Intro

The essays are enumerated for reasons that are two fold. Firstly they build on each other in chronological order such that they need to be read start to finish even though they are modulated to each have self-contained insights, and secondly they are referred to as “enumerated essays” in contrast and as a pointer to Nick Szabo’s blog unenumerated which is a name that is a pointer to the concept of implicit (but not enumerated etc.) rights.

Rheomodes [link]-In these and other essays rheomodes are used, often (but not necessarily) denoted and prefixed by ‘re-’, which are an experimental extension of language designed by David Bohm. They are not explained or highlighted in these essays but are explained in other companion essays and Bohm explains them in detail in his book “Wholeness and the Implicate Order”. Rheomodes are awareness concepts and so they map well with the related subjects, such as consensus games, coalitional formation, Nash’s proposal Ideal Money, and Bitcoin etc.

Factors of Metcalfe Potential-Along the way different framings are made that allow the observed content to fit as represented by Metcalfe's law.

Szabonian Deconstruction [link]-a method of usefully traversing complex social systems is introduced by examples as well as a basic foundation for a syntax to represent it (this syntax is used throughout the series in various ways). The method is extended from Nick Szabo’s method of hermeneutical analysis he extended from algorithmic information theory.

Essay Summary Notes

1. Bitcoin Most Certainly Violates Mises Regression Theorem and This Fact Compels Clarification or Re‐Solution from the Mises Institute; And An Introduction to Szabonian Deconstruction [link]-The first essay is dual purpose. Firstly it takes a specific orientation of the question of whether or not bitcoin violates “Mises Regression Theorem" in regard to the origins or evolution of what can become a money and how an object becomes money. The specific orientation is an observation of various Mises Institute writers that don’t seem to agree on what the implications of Bitcoin existing are in regard to Mises’s Regression Theorem and his system of economic philosophy ‘praxelogy’.

   The second aspect of the essay is that it exemplifies “Szabonian Deconstruction” (defined and formalized in subsequent and companion essays). It is a concept that extends from various essays by Nick Szabo in which he derives from formal complexity theory a method of hermeneutical analysis of intersubjectively (ie culturally) held truths. Szabonian Deconstruction is a method to wade through social complexity by assuming that an axiom of consistency was applied as a cheating shortcut to fix a system of thought or culture that was broken by an event or phenomenon of nature etc. Thus essays of certain Mises institute writers are framed from the perspective that Bitcoin broke Mises’ system of praxeology and this essay peels out their attempts to covertly assert that praxeology, and more specifically Mises Regression Theorem, was not broken by the existence of Bitcoin and reveals the direct truth of what Mises meant the Regression Theorem to be (and its apparent limitation/weakness given bitcoin’s existence).

   The essay ends with a specific point made by Mises necessary for the second essay-that praxeology rejects empirically based arguments. The next essay will show that Saifedean Ammous built an empirical based argument for Bitcoin’ monetary superiority and thus used an invalid citation of Mises and praxeology as the basis for his extension of Austrian economics.

2. Of The Fatal Inconsistencies In Saifedean Ammous' Bitcoin Standard [link]-This writing shows how Saifedean repeatedly builds his argument for Bitcoin as the optimal global currency using empirical based (and thus) praxeologically invalid points while citing Mises (the founder of praxeology) and the Austrian school of economics.

3. On Terminating Bitcoin's Violation of Mises Regression Theorem With Games as Pre‐Market Commodity Valuators [link]-It is noted that Eric Voskuil (author of Crypto-Economics) believes Bitcoin violates the limitations implied in Mises regression theorem. The writing extends the theory of collectibles (a la Szabo/Satoshi) to recurse Mises Regression Theorem down to games that cause humans to evaluate and ascribe value to otherwise useless commodity byproducts.

4. On the Szabonian Deconstruction of Money and Gresham's Law [link]-Szabonian deconstruction is exemplified again with respect to Gresham’s law illuminating the paradox of calling a good money ‘that which doesn’t circulate as money’ as a useful metaphor used to satisfy Gresham’s queen of his time.

5. The Bitcoin Community is a Sybil Attack On Bitcoin [link]-The types of persons that share the same nefarious goal to narrate and influence the development of Bitcoin as something that it isn’t, shouldn’t, and can never be-namely a scalable, private, everyday ‘coffee money’. These groups include thieves, conmen, tax evaders, and Saifedean Amous.

6. On The Satoshi Complex [link]-Bitcoin was born from accepting limitations on what it could be, not from designing it with respect to what it should be.

7. On Cantillon and the Szabonian Deconstruction of the Cantillon Effect [link]-Szabonian Deconstruction is exemplified again to peel the “Cantillon Effect” from Cantillon’s work (An Essay On Economique Theory) in order to reveal a deeper and more relevant point of from Cantillon that the reserve currency issuer necessarily outsources their labour. His countryside/province vs market/capital framework is captured and highlighted in order to bring it forward for traversing other’s works in subsequent essays.

8. Understanding Hayek Via Our Szabonian Deconstruction of Cantillon [link]-Cantillon’s countryside/province vs market/capital is compared to a telecommunications network with respect to Hayek’s essay The Use of Knowledge In Society in which Hayek lays the grounds and definition for the ultimate problem for humans to solve-the optimal distribution of resources. For the solution the optimization of the pricing system is the key and laissez faire from the state is the key to the optimization in Hayek’s view (and in contrast that state intervention into the pricing system is disastrous for economic efficiency and the rights of man).

9. On the Tools and Metaphors Necessary To Properly Traverse Hayek’s Denationalization of Money In the Face and Light of Bitcoin [link]-The Cantillon countryside/province vs market/capital framework orientation of Hayek’s essay The Use of Knowledge In Society is the useful framing for approaching Hayek’s Denationalization of Money and this essay begins to gather the previous observations and framings in order to scope an inquiry into Hayek’s Denationalization of Money proposal. The ‘ducatH’ is introduced as a modification of Hayek’s metaphorical device to help the reader understand Hayek’s proposal with respect to the existence of Bitcoin as well as Nash’s proposal Ideal Money.

10. On the Sharpening of the Tools Necessary As a Computational Shortcut for Understanding Hayek’s Proposal The Denationalization of Money in The Context of the Existence of Bitcoin [link]-revisits the useful points gathered in the previous essays that are helpful to understand Bitcoin with respect to Hayek’s essay the Denationalization of Money.

11. Our Tool for Szabonian Deconstruction of Highly Evolved Religions [link]-begins to touch on the basis for Szabonian Deconstruction by illuminating an approach Szabo describes for traversing “Highly Evolved Religions” aka intersubjectively held beliefs.

12. Thought Systems As Inputs For Turing Machines‐Our Tool For Framing Metaphors Of Intersubjective Truths [link]-How humans hold and validate intersubjective truths is framed with respect to the concept of Turing machines parsing the halting problem and verifying truth versus falseness of codified culturally held beliefs.

13. On the Szabonian Metaphorical Framework For Objectively Traversing the Complex History of Mankind [link]-Some observable metaphors as intersubjectively held truths are traversed with consideration of Szabo’s method of parsing culturally held complexity.

14. On the Synthesis and Formalization of Hayek, Nash, And Szabo’s Proposals For The Optimization of The Existing Global Legacy Currency Systems [link]-The framework is laid to approach Szabo, Nash, Satoshi, and Hayek from a perspective which shows that their arguments and conclusions support each other.

15. On The Re‐Solution of Central Banking and Hayekian Landscapes [link]-The framework is laid for the formalization of the equilibrium for the adoption of a single global pricing system as described by Nash’s in his proposal Ideal Money and with respect to the present day central banking network. This pricing system is the achievement of the ultimate goal or problem to be solved as described by Hayek in the Denationalization of Money-it is the (asymptotic) global inter-relational exchange stability of major currencies.