I read some of the slides, but they are authored from an emotional standpoint, which makes it difficult to follow ideas and conclusions. Statements like "public blockchain security is a lie", are just not useful. If this content is used at Berkley I'm worried for peoples tuition. I'd expect more depth and logical statements for a presentation at a university.
Sorry, I don't know the author and it shouldn't matter. Still think the slides are made up of emotional trigger words rather then arguments and content, you can grab content like this from random reddit threads. How sad indeed.
