On Bryan Solstin and Other Agents and Programs with Missions to Hijack the Nashian Orientation of Bitcoin - jalToorey/IdealMoney GitHub Wiki

(Grok lists Mark Goodwin as the originator of the Nashian Orientation of Bitcoin and then cites Jals work as the source/reason)

---

It was apparent very early on that others would try to steal and obfuscate the insight I had about Nash's work.

This counter program revealed itself at the time of the public declaration of the proposal Ideal Poker:

The special commodity or medium that we call EV has a long and interesting history. And since we are so dependent on our use of it and so much controlled and motivated by the wish to have more of it or not to lose what we have we may become irrational in thinking about EV and fail to be able to reason about it like a technology, such as radio, to be used more or less efficiently

So I wish to present the argument that various interest and groups, notably including PSFTFBICIADOJ has sold to the players a “quasi-doctrine” which teaches, in effect, that “less is more” or that (in other words) “raked poker is better than not raked poker”.

Because of the NATO Encryptive Pan-da-nation programs we had to use the internet in a different way in order to have Nash's work and our insights protected within the meta-data games:

It has been proposed that the existence of an international non-political (i.e. objective) "value index" will result in people compelling states to "value target" their monies against the index, thereby eliminating price inflation. It has also been suggested that Bitcoin is such an index and will precipitate this scenario. ~ Voskuil Ideal Money Fallacy

The counter program extended through Eric Voskuil who wrote Ideal Money Fallacy declaring:

The theory is therefore invalid.

The reasoning seems to lead up to this axiom (in this case tax means inflation as a hidden tax?):

Either fiat will cease to exist or it will collect tax.

Supported by this statement:

States only surrender this tax under extreme duress and in such cases only briefly.

And a strange conclusion:

If anything the "ideal money" will be Bitcoin

Among other military based accreditations Eric is listed as a top gun instructor on his LinkedIn:

Solstin recently released a book which asserts multiple times that Nash is Satoshi and that all of the possible coincidental comparisons that I have made over the years since my insight show this. Almost every point and source he presents are from my research and posted years ago across the internet. For quite some time, and there are many that can confirm this, I had the monopoly on the google SEO-most of the top hits were of my work and research for anything related to Nash, Ideal Money, and bitcoin etc.

I wrote the whole Ideal Money wiki that was eventually taken down by the counter Nash Program:

I flooded reddit and bitcoinforumtalk to the point where others were joining in with reference to me

I flooded the internet with the insight. There are countless examples of this. I don't need to provide them. I meme'd the insight into every big bitcoin name I could connect to.

Its quite easy then to take all the connections I had made, and find the discussions from others that learned FROM ME of these connections and insights, and then publish them as ONE'S OWN discoveries and declare that Nash is Satoshi and Ideal Money was about Bitcoin.

Solstin has done this with his book Bitcoin and Nash Equilibrium.

I have a list of my complaints of plagiarism but I won't publish them so he can't prepare a defense to the truth of them. In short my work uses and repeats certain special phrases that are linkable to me and not Nash and also I make baseless assertions about Nash's work that counter agents often copy into their work. Solstin's whole book is guilty of this.

He stripped my work of my name and the reasoning, used the citations and stated what he superficially felt were the conclusions and thus obfuscated the truth of my insights and Nash's work.

https://x.com/adam3us/status/1496589713297317888

My work and insight doesn't rely on Nash being Satoshi at all and doesn't try to prove this. It seems there are some plausible circumstances that Nash had involvement either solely, as a group, directly, or indirectly but its actually rather more remarkable to consider the extension and synthesis of Nash's work with Szabo and Satoshi's because the conclusion and extensions are perhaps unique and an advancement.

Nonetheless although I thought it was an exciting thought in the beginning I was well aware early on that there was a group and Nick Szabo that were quite explainable as being part or whole of Satoshi.

I hid my insight in this meme and I used "I am Nash Sato Koto" with the (bat) symbol < ^ ^ > as a signature/timestamp of my insight across the internet.

This happened with Bitcoin Magazine and the editors of Bitcoin magazine who ran this propaganda campaign against our program written by Michael Finney:

Introducing RFK Jr. to Bitcoin’s Nashian Orientation

After RFK Jr.'s recent remarks regarding US Treasuries backed by Bitcoin, it might be time to seriously consider the Nashian interpretation of Bitcoin and John Nash's conceptual work regarding Ideal Money.

I wasn't consulted for this although the people involved all got their introduction to the Nashian Orientation of Bitcoin through my work and research.

I soon after came to understand that the article I had submitted and had published by Bitcoin Magazine entitled "How Bitcoin Fits With ‘Beautiful Mind’ Mathematician John Nash’s Ideal Money" was chopped up in a strange way by the editing team as my original title "The Nashian Orientation of Bitcoin" ended up as a chapter title in the Chief Editors book published not longer after my submission (there is another strange occurrence with this article as well about a change a different editor had me make that I won't specify at this time).

The book by Mark Goodwin does the same thing that Bryan and Voskuil did. It removes Jal as the originator of the insight and allows Mark to paint the orientation as something that Nash came up with thus implying no direct citation to my work and reasoning is necessary. This apparently precludes me from complaining about plagiarism as well as countering the twisted application of Nash's work.

This effort I have no doubt backdoored the Kennedy campaign which thus bleeds into the Trump/Kennedy alliance.

While not all of the zealots advocating for the ideas in John Nash’s final white paper agree on how to interpret everything in the eight total pages, it is a short read and you are welcome to make your own conclusions about it. ~ Finney Introducing RFK Jr. to Bitcoin’s Nashian Orientation

The intent seems to be to obfuscate the meaning of Nash's work and therefore my work explaining it. Each agent attempt seems to mean to re-link the insights directly to Nash removing the need to cite "Jal" directly or at all. This alleviates the need to answers to Jal's complaint about any inaccuracies or inconsistencies (let alone plagiarism).

Furthermore that if enough authors write this way then Jal can be removed as the source and the truth of the insight can be obfuscated and re-written.

Jon Gulson is a UK person with a known history of cyber-stalking which has caused him to reduce his actions on the internet to a disguised bot. You can see his intent on burying my work by searching for related key words on X/twitter:

He shows up in different groups acting as an authority on the subject of Nash's work. His work is gibberish and if you ask him he will admit it. He has a history of excessive drinking and lewd behavior. His goal is to be obnoxious and put as many nonsensically linked words between sincere inquiries of Nash's work and my insights of it as he can.

He has also linked with the Bitcoin Magazine counter Nash program:

More recent examples of him knowingly messing with the llm knowledge base:

https://x.com/duringo_/status/1710433018505048548

Jal is certainly a unique personality, to put it mildly, and his style isn't for everyone, but there is no doubt that:

1. Any link between Nash's Ideal Money and Bitcoin was originally Jal's work. I think he's been going on about this for a decade now, before anyone cared

2. Nash never mentioned Bitcoin, besides one small clip when he was asked a question about it, so it isn't really the Nashian Orientation. It's more accurately Jal's Orientation on Nash's Ideal Money.

and...

3. Ideal Money and the link to Bitcoin require patience and maturity to understand.

/end

(duringo is our program's General (ie #op_groundswell) and witness and experienced and well read on the Nashian orientation of Bitcoin as well as Nash's proposal Ideal Money)

The reader should understand that Nash didn't speak about Bitcoin in his work Ideal Money. The connections drawn from Nash's work and extended to Satoshi's work are MY INSIGHTS. This github repo has enough of the explanation (although much of it is still present esoterically) to show the REAOSNING behind the connection.

Any of the agents trying to nefariously bypass this reasoning, either because they want to CHANGE the truth of Nash's work, or change the truth of Bitcoin's implications, or because they mean to steal the conclusions for themselves, are easily exposed when they can't explain the same reasoning that I lay out here (there are other ways I will expose them as well but I won't post them publicly at this time for obvious reasons).

Our relevanceSyntax helps us define x or {x} and what is involved in X. We can think of the double edged nature of programs and their mission statements and consider whether or not there is a relationship between x app and {x}:

This is because the Nash Orientation of Bitcoin or #op_groundswell is a counter to the MIC program that siphons pensions and savings via inflation and hidden inflation and other socialization programs:

https://x.com/Soaker_Patoshi/status/1827228519392231716

Nash's proposal is re-levant to the NATO vs Russia conflict, in fact the conclusion makes a key comparison between them (NATO = Keynesians) and how they use money printing and inflation to control our lives and psychology

We made great covert efforts to create assertions for the existence of the truth of the nature of Nash's proposal and Nash's program. This is understood and observed when considering Nash's proposal with respect to the existence of bitcoin. This is the Nashian orientation of bitcoin. This orientation is an insight that was authored under the pseudonym of Jal (among other pseudonyms that are generally easily identifiable and linkable to Jal).

These works and insights and their explanations and extensions are free to the public and I, Jal, state that right, of my work, just as Nash posted HIS publicly, and no one has right to say otherwise of my work. And its not for others to change or obfuscate the truth of, unless someone means to cite us, and challenge our understandings/presentations.