@stevepatterson is on PowPing!

PowPing is a place where you can earn Bitcoin simply by socializing, for FREE.
Never tried Bitcoin? It's OK! Just come, socialize, and earn Bitcoin.
Check out stevepatterson's activities
Total Economy: 2.18 USD
I've enjoyed watching the "Theory of Bitcoin" videos with RXC. It's clear to me that Craig is an academic, but not a good way. I love interdisciplinary knowledge and consider essential for all serious theorizing. But I'm not a fan of shallow interdisciplinary knowledge. Craig is a reservoir of shallow knowledge - as if he's read a hundred college textbooks on a hundred subjects, never realizing that college textbooks are terrible sources of information. Because few people are broadly studied, they don't even know where to challenge him or how to reveal his lack of depth. For example, Craig has mentioned several times that "Mathematics has self-referential problems that were illustrated by people like Russell and Godel." This is incorrect. Or at least, it's spectacularly shallow. If you read a college textbook or skim Wikipedia, you might think it was true. But it's superficial book knowledge. The problems in the foundations of mathematics (especially wrt self-reference) presuppose a bunch of questionable philosophical axioms. They cannot be separated from metaphysics. While yes, it's true that a Platonic Cantorian will run into problems (like Russell did), that's merely one school of thinking. To take this and universalize about mathematics as a whole is shallow and ignorant - the kind of thing a grad student would confidently state while standing on the peak of "Mt Stupid." This is another reason I am more persuaded by Phil Wilson's account of the creation of Bitcoin. Academic minds are generally terrible at real-world problem solving (or even independent thinking). Phil is an independent mind which has shown the patterns of reasoning necessary to make a breakthrough invention. In Phil's story, Craig is an academic that might have understood Bitcoin was theoretically possible, but because of his unoriginal patterns of reasoning, he was incapable of bringing it into existence. Book knowledge is too shallow to make real breakthroughs.
isaacmorehouse tipped:
0.04 USD
1 year ago
pete tipped:
0.05 USD
1 year ago
enlightenedfish tipped:
0.01 USD
1 year ago
kraftwerk tipped:
0.48 USD
1 year ago
Enjoyed this blurb bc it reveals everything one needs to know about a REAL interdisciplinary theorizing DEEP properly-sourced CORRECT-yet-unspectacular broad-studied non-superficial non-universalizing non-ignorant (said DEEP already?) DEEP DEEP original capable breakthru-spewing academic whose already been done climbed Mount Enlightenment. Bravo! Teaser: There's a mega-intellectual stud leader about to finally get rid of his smelly French baggage come Movemba. That's a train superior intellectuals simply can't miss-- get on that sheeot!! (Excuse the "French") WOOT WOOT!
benjamin replied:
I tried the translate button, but it didn't work. 😁😅 Tangentially, saw CG interview posted with your... great stuff! Thanks for your passion and dedication in the community.
john replied:
Yes intentionally Smokey.
I tried watching that 7 hour Phil video you made but I just can't keep focus through it. He makes Craig Wright an easy listen.
Given Craig's history of being cast aside as an outsider in the social sphere, I think it's quite understandable for him to want to feel accepted and recognised for his erudition, pretentious as it may be at times. He also worked in security for govt, who would appreciate someone with academic clout. His character flaw of talking about more things than he understands fully doesn't detract from his knowledge of the thing that matters here...bitcoin. Also, Craig has explicitly said he is not good at real-world implementation. 'You do not want a visionary accountant'. His narrative seems coherent to me, and being superficially knowledgeable about a broad range of fields fits his self-description as a visionary who's terrible at implementation. Thus, nChain with 94 employees. I'm not fussed if he's Satoshi or not, but I don't think 'academic minds are generally terrible at real-world problem solving' and a penchant for saying 'wicked smaht' things is a strong argument against him.
orac tipped:
0.03 USD
1 year ago
stevepatterson replied:
I haven't made an argument "against" Craig. I'm saying it's plausible that he was involved with the creation of Bitcoin. If he was involved, then I think he's overstated his importance with regards to the conceptual/technical breakthrough of Bitcoin. I could see him being the driven, motivated researcher who helped somebody else make the breakthrough. It's interesting to me how many people interpret this as being "against Craig" or being a "Craig hater." Compared to the rest of the crypto world, it's giving Craig a trillion times more credibility.
dlsit tipped:
0.04 USD
1 year ago
deleted account
adonsats replied:
😂😂😂 This is exactly the text that take him as a talker, a sentimentalist. It is even clear to him that... Can he clarify that so we could follow his clarification ? I think he can make a youtube to elaborate about " the theory of bitcoin" 🤗
You got it upside down. Probably meditate on the statements and claims you are making. Mathematics has a self referential problem is probably the most deep thought you can have. Only a shallow understanding of it will say it's a shallow statement. Ironically your statements have self referential problems 😁
orac tipped:
0.02 USD
1 year ago
I find more accurate Phil Wilson's story than Craig's. I think at the end of the court case he will reveal all of that and share the creation of Bitcoin with DK and PW.
aesesino replied:
Share the credit of the creation of Bitcoin*
robertogox replied:
lol
again, is our right to see CSW as not-satoshi. WE - DO - NOT - CARE !!!! stop looking at satoshi. WE - DO - NOT - CARE !!!! want to hide satoshi in our 100000 book ou youtube ? WE - DO - NOT - CARE !!!! WE BUILD. WE LEARN. WE TRY. COMPETE 🤣
What's your source of information?
I'm not being snide, but I always thought of you as somewhat of a shallow academic pretender also.
robertogox tipped:
0.05 USD
1 year ago
orac tipped:
0.02 USD
1 year ago
derekm replied:
The Theory of Bitcoin videos, I thought, were terrible, btw. Especially the last one!
How is somone going to go through a tax audit by the Australian goverment and it not going to reveal he is Satoshi?
deleted account
thacypha replied:
Receipts he has them. Everything he has spent his money on they have. Thats what a tax audit is!
deleted account
thacypha replied:
Steve you miss the most glaringly obvious part of all this. Who is continuing the work hard to see this creation succeed? Day in day out? CSW. Who is leading this creation in the right direction? CSW. Who is passionate about this creation, actively involved to drive it further? CSW Who consistently points people out when they are wrong about this creation, and corrects them? CSW This Phil guy, is no where to be seen. Hey I’m glad there are people who dislike csw joining bsv, that is a strong signal. But you miss something so obvious. If BSV gains global adoption, you’ll probably still think csw isn’t Satoshi. Smart people are able to admit they were wrong. Stupid people argue the same shit forever in denial. Which one are you Steve?
micketymac tipped:
0.76 USD
1 year ago
joeldalais tipped:
0.2 USD
1 year ago
orac tipped:
0.06 USD
1 year ago
deleted account
satoshisdisciple replied:
It’s doesn’t contradict. I just think those people who see bsv as the best solution and don’t appreciate Craig’s input are in denial (stupid). I think Steve likes to stay ‘anti craig’ and bends logic to fit this position.
deleted account
adonsats replied:
Stupid people argue the same shit forever in denial. most of us are stupid... not stupid but jaleous, leazy, cowards and loosers. welcome to the real world
deleted account
satoshisdisciple replied:
Bitcoin is a combination of many disciplines working in harmony with one another. A deep level of understanding in every one of those fields was required to create Bitcoin. If it wasn’t for Craig’s wealth of knowledge, I doubt we’d have Bitcoin. So to conclude that Craig being academic is somehow a negative is ludicrous as far as I’m concerned.
adonsats replied:
"stupid" is not a good word for a great filosofe. read: " This is incorrect. Or at least, it's spectacularly shallow. If you read a college textbook or skim Wikipedia, you might think it was true. But it's superficial book knowledge." <--- clearly there is somthing wrong in this text. Clearly. There are many good wikipedia out there. but many school books are utopia.
adonsats replied:
again, is our right to see CSW as not-satoshi. WE - DO - NOT - CARE !!!!
deleted account
Please shut up
Interesting. Also a part of this, I think it is time to focus on real world needs vs this myth of Craig and the student of Craig. The theory of Bitcoin honestly is not interesting to the world, I am afraid. Even the word Bitcoin is becoming obsoleted.
Phil Wilson seems unlikely to have contributed to the creation of bitcoin because there doesn't seem to any evidence of him doing anything else of substance. His convenient stories about forgetting stuff don't ring true either.
wonderwall tipped:
0.04 USD
1 year ago
shadders replied:
There's a glaring hole in Phil's story. He talks about the origins of the name of the Prometheus project and makes it clear that he introduced Craig to the Prometheus story. According to his story this was in June 2008. Except Craig wrote a thesis in 2003 on the origins of various creation myths that referenced the Prometheus story extensively. So clearly at least this part of the story is pure fantasy.
adonsats tipped:
0.01 USD
1 year ago
The man has his opinions, sometimes they will be shallow and far from his circle of knowledge. It was a conversation, not a technical lecture. I always like to listen when he talks about bitcoin, he is truly a genius. I also like some of his thoughts on western education, morals and meritocracy. His points are interesting, I listen, but I think for myself. When he gets off the road or starts to repeat old cursing against some people or some things I stop listening and it is not pleasant. I understand his anger, but I have already heard it and I think he should move on. I have lots of respect for him, in spite of his unpopular ways.
swandive tipped:
0.02 USD
1 year ago
wonderwall tipped:
0.08 USD
1 year ago
orac tipped:
0.06 USD
1 year ago
I think there’s a great many things that perhaps we will never know about the origins of bitcoin. Unfortunately, most of the people who know seem to be dead, and the others either cannot prove their narratives or they have major conflicts of interest. My favorite take on Satoshi origins and controversy is that of Ian Grigg: http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001617.html His whole blog is great, but this post has some bombshells that don’t get cited very often.
wonderwall tipped:
0.08 USD
1 year ago
Good post. I've had a hard time making it through the videos -- it's a struggle. But I've watched enough to see refrains of the obsession w/ credit hours and degrees... yet the narrative in the interviews speaks to the underlying "educational" value. IRT Scronty -- the whole CSW et al supplanting him with another "Jamie Wilson" aspect was very odd when I read his interview with Bitcoin.com. The extent he goes into explaining Jamie in http://vu.hn/bitcoin%20origins.html was also odd. The determination it would take to go find another Jamie Wilson to swindle the 'real' Jamie Wilson out of legitimacy... I also found it coincidental that he came out with his version after the Kleiman litigation made names like "Jamie Wilson" more known and tied to the inner-workings of W&K and Bitcoin story (at least per CSW). Do you address that aspect in the interview (will have to find a few hours to 2x through it some day!)? I didn't see any references to him in the court docs (not that I read every doc). Again though, not that negates anything as the parties are purportedly squabbling over their piece of the Satoshi pie -- why legitimize anyone that could dilute that? Again, if the whole Kleiman / CSW angle is legit...
jas replied:
Have you read the emails between Scronty and CSW?
benjamin replied:
I read the"wanker" commentary, the extortion refs, the Prometheus challenge... but that might have been it. Haven't dug into it...
jas replied:
I watched them all, and i think the whole ten episodes are easily forgettable The only two things that stick in my mind from this are communists bad, capitalist good.
I agree that Craig very often chooses to talk with great confidence about topics he doesn't know enough about. Some of us are experts in some topics and will most certainly notice this when he ventures into topics we are expert at and he clearly has a superficial knowledge about. But that doesn't mean he did not invent Bitcoin or doesn't have the capacity to invent it. On that specific topic, I dare you to point to someone who understands it better. And this trait of talking confidently about everything in relaxed settings is characteristic of many great minds. Very intelligent and creative people often like to talk confidently albeit loosely about any topic being asked about. One must learn to filter what he says in such circumstances and take it has just an opinion, not an absolute expert one.
justicemate tipped:
0.03 USD
1 year ago
orac tipped:
0.06 USD
1 year ago
that sound good. satoshi is really a student.
How about you ask Dr Wright for an interview and record it for the rest of us to watch? Perhaps you'll be able to test his knowledge directly.
musiq tipped:
0.01 USD
1 year ago
stevepatterson replied:
I asked him a while ago, but he blocked me. Would be happy to interview him.
pete tipped:
0.05 USD
1 year ago
adonsats replied:
clever.
I wanted to watch the video, I really did. The problem with your Phil Wilson interview is that nobody had the time to watch the entire 8 hour interview. I hope you release bits and pieces of the edited video so we can watch the important parts.
stevepatterson replied:
It's definitely a problem. I was planning on editing it, but the BCH-BSV split was about to happen, so I released it raw. I'm hoping that other people will chop it up. Perhaps could release the relevant bits on Streamanity. I don't have time at the moment.
musiq tipped:
0.01 USD
1 year ago
musiq replied:
> I'm hoping that other people will chop it up. The problem is there are very few "other people" who've watched the whole 8 hour adventure so nobody knows where to chop it up. But yeah looking forward to it at some point.
musiq replied:
FWIW I still think his shallow knowledge about many things he talks about doesn't mean he didn't invent Bitcoin. Many inventions were created by luck and skills combined. But I also kind of had a similar thought lately that he tends to talk about things with a bit extreme confidence where he is no expert in, especially when watching those Theory of Bitcoin videos.
stevepatterson replied:
If you don't have time to listen to the interview, then read Phil's story. It's essential reading for people interested in the origins of Bitcoin. Craig can still be part of the Satoshi team. http://vu.hn/bitcoin%20origins.html