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

51–60 of 194 posts

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#51

Post by rurban »

Timja wrote: post #30

I think there is some systematic reason why people like Satoshi, Buckethead, Banksy, etc are not uncovered. In each case, I doubt that it really is hard to figure out who they are. Maybe it is the way the press and social media work. You get as many clicks for a wild theory as you get for a properly researched opinion. As for Satoshi Nakamoto: The most obvious candidate seems to be Adam Back. His invention of proof o…

All three of them are uncovered, just not officially. But many do know their identities.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#52

Post by lagniappe »

drexlspivey wrote: post #49
iamgopal wrote: post #40

Is it possible ( novice with respect to blockchain here ) , to crack the wallet , with all the computing power of the bitcoin mining ?

No, otherwise miners would be cracking wallets instead of mining bitcoins

They are. This is the foundation of the BTC collider project [0]. By the way, wallets do get cracked this way, but less through technical supremacy and more about brute force.

[0] - https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/about

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#55

Post by toenail »

infecto wrote: post #34
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.

Is bitcoin a currency or investment? I would say neither but interesting to see it getting lumped in with investments.

You're right, bitcoin is something entirely new, and we don't know the future, so we don't know what it will end up being.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#56

Post by Timja »

lawn wrote: post #47
Timja wrote: post #30

I think there is some systematic reason why people like Satoshi, Buckethead, Banksy, etc are not uncovered. In each case, I doubt that it really is hard to figure out who they are. Maybe it is the way the press and social media work. You get as many clicks for a wild theory as you get for a properly researched opinion. As for Satoshi Nakamoto: The most obvious candidate seems to be Adam Back. His invention of proof o…

> As for Satoshi Nakamoto: The most obvious candidate seems to be Adam Back. His invention of proof of work, his biography, character, writing style and role as the CEO of the company behind the main wallet software all point to him. Adam Back is obviously not Satoshi. His level of writing or thinking is not even close to the level of Satoshi. When asked what people should pay with when fees were high and Lightning N…

The question asked on that video does not mention lightning.

But his answer begins by explaining lightning.

Back early on forsaw that lightning is the way forward and not larger blocks. Which is another indication to me, that he is indeed Nakamoto.

It was a great insight very much in line with Nakamoto's thinking. Nakamoto who forsaw so many things early on like the need for a script instead of just transaction data on the chain.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#57

Post by drexlspivey »

lagniappe wrote: post #52
drexlspivey wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, otherwise miners would be cracking wallets instead of mining bitcoins

They are. This is the foundation of the BTC collider project [0]. By the way, wallets do get cracked this way, but less through technical supremacy and more about brute force. [0] - https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/about

Afaik they haven't found anything except some puzzle coins being hidden behind increasing difficulty wallets. Only way they can crack a wallet is if the softwate generated the wallet uses some poor sources of entropy or has a vulnerability.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#58

Post by imglorp »

Have state actors playing a longer honeypot sort of game been ruled out?

Because btc is only pseudoanonymous, letting you observe and maybe link transaction sources and recipients, it gives SOME insight into the global movements of funds which were previously totally opaque and untraceable, such as cash, gold, and offshore instruments where there might be NONE.

So for a small investment of a few cryptographic experts' time, a state actor has new insights into political opponents, tax dodges, arms and contraband sales. The amount of insights scales with crypto's adoption and is always greater than the opaque instruments.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#59

Post by toenail »

zaphar wrote: post #37
sMarsIntruder wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I am biased because I see a lot of value in the current fiat system that Bitcoin directly impacts. I am also biased because I don't buy the arguments that the current fiat system has enough issues to indicate it needs replacement. As an example, I am against any system that takes us back to a world where governments no longer are able to use the soft power of economics to react to other countries. The alternative bei…

> I don't buy the arguments that the current fiat system has enough issues to indicate it needs replacement.

Said like somebody who never had a problem with the financial system and had access to banks for their entire life. It's great that money works for you, for most people on this planet the same can not be said.

> where governments no longer are able to use the soft power of economics to react to other countries

The idea that monetary policy is the only way to influence economics seems kind of absurd? You're surely not suggesting that removing fiat currencies would remove economics from the world of politics?

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#60

Post by chollida1 »

lisper wrote: post #24
orra wrote: post #23

The thing I don't understand: if Satoshi is still alive, surely they'd have spent some of that money. They're filthy rich, so why not enjoy it? I get that you can't cash out 5% of any market in one go, without tanking prices. But you can do it gradually.

If Satoshi cashed out even a single satoshi the market would crash because now the odds of him cashing out the rest will have just risen dramatically.

This gets thrown around alot but I disagree.

Mark Zuckerberg sells Meta shares, Bezoes sells Amazon shares, Gates sold a large portion of Microsoft.

The BTC market is big enough to support satoshi selling his coins.

Hell the ETF market alone could absorb all his coins.

I have yet to see anyone show how satoshi selling a single coin would crash the market. He has about 2 days worth of liquidity in a relatively mature market. That's not much volume at all.

Post reply on HN