Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto • Hacker News Board

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#141

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:03 PM UTC

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.

When it goes from being worth less than a dollar to sixty thousand dollars in a few years, its an investment not much different than a limited baseball card.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#142

Post by kkielhofner » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:08 PM UTC

toenail wrote: post #55

infecto wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Bitcoin is almost 15 years old.

This is like calling the web “new” in 2005-2008 (depending on chosen start date).

The “new” excuses ran out a decade ago.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#143

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:12 PM UTC

almost_usual wrote: post #86

paulryanrogers wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Entirely new is a stretch. And haven't we reached the end? It's not broadly useful nor sustainable nor trustworthy.

I’d argue it’s useful for many people who live in countries that suffer from hyperinflation.

I feel like an asset that doesn't rise or fall by a factor of 10 a year would be a lot more useful for that purpose. Even bartering levis blue jeans would offer more price stability than btc.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#144

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:15 PM UTC

toenail wrote: post #123

kranke155 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about kids who weren’t able or had any capital to invest at the time Bitcoin was doing high returns ? They will just be born poor and die poor I suppose ?

Not sure why you expect bitcoin to do "high returns" for everybody, that was never a promise and never a goal. Are you going to argue that stocks are not fair because you personally didn't buy the stocks with the best returns? Bitcoin only makes one relevant promise: There will only be 21 million. And that means that the people who are born poor get a chance at building wealth by not having the government constantly…

You could say as much for beanie babies too. They will be limited so therefore valuable. Forget a hundred years from now that people might not see any value at all in a plush doll, or some runescape gp, or bitcoin. Meanwhile, something like iron or gold has held value for all of human history.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#145

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:23 PM UTC

jonahbenton wrote: post #140

almost_usual wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin is more damaging to surveillance than helpful. Cash is being phased every year. The $10,000 limit in the USA was established in 1970, I guarantee it won’t be adjusted for inflation.

Nah. The blockchain is forever and there are all these breadcrumb producing onramps.

Its probably a lot easier to do a better job of covering your tracks with cash than with bitcoin.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#146

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:26 PM UTC

yieldcrv wrote: post #127

noman-land wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What changed?

Maybe it’s price resilience after zero interest rates went away was just too impressive

Price resilience? It’s lost 50% of its value in the last 2 years. Its as volatile as $AMC or $GME and is talked about in the same circles. Its a meme investment like many others.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#147

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:32 PM UTC

sireat wrote: post #111

chx wrote: post #16

Remind me why we dropped Paul Le Roux as Satoshi. I thought it fit rather well: he had the motivation, the knowledge and the disappearance of Satoshi also fit.

I asked this question about a year ago. Paul Le Roux had the motivation, the knowledge, the multitude of projects, the ability/drive to take on different persona. Plus Le Roux coded crypto projects in C++ on Windows unlike most of his peers. The timelines also fit with Le Roux going into custody when Satoshi dissappeared. Also with 100Ms in USD sitting in laundry baskets around his apartment, Le Roux would not have n…

If you are anonymously building on something like this, then I think you for sure would obfuscate both your code style and your writing style. Code style I’d guess takes less work to obfuscate. E.g. if you typically use tabs instead of spaces, thats a single line of sed to remove that identifier from the entire codebase.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#148

Post by kjkjadksj » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:36 PM UTC

apantel wrote: post #67

Train an LLM on all of Satoshi’s known correspondences, then have it grade the correspondences of each suspected Satoshi candidate to determine who actually writes like him.

Thats if the brilliant ephemeral ghost like Satoshi was dumb enough to write and code in a publicly identifiable style though.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#149

Post by yieldcrv » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:36 PM UTC

kjkjadksj wrote: post #146

yieldcrv wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it’s price resilience after zero interest rates went away was just too impressive

Price resilience? It’s lost 50% of its value in the last 2 years. Its as volatile as $AMC or $GME and is talked about in the same circles. Its a meme investment like many others.

commodities trading (in most markets) never involved permabull expectations like stocks. instead they are cyclical or “seasonal”, and bitcoin has performed the exact same way in many other cycles over the last decade, before “meme stocks” were a thing.

bitcoin spot declined from all time highs.

but to point out your stocks, $AMC and $GME and many other pandemic era stocks have declined way more than 50% from all time highs.

there were questions of whether bitcoin would be of interest or attract capital outside of a zero interest rate environment, and its surpassed all expectations on that front.

Re: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto

#150

Post by jandrese » Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 9:38 PM UTC

sowbug wrote: post #138

jandrese wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is silly. It is like saying nobody would invest in Amazon if Jeff Bezos sold even one share of his stock. Nonsense.

The prevailing belief is that the coins that Satoshi mined are impossible to transfer because Satoshi either never had the private keys, discarded them, or is dead without disclosing them to anyone. A transfer of any amount would invalidate that belief. That's quite unlike a large shareholder of a company who could sell shares but chooses not to, and whose assets would be passed to someone else upon death.

But the immediate assumption is that he would want to burn the whole thing to the ground if he moved a single mBTC? Where does that come from?