is conventional: each vat contains a communications system allowing it to make connections to, and accept connections from, other vats. Each vat’s communications system contains objects called proxies (shown by half circles in Fig. 5). When an object in a vat refers to an object in a different vat, it actually refers to a proxy object, which is the local representative of the remote object. In the illustration, when a proxy (b1) is sent a local message (step 1), it encodes the message arguments (c1) into a packet which it sends out as a network message (step 2). When VatB receives the network message, it decodes it into a message local to VatB, handshaking with remote vats (VatC) as necessary to create the needed proxies (c2, step 3). The decoded message is finally delivered to Bob (step 4).
It’s about encoding a message, sending locally, then out to a network which has different protocols. Once the message is decoded where it can be accepted on a network another proxy allows it to be delivered to the destination to be read. It’s primative block chain in my opinion. And genius because who thinks of that in 2000?
Finally, lets look at Pluribus in action from “E Money” as shown above:
Here is the first reference to something of similarity to Hal Finney’s IBM 4758 dual processing Trusted Platform Module for RPOW:
4.3 Subjective Aggregation — or — Only Trust Makes Distinctions Although correct, there’s something peculiar in the above description. On the one hand, the analysis seems to assume that we aren’t trusting VatB, which is why Carol’s Swiss number isn’t revealed to VatB until someone reveals it to an object, such as Bob, which is hosted by VatB. On the other hand, Alice’s intention is to give Bob access to Carol, but not to give this access to any other objects, such as Joe, that might be hosted by VatB. However, Alice must trust VatB to play by these rules, since Alice, by sending it Carol’s Swiss number, has enabled it to do otherwise. There are two forms of mutual suspicion simultaneously supported by this Pluribus protocol: inter-vat (or inter-machine) mutual suspicion, and inter-object mutual suspicion. It would be a mistake for anyone to trust Bob any more than they trust VatB. To the objects within a vat, their hosting vat is their Trusted Computing Base (TCB). Their own operation is completely at the mercy of their TCB, with no escape. Bob’s behavior can be seen as an aspect of VatB’s behavior.
And I am probably missing things even, but I don’t know who has read this paper and noticed in the outside world how clearly this is the Satoshi plan. The beginning of the vision. The art of abstraction. Quantum computing and in the end what matters is fairness + security and with that we get a need, a valued composite of what has been embedded and what will be in years to come.
On another note, remember when I brought up a person named Andrew Dunstan who’s Build Farm, PostgreSQL databases are supposedly the best and are even used quietly by Bitcoin ABE? He talked about cows in his references to Szabo’s collectible items of value. Well, markm trolls a step further and mentioned cows for his. The truth is in the connection of the three, these are there for reasons to pay attention:
6.1 From Stuff to Financial Instruments and Smart Contracts
Real world markets started out with direct trade of physical objects. To oversimplify greatly, ownership usually went along with possession and use, and, because of the locality of matter, all three together were exclusive. The user interface was intuitive — you knew what rights you had because you could see your stuff. For Alice to transfer ownership of a cow to Bob, Alice and Bob would move the cow’s physical location from Alice’s territory to Bob’s. Both would then effortlessly have common knowledge that the transfer had occurred, and who had which cows. Absent theft, possession would be an adequate record of ownership. Cows were bearer instruments. (There is some evidence that the first money was coins redeemable for cows [35].) Over time, of course, more abstract rights were invented, as were more complex arrangements for their transfer, usually with ghastly user interfaces and more room for misunderstandings and disputes.
I recommend you read the rest of markm’s paper because it goes over things that look like they came out of an Ethereum smart contract as well as escrow, stocks, and other assets all in the way we understand it today. It’s like he wrote it this decade — it was well thought out and prepared. I am sure by that time the pieces were in motion. Which reminds me of what Hal Finney said in his RPOW release, and things taking a long time for public keys (DVC uses the 1-prefix for a legacy pubkey) to be re-enabled:
After a period of time has elapsed long enough that all active RPOW users have exchanged their old RPOW tokens, there is no longer any need to maintain the old database file. The RPOW server includes a command to disable keys on its list of known RPOW public keys. This should eventually be done to the old key, at which point any RPOWs which were created with that key will no longer be accepted. They will become worthless, in effect, which is why it is important to wait long enough to be confident that active users have exchanged their tokens. At this time the old RPOW database file can be archived and deleted, freeing disk space and setting the scene for another rollover at some future time.
RPOW never forgets old public keys, even though they can be disabled and made unusable. This is for security reasons, to prevent an attack where a previously used public key is offered as a new key, using the cooperative feature described below. If that were possible, old RPOW tokens might be re-deposited because RPOW would not know to use the old seen-rpow database. To prevent this, RPOW forever remembers old public keys and their database information.
This means that in principle, old public keys can be re-enabled. If someone showed up years later with some extremely valuable RPOW tokens for an old public key, it would be possible to retrieve the old seen-RPOW database from archival storage, re-enable the public key, and exchange those old tokens. As long as the old seen-RPOW database is saved in some recoverable form, this will always be a possibility, in case of emergency.
We are approaching that day.
Quantum Happenings
And what of IBM? Well, they are going to demonstrate their ability to build a dual-state functioning chain, with Stellar as a cherry of book keeping on top. There’s more suprises ahead. I am positive EOS has 21 validators to sign off on a wealth transfer back to the source. The creators of this whole project wanted to keep it simple. A particular account I enjoy following is Andrew Desantis on Twitter. Today I knew what he was talking about and it came after BAT pumped on Coinbase’s announcement. Rather it flooded in money because it’s going to cross states or pass some sort of message. Remember it has the triangle representing the Delta/Eth/4/D whatever you wanna say it matters. The original Delta is DVC, and that Delta Wave could come from some immense energy provided by IBM Quantum Computing. See:
The genesis block had to allocate up to 0x1000000 which fits all colors into a block. This is the power it took for that little tiny square I pasted earlier in the article per the description:
Before you take look at this (truly) colourful piece of art, I warn those with slow computers. Don’t let the light download trick you — the graphic packs a nice punch to the CPU if you’re on something like 400 MHz.
We’re talking about a longstanding project. 20+ years is a definite. This is what a Delta wave looks like in quantum computing:
And here’s the setup:
Transactions in “Ethereum Classic” headed to the coinbase, or at least to connect with it and a bunch of hex-encoded script to go with it. The power will be cranked high and the emerald “Phoenix” will rise. This truly is the beginning of a world currency. Who won’t use this? It will be everywhere. Maybe even your bank ATM.
ERC20 — Waiting 20 Years Now For Comment
I remembered a part of Duality that explained how Hal wanted to send Satoshi his coins but could not send it while he was “offline” and in doing so he could not send with a “comment” like he could if he was online. Read the excerpt:
ERC20 stands for “Ethereum Request for Comment” and you just saw a token called BAT with the Delta triangle and upside down prism color scheme head back to the Coinbase. It pumped. It also sold out $35 million tokens in 30 seconds in its ICO. What exactly is Basic Attention Token then and would it be the comment necessary? It does operate out of the Brave browser. It seemingly could be the .bat file that will execute the (script) comment sent with it from long ago. BAT also will be able to work within the Coinbase app:
Token and Status: The BAT also has attention-based applicability inside the Ethereum-based messaging/payment platforms such as Coinbase’s new Token app and Status app.
Perhaps this is the setup from “batching” transactions — ala Bitcoin Core. Set them up for the execution. Sh just happens to do it so much better. But messaging as script execution within the coinbase, how very interesting. A sure setup in my humble opinion. Don’t forget where “Ethereum Classic” resides. Would you be shocked to see the instant addition of hundreds of coins now? I would not. That is what Coinbase said this past week. Remember, DevCoin exists in the coinbase originally, it’s probably there again. Technically Devcoin and its merge mining cohorts are there always. It’s pretty obvious how this all set up. There is a massive amount of money headed in. The emails and Duality tell the same story. Hal and his crashing wallet ran from Microsoft Visual C++ and here comes Bitcoin Core’s MSVC files full of scripts to execute (Python 3 included):
This is a well known journal from 1968 authored by NATO about middleware’s importance. Think of it like a debugging log as well as a router/processor:
Upside down pyramid, 1/2 of an Ethereum, flipped Delta. Anyway you look at it, inverted is good.
Remember that Devcoin is debugging away and forked off the bitcoind daemon becoming its segregated parent. However, it is “headless” as they saw. It doesn’t think. The other dev for Devcoin is “Unthinkingbit” and perhaps the one we need thinking. See:
It’s a large, anonymous… perhaps all of those relayed by “Unknown” blocks we see with a 0.0.0.0 address. Hal had that in his debug log from the crash — so in a dual sense, Satoshi reincarnated. Either way, what happened was Bitcoin was always Eth + BitCoin.
They flipped. They will flip again and in doing so create a mainnet combination chain with powers I cannot imagine. But I get why things had to be this way for awhile. Soon the script flips!
The difficulty is rising for DevCoin while the prices have no pulse. Enough to stay out of sight. No price is no problem. Hal warned of that. It’s had no price since I bought it for under 1 satoshi. Do not mind!
I wondered why it didn’t have a hash but still worked and I sort of get it now. Can show one thing in one state and exist in the other, which makes DevCoin truly special. But let the Raven fly already. One last look at the debug log on my QT:
Here’s a reach…
But look at the load of money piling up here:
There’s probably tons of these getting ready to go on a delta wave through history. I mentioned November 4 (delta) and of course February 4, a day after Open Source Initiatives 20th Birthday (see below), an ERC20 token nobody cares or knows about will reign $40,000,000 on National Candy Day. It’s hilariously funny.
It came with SELFKEY…
But there’s more with Candy to say:
“The total supply of CANDY is one trillion. Candy Box will distribute tokens to project holders by making future airdrop, gifts and other means. Currently locked include PRS, BIG, XIN, MTN and nearly 20 kinds of tokens, worth almost 100 million USD.”
And then there’s the bottom of this article where you know he knows:
On that note, I think Nick Szabo is about to drop some truth on the world. Don’t forget BitGold. It is out there, perhaps collecting “gold dust” for hodlers.
Open Source Development turned 20 this year. Could that bode well for ERC 20? Any open source project wins. That’s a lot of green:
Thanks to open source developers I have the bonus of enjoying this opportunity but as someone who learned a lot I’m sort of sad to see it end. I am sure there is plenty left to discover, but what a journey. I feel that all signs are to eternity for here. Thanks for reading, I hope you prosper off of this — I really do.
42
