A Code I Saw Outside

 

To begin with, I don't think my mental health is worse.  It's much better.  I am facing ideas of reference every day, and mentalizing in response to those ideas.  The psychotic spectrum disorder patient's best friend is the word "maybe."  I shouldn't dismiss my ideas of reference, I should try to analyze them, and not be too certain either way, even if my ideas are odd.  I think the situation I'm in is certainly very unusual!


Anyway, I saw a code outside that seemed to say:  "That's bad game theory."  Not mine!  Perhaps the Department of Defense (or "War" as they now sometimes call it) is bad at game theory--that sounds true.


My game theory idea was based on a YouTube video for the Jason Bourne song, "Extreme Ways."  One of the versions of the song came up with the title, "Extreme Ways (Loops of Fury Remix)".  It might have been the wrong one, i.e., the wrong song for that title.  Anyway, that inspired me to develop some good "game theoretic while loops."  It exposes *how easy I am* to "win" as an ally, and, how incredibly disinterested in using my extremely high talents a lot of communities are.


I was impressed that Joshua Zelinsky eventually checked my proof.  I'm not angry with him.  I do think academic mathematicians in general are not so great, given their apathy about me.  It's true that I only ever proved GLL...but why have I not gotten credit for it?  Anyway, the refusal to look at my work and research is over, I was given the mistake in my proof, and so I decided to "robotically follow through" and publish my work.


My game theory is excellent.  The next issue is, my political support is up for grabs.  Will any political leaders send someone by to do me the honor of valuing my human rights to tell me when it's over?  Not being gaslighted is a human right.  I deserve to know when my ordeal will end.  My political communication will be "on" again after the FBI finally assists me.


Until then, it's going to be *very difficult to CITE* any of my work.  People can use my ideas that I'm publishing, but it's going to be very awkward when I am living in isolation, publishing research ideas that no one will acknowledge.


Indeed, my game theory is excellent.  In particular, everyone knows that if this ever happens to me or a loved one of mine again, the cost will be *tremendously high*!  If I'm "going to have to wait," then so will all of you.  In particular, if this ever happens to me or a loved one of mine again, I WILL DO EXACTLY THE SAME THING, and people will HATE IT, because they could have had the fruits of my uniquely talented labor much much sooner!  Think how long the FBI made YOU wait to get this information published by me!


That's why I am good at game theory, and DOS/DOJ/DOD are not.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Math Update: My P != NP Proof Might Be Correct!!!!! -- (update, no it's not, see the note at the beginning and the updates near the bottom)

EDIT:  No, this proof is not correct.  See the updates at the bottom for details on why (based on Dr. Zelinsky's comment).  Fortunately, my GLL proof and MSR proofs still appear to be correct. It could be that Joshua Zelinsky's comment actually helps me to complete the proof. The GLL proof appears to be correct, AFAIK. The thing is, the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent --> P != NP" within PA and the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent" as a theorem of ZFC just shows that P != NP is a theorem of PA.  That isn't a contradiction, it's just another step in the proof. I think the striking idea is, P != NP is a theorem of PA, but not of ZFC.  That is what I worked to prove.  AFAIK it is possible for a proposition to be a theorem of PA but not of ZFC.  In particular, PA can be proved consistent from ZFC, so we would think it s possible and even likely that there are some non-theorems of ZFC that are theorems of PA. So this is great!  It l...
Read more

Hello, Texas - A Quick Monopoly Lesson

  So today, I thought I saw some people running around blurting code gestures at me.  One of the codes seemed to say, "Riot for a[buse] v[ictim] time -M".  Oh, M?  M as in Monolith, or M as in Monopoly fan who doesn't get it? Here, Houstonian code-talkers...let me teach you how to play Monopoly, since you are so hungry for free knowledge:  - Make deals with other players that benefit you.  - Offer deals to difficult players that are somewhat beneficial to them, knowing that they might reject.  - Watch which deals other players reject, and identify what *deal types* they are not likely to accept from you or anyone else.  - Be very very careful about your own deals--and behavior--lest you get figured out by your opponents and backed into a corner, with good, beneficial deals being made without you by cunning adversaries who know your every move. There's a poker lesson in there, too, but I don't want to get too educational right now.
Read more

Flash Non-Fiction: James Bond and Masculinity

  This was going to be a longer essay, but I decided to just blurt out my point rather than trying to write well. Basically, I think James Bond movies are good, and the songs are high-quality too, but it sends semi-dangerous messages to men in particular about what it means to be a man.  The Bond character is intransigent, aggressive, violent, and absolutely sure of himself in all cases.  He is portrayed as a big winner--able to date and have sex with beautiful women, almost impossible to kill, and lethal and elite at both armed and unarmed combat. I'm concerned that some men, including my estranged father ASW, have had their sense of morality warped by Bond movies.  They think that this dramatically presented way to be masculine is the only way.  I think that's unhealthy, and when people get the not-so-original idea to "try to be more Bond-like" in their personal lives, that leads to catastrophic conflicts with and major potential for deep pain for people that ...
Read more