Kim Kardashian, Satoshi N,: Refinement of Rpcs.

unbelievable as it sounds, Kim Kardashian has coauthored an inscrutable paper with the creator of Bitcoin, about something way beyond anyone's grasp. there has GOT TO BE a conspiracy in there somewhere?

Figure 1: A decision tree showing the relationship between our system and the construction of linked lists.

PDF inscrutable paper HERE.

for me, this is at least part humor. but we should consider that Satoshi Nakamoto is a pseudonym for a person who is so terrified of assassination that no one (except Kim?) knows who he is. but we do know that his creation, Bitcoin, is also technologically inscrutable.

i would love to hear any findings or other useful comments... if you can even get through the first paragraph.

Without a doubt, the shortcoming of this type of approach, however, is that link-level acknowledgements can be made virtual, large-scale, and scalable. Although this result is continuously an extensive ambition, it often conflicts with the need to provide lambda calculus to systems engineers. Similarly, indeed, SCSI disks and virtual machines have a long history of agreeing in this manner.

GOOD LUCK!

I don't even know what to say. Not sure how Kim would've even go about collaborating with someone that may not even exist. My brain can't process this. It's contrary to everything I expect out of reality.

From your source:

As Pluskal explained to Retraction Watch, the paper – which neither Kardashian or Satoshi Nakamoto actually co-authored – isn't a real study, but a contrived fake designed as yet another sting on predatory journals.

There's the explanation right there.

a reply to: trollz

Cool. Missed that somehow, though admittedly I didn't spend very long checking out the details. Well, back to my normal, everyday questioning of reality.

a reply to: trollz

So this is high level trolling, then?

we need to get the Q-squad on this STAT!

they could drill down on, say, every other word, and in a few short consecutive 10-thousand-page threads we will probably end up with a recipe for buttered toast.

i already found out that the lambda calculus is a universal model of computation that can be used to simulate any Turing machine. (wiki).... so that tiny piece checks out.


could this be for real?

ETA: doh!

You knew it wasn't real when Kris the Momager wasn't trying to sell the rights to the story..

More importantly, has Caitlyn™ been able to squeeze into heels yet? If You look back when He was still "Bruce" He was one of the first to sport a 'Man Bun' sadly She won't get the credit, because now it is just a "bun" (how hetero).

Did You know that Bruce wanted to spell it w/a 'K' to be one of the girls and Kris blew a gasket, and probably a couple doormen...

What a crap decision tree. They could have put more effort into it to make it more realistic. As it is, the decisions aren't complete. "no" branches without "yes" branches. The symbols are wrong in many cases.

originally posted by: tgidkp
we need to get the Q-squad on this STAT!

they could drill down on, say, every other word, and in a few short consecutive 10-thousand-page threads we will probably end up with a recipe for buttered toast.


ETA: doh!

so you posted a hoax article thinking it was real,
then you take a dig at real researchers following Q...

your thread belongs in the hoax bin and you should feel bad.



and only someone completely ignorant of whats happening with Qanon posts would think as you do 'they havnt uncovered anything'.....




cryptocurrencies are the way of the future but it wont be something from the kardashians.... you really couldnt figure that out yourself?


wow its actually not even half way down the page of your own linked article

The journal the work appears in is published by a company called Lupine Publishers. That name has a vaguely sinister, predatory ring to it – which is ironically fitting, because (surprise!) this entire study is a sham. As Pluskal explained to Retraction Watch, the paper – which neither Kardashian or Satoshi Nakamoto actually co-authored – isn't a real study, but a contrived fake designed as yet another sting on predatory journals.

what this proves, is the sort of people who doubt Qanon are the same sort of people who dont even read halfway down the first page of their own links before promoting them with their own threads here on ats.....


read Q's post yourselves, dont let fools like that deter you from doing so, all Q posts linked in my signature