Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

blog.lopp.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 194 posts

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#11

Post by sschueller »

tempmac wrote: post #2

what happens if wallet from satoshi is stolen and poured into the market for quick bucks? what happens if "satoshi" gets desperate for quick cash? idk this seems to be a major financial risk for bitcoiners, not altruism...

Yes, all those known wallets should be burned if anyone really cared about the stability of bitcoin. Others aka "shit coins" do not have this massive amount of cash that could all of a sudden be spent causing a huge crash.

Although very unlikely that anyone will ever crack those keys it is possible that the keys are found by someone or Satoshi himself spends it.

The bitcoin core maximalists should focus on fixing their block including moving to PoS instead of pissing on all other coins constantly.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#12

Post by toenail »

aniforprez wrote: post #8
toenail wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A truly altruistic system would not confer such a huge advantage on early miners Bitcoin never claimed to be and is not altruistic. And the same can be said about almost all investments, you need information early, you need to judge the information correctly, and you need to move in. Same with bitcoin.

GP said nothing about bitcoin claiming to be anything. They're directly quoting the article

Your point being?

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#13

Post by maipen »

monsieurbanana wrote: post #7
maipen wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been more than 10 years since there was activity. The market would crash but eventualy recover. There's really nothing dramatic about it.

Even if you were right on both of your points it still would be dramatic. Behind every marker crash there's people's lives changing forever.

> Behind every marker crash there's people's lives changing forever.

Absolutely.

My reply was directed towards bitcoin as a technology. The market volatility but more important the constant manipulators and bad actors really have a negative impact in people's lifes.

But most often we see this happening to people that are invested in crypto but not users of it. Because they keep their money on exchanges, they are not taking advantage to the security and self sovereignty that comes with crypto. There is no evidence that bitcoin will die or wouldn't recover from market dumps.

However there's plenty examples of exchanges going under or stealing people's assets forever.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#15

Post by toenail »

sschueller wrote: post #11
tempmac wrote: post #2

what happens if wallet from satoshi is stolen and poured into the market for quick bucks? what happens if "satoshi" gets desperate for quick cash? idk this seems to be a major financial risk for bitcoiners, not altruism...

Yes, all those known wallets should be burned if anyone really cared about the stability of bitcoin. Others aka "shit coins" do not have this massive amount of cash that could all of a sudden be spent causing a huge crash. Although very unlikely that anyone will ever crack those keys it is possible that the keys are found by someone or Satoshi himself spends it. The bitcoin core maximalists should focus on fixing the…

> fixing their block including moving to PoS

POW fixed a problem POS does not solve, it is an entirely decentralized, trustless system. It is not possible to move to POS, the only coins who can do that are coins that are not decentralized and trustless to begin with.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#17

Post by gonehome »

toenail wrote: post #6
tromp wrote: post #4

> Who, we ask, is so altruistic as to create a new monetary system but not use it to enrich themselves? Bitcoin's supply schedule, in which half of all Bitcoin is mined in the first four years, guaranteed a Bitcoin wealth concentration on the early miners, especially considering how few there were. At long intervals, Satoshi would be the only one, mining on his laptop. A truly altruistic system would not confer such…

> A truly altruistic system would not confer such a huge advantage on early miners Bitcoin never claimed to be and is not altruistic. And the same can be said about almost all investments, you need information early, you need to judge the information correctly, and you need to move in. Same with bitcoin.

Plus rewarding early miners creative the incentive structure more likely to drive adoption.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#18

Post by RyanAdamas »

>Sure, but Occam’s Razor applies. Why go to such lengths to sow disinformation in a private communication? It would have been far simpler for Hal to have just responded at a different time rather than leaving this proverbial needle in the haystack that would have never been revealed had Hearn not published the emails.

Occam's Razor, as the author enjoyed using, would suggest that someone knowingly creating a rival to a hegemonic currency system would need plausible deniability as to who they are and what they are doing. Having a partner in crime would not be inconceivable and they wouldn't need to be Satoshi.

"Hal used tabs while Satoshi used spaces (this is a massive never-ending debate between developers)

Hal preferred his debug statements not to be indented while Satoshi’s maintained indentation with surrounding code

Hal made comments with block style multi-line markers while Satoshi preferred to create many single-line comments with double slashes

Hal used snake_case for his function names while Satoshi used camelCase

There are probably far more differences that are more subtle, but these jumped out from just a few minutes of eyeballing the codebases."

These are irrelevant. Someone of Hal's intelligence and skill who was a decades long cypherpunk would understand the importance of obfuscating ones own styles. Lastly, I find it interesting that the Silicon Valley elite did the ice bucket challenge 2 weeks before Hal died.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#20

Post by Beijinger »

tromp wrote: post #4

> Who, we ask, is so altruistic as to create a new monetary system but not use it to enrich themselves? Bitcoin's supply schedule, in which half of all Bitcoin is mined in the first four years, guaranteed a Bitcoin wealth concentration on the early miners, especially considering how few there were. At long intervals, Satoshi would be the only one, mining on his laptop. A truly altruistic system would not confer such…

> Who, we ask, is so altruistic as to create a new monetary system but not use it to enrich themselves?

And take the fame. He also, as I mentioned before, may have been a candidate for the Noble prize in economics. https://www.newsbtc.com/news/bitcoin/bitcoin-creator-satoshi....

I take it as a given, he is dead. He would be a candidate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Kleiman

Post reply on HN