Interesting! This person knew about b-money though.

nice

Was that before he went to the pedo island?

I'd be willing to bet that Adam was part of team Satoshi. After vanishing for some years he came back in late 2013 playing dumb. But they still got to him making him an offer he couldn't resist. Blockstream was founded to deliver a heavily limited version of Bitcoin. No privacy/fungibility despite Adam talking a lot about it and no scaling without custodians. A Bitcoin that would still build on its early reputation, (ironically) prolonging the life span of fiat currency (read control-plane-capital on "freegold") however castrated as a medium of exchange so it wouldn't disrupt the machinery of banking dynasties. At least not too early.

does this mean that cashu is not real "ecash", but bitcoin onchain is?

From cypherpunks Sun Sep 19 20:43:05 1999 From: Anonymous <nobody () replay ! com> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 20:43:05 +0000 To: cypherpunks Subject: Re: ecash means anonymous & untraceable (Re: Will this replace banking X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=cypherpunks&m=95280154629912 >I wouldn't say ecash has to use blinding, but I would argue it would >be a misuse of the word "ecash", if something which was revocable were >dubbed ecash. > >With that definition it is not technically possible to implement >electronic cash at all without tamper resistant hardware, because >reliance on a mint, or double spend database means your "cash" can >become worthless over night if someone (say a government) decides to >switch off a computer (the one holding the double spending database). There are soem alternatives which would come closer to this definition. One possibility is to make the double-spending database public. Whenever someone receives a coin they broadcast its value. The DB operates in parallel across a large number of servers so it is intractable to shut it down. The greater danger is that the mint would be taken over and forced to behave badly, say by issuing too many coins. This would degrade the money and make it worthless. Another possible form of ecash could be based on Wei Dai's b-money. This is like hashcash, something which represents a measureable amount of computational work to produce. It therefore can't be forged. This could be a very robust payment system and is worth pursuing further.

From cypherpunks Sun Sep 19 20:43:05 1999 From: Anonymous <nobody () replay ! com> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 20:43:05 +0000 To: cypherpunks Subject: Re: ecash means anonymous & untraceable (Re: Will this replace banking X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=cypherpunks&m=95280154629912 >I wouldn't say ecash has to use blinding, but I would argue it would >be a misuse of the word "ecash", if something which was revocable were >dubbed ecash. > >With that definition it is not technically possible to implement >electronic cash at all without tamper resistant hardware, because >reliance on a mint, or double spend database means your "cash" can >become worthless over night if someone (say a government) decides to >switch off a computer (the one holding the double spending database). There are soem alternatives which would come closer to this definition. One possibility is to make the double-spending database public. Whenever someone receives a coin they broadcast its value. The DB operates in parallel across a large number of servers so it is intractable to shut it down. The greater danger is that the mint would be taken over and forced to behave badly, say by issuing too many coins. This would degrade the money and make it worthless. Another possible form of ecash could be based on Wei Dai's b-money. This is like hashcash, something which represents a measureable amount of computational work to produce. It therefore can't be forged. This could be a very robust payment system and is worth pursuing further.

Its a shitcoin