de la Talebenning, of courso …

photo by Marvin Rozendal, via Unsplash

We’re back, folks!

You knew we would be because we clearly have unresolved business, does our little gang of anti-Talebites. One such can of worms is the competition as described in L’epilogo del Essayo, which we will come to shortly, but for the time being we must deal with my prediction as to how Fragile Nassim would respond to the original essay.

As a reminder, I said the following towards the end of A Tale of Two Talebs:

I have to say I am rather disappointed that he basically didn’t do any of the things I predicted. At least not the ones I can verify from his public behaviour. But that’s okay. I am Dynamically Hedged. It’s no biggie. In fact, I would argue that I am being incredibly brave to post the preimage at all, given it involves ceding points to Fragile Nassim. Think about that. Think about how brave I am.

Here is the hash primage, with commentary to follow. This is how I predicted Fragile Nassim would respond:

SHA256:1E997FE5DD9D49EB1F4E7EB8113A66E3C4C8F19C8067EB14507DF7260363A703

and the timestamp:

Whatever to make of all this? An ignominious defeat? A mark of imbecility and a lack of appreciation for the SECOND ORDER COMPLEX NONLINEAR EFFECTS and beyond?

lolz. that’s cute.

Well, first of all, I did in fact deal with a barrage of sycophantic Talebites, who did in fact rain down all manner of distracting, fallacious bullshit that did nothing to refute my irrefutable core argument. And I didn’t have to block any of them because I trolled them so hard they blocked me. Booyah.

Second of all, I think it’s safe to say he consulted Norman and Bar-Yam who did exactly what I described and then resolved to keep quiet about it forever. I can’t prove this, obviously, but I welcome their public refutation. Note this means they need to start arguing with the claims in the essay. They won’t do this. Double booyah.

Third of all, we must contend with the fact that Fragile Nassim read the post. Given its popularity, he was obviously going to be aware of it, but we know specifically that he read it because he tweeted a screenshot of a comment. Unfortunately, he deleted the tweet before I thought to screenshot it. He also blocked a parody account that had never interacted with his. He’s wildly unpredictable, which I guess he did say in one of his books …

But let us ponder further how odd it is that my predictions have not come true …

Can you think of anybody else to have ever crossed him to then escape his wrath? This is somebody who routinely goes well out of his way to destroy people. Why hasn’t he tried to destroy me?

Is it because A Tale of Two Talebs isn’t a big enough deal? We shall see. The monthly readership is growing exponentially, a process we all know he understands very well due to his musings on P=NP. It is only a matter of time before somebody puts it to him directly and he can’t avoid addressing it.

I would like to think it is because I predicted his behaviour both pre- and post-Hofstadterian paradox. Maybe, maybe not. But note I am now super-dynamically hedged because, if he is pushed to the point of needing to harass me, it will be despite my prediction of this being entirely public!

I want to push him to such a point. It will undoubtedly Streisand back in his face and be all the more delightful for bystanders. That is why I launched the competition to solve the cryptic puzzle as indicated in the Twitter thread below:

For those readers who have Twitter, please publicise this as best you can. Not only will it help spread the original post but it will raise awareness for BTCPayServer, which I think is an entirely worthy cause. Although the puzzle is solvable, I would rather prefer that nobody solved it so that I can give the entire prize pot to them.

For those who do not have Twitter, I will repeat the terms here:

there is a puzzle embedded in the piece. it cannot be solved. the prize will be awarded to whoever correctly explains *why* it cannot be solved. to avoid suspicions of shenanigans, I have written out the conditions of victory and hashed them:

635A9B10FBF31D966574480BB9CC1FF4F921F69AC6FDD08490DD811D08CC829F

I will make public these conditions in another Appendiccio when the competition closes so that everybody can audit the whole process for funny business.

to be clear, that is a hash of a very long plaintext explanation of the requirements for a submission to win. please submit solutions to taleoftwotalebs@gmail.com. the deadline will be one month from now, July 6th, 2020.

on July 6th I will post the primage, and I will contact the winners via the email address they use to submit. non-winning entries will not be contacted unless I think they are funny enough to deserve it. winners’ identities will not be made public unless they request it.

the prize will be as follows: 0.25 BTC to be donated to BTCPayServer, and 0.25 BTC to be split between correct submissions. this set will max out at 5 based on who submitted first. in the event of zero correct submissions by the deadline, fully 0.5 BTC will be donated to BTCPayServer.

in order to receive your prize, you must have a bitcoin address and you must be willing to tell me this, obviously. this can be done privately, over telegram or signal if desired. or, if you are just swell, submit anyway and, if you win, donate your prize to BTCPayServer.

furthermore, I heartily encourage any well-off Bitcoiners to publicly vow to either match or exceed my donation! don’t worry too much about who wins my stupid competition, but certainly retweet and repost all this nonsense as a way to gather momentum for BTCPayServer.

Happy hunting, folks!

And watch this space for further Appendiccios. This was by far the least exciting …

follow me on Twitter @allenf32, and follow @BtcpayServer too while you are at it.

maybe a squirrel. maybe not. views my own, not my employer’s.