A Gradual Advance into Ecstasy
Players and participants in games are parallel to each other: it’s the trustworthiness of the game determining the general standard and well-being.
Popular metaphor might translate as rising tides float all boats.
In such a sense, it’s been observed [the] creator of Bitcoin may have applied [such, a] game theoretical scenario within Bitcoin:
It has also been intimated Central Banks play language games in the manner of their operations:
Cadence in a Time Laden Stream
To speak of an apolitical trend standard through the lenses of a political condition appears dysfunctional: while contemporary money standards are politically composed, for the most part [money] is enjoyed without the effort of having to justify using it.
A prominent monetary economist makes a prescient observation on the condition here.
False Euphoria
For many, Bitcoin appears at fundamental polar opposites to Central Banking theory and modern monetary evolution.
An understandable observation is made on this general nature:
Provoking a response:
Auri Sacra Fames
The inflation resistant properties prevalent [in] common conceptions of gold are themselves resistant to [how] inflation can be disambiguated in the [common sense] — causing speculation in how Satoshi may have done so:
“Of late years the ‘auri sacra fames’ has to sought to envelop itself in a garment of respectability…as the gold advocates allege, because gold is the sole prophylactic against the plague of fiat moneys, or whether it is a furtive Freudian cloak…gold has become part of the apparatus of conservatism and is one of the matters we cannot expect to see handled without prejudice.” John Maynard Keynes, Treatise on Money (Chapter 35), 1930.
Mexican Standoff
Now considered something of a movie cliché, a Mexican standoff is a confrontation in which no strategy exists to allow any party [achieve] victory.
It has been used in satire of the Western genre — and by default — the gold standard.
Satoshi Nakamoto: Performance Artist
Applied on a sovereign standard, game theory equilibrium induces an external influence unavailable in such a stand off.
It’s slowly dawning on the traditional Bitcoin actors [of] the game afoot:
Apparatus of conservatism persists:
Along with a disregard for games in the money context:
Gold is Not Asymptotic
Bitcoin trends in the asymptotic Ideal:
Code is Not Law
If Bitcoin can’t be contrary to economics, it can’t be contrary to law:
If it’s said [that] Bitcoin belongs in the word [and] a language condition — a relatively less considered approach —then it’s still an abstract.
It’s therefore probable some sort of performative or other type of art will occur — impelling the imagination toward irregularity; abstracting the abstract from abstraction.
How random does random have to be before it becomes logical in the legal and trustworthy sense?
