Live data from Hacker News

Len Sassaman and Satoshi

leung-btc.medium.com

21–30 of 73 posts

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#21
post #8

It‘s a pretty strong case for Len to be Satoshi, admittedly. And it would explain the mysterious silence from Satoshi Nakamoto - he's dead. Of course one could argue that Satoshi is alive and choses to be silent on purpose, since being worth tens of billions of dollars might come with some strings attached, ie kidnappings, black mail, extortions etc. But one would have to have a rather strong personality to not give…

Len is a good candidate, but here's one problem: Satoshi spoke up in 2014 on a long-dormant account[1] to say "I am not Dorian Nakamoto." This was a response to a Newsweek article that claimed to have found his identity. So maybe someone hacked that account-- but then, why didn't we get any more Satoshi activity? Or maybe Len (who took his own life in 2011) isn't Satoshi after all! [1] http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/f…

[deleted]

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#22

It‘s a pretty strong case for Len to be Satoshi, admittedly. And it would explain the mysterious silence from Satoshi Nakamoto - he's dead. Of course one could argue that Satoshi is alive and choses to be silent on purpose, since being worth tens of billions of dollars might come with some strings attached, ie kidnappings, black mail, extortions etc. But one would have to have a rather strong personality to not give…

> It‘s a pretty strong case for Len to be Satoshi, admittedly. And it would explain the mysterious silence from Satoshi Nakamoto - he's dead.

I think it's pretty likely that the person (or people) who went by Satoshi is dead, and probably died before their Bitcoin hoard was worth much.

If not, you'd have to explain why someone is giving up the opportunity to never have to work for someone else to support themselves ever again. And those are less believable to me: e.g. 1) already having so much FU money they're secure in their lifestyle w/o the Bitcoin, 2) being either extremely ascetic or happy to work for someone else to support themselves, 3) deliberately choosing to destroy it for some reason, 4) losing the all keys in an accident (more understandable for a rando playing around than the creator), etc.

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#23
post #9

I actually met Len in 2010/2011 when he was visiting the Dartmouth cs dept! We talked about noodlers being an excellent fountain pen ink and some stuff around functional programming that overlap with the language base security ideas Sergey Bratus and Meredith Patterson went on to popularize. I also have a distinct memory that he had a very well decorated walking cane. Edit: I do think that this post, while having val…

I worked with him at PGP in 2000.

Do you have any opinion about whether he could be Satoshi?

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#24

Pretty awesome article. Certainly as good as any other 'proof' I've seen.

That's an understatement if you ask me. This seems much better than any other Satoshi theory I've seen.

I've always thought the best way to verify a Satoshi candidate would be to compare coding style. Presumably this guy has some open source code we can look at. Has anyone done a comparison?

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#25
Pretty sure Len thought Bitcoin was a profound abortion of an idea:

https://twitter.com/lensassaman/status/77358901774917632

> Right; why would they [mention Bitcoin in the cypherpunk panel on digital currencies], though? Bitcoin pretty much fails as a cypherpunk protocol.

https://twitter.com/lensassaman/status/81121594373709825

> That only works if you want to leave the inflated value of Bitcoin on the table; otherwise you must cash out before the crash.

https://twitter.com/lensassaman/status/80748374386679808

> Oh, where's #infoanarchy when you need it? I mean, we could do a serious take and do BitCoin right, you know. (P.S.: CloudCoin™)

Also, Len was a Unix guy, and whoever wrote Bitcoin was a Windows programmer, though not an incompetent one.

(And, as pointed out in other comments below, Satoshi came out of his seclusion in 02014, three years after Len killed himself, writing only one short email, to rebut Newsweek's article claiming he was Dorian Nakamoto.)

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#26
post #20
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Len is a good candidate, but here's one problem: Satoshi spoke up in 2014 on a long-dormant account[1] to say "I am not Dorian Nakamoto." This was a response to a Newsweek article that claimed to have found his identity. So maybe someone hacked that account-- but then, why didn't we get any more Satoshi activity? Or maybe Len (who took his own life in 2011) isn't Satoshi after all! [1] http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/f…

Yes, 2014 in fact is when Hal Finney died, a few months after that post. He is perhaps the strongest candidate for Satoshi, and if so we'll probably never know.

Maybe if the cryonics thing works out, but that's a long shot.

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#27
post #8

It‘s a pretty strong case for Len to be Satoshi, admittedly. And it would explain the mysterious silence from Satoshi Nakamoto - he's dead. Of course one could argue that Satoshi is alive and choses to be silent on purpose, since being worth tens of billions of dollars might come with some strings attached, ie kidnappings, black mail, extortions etc. But one would have to have a rather strong personality to not give…

Len is a good candidate, but here's one problem: Satoshi spoke up in 2014 on a long-dormant account[1] to say "I am not Dorian Nakamoto." This was a response to a Newsweek article that claimed to have found his identity. So maybe someone hacked that account-- but then, why didn't we get any more Satoshi activity? Or maybe Len (who took his own life in 2011) isn't Satoshi after all! [1] http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/f…

Satoshi's email was hacked and that wasn't signed with PGP

I think the consensus is that the statement wasn't real

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#28

My money (er, bitcoin) is on Hal Finney. I knew Hal from occupying the dorm room next to mine at Caltech. Being Satoshi is just the kind of elaborate prank Hal would have loved. Besides, I've never met anyone as smart as Hal, and I've met a lot of smart people. In his last interview (when he could no longer speak) he was asked if he was Satoshi, and he just grinned. As for where the missing bitcoins are, my bitcoin i…

Why do you think Hal would have been Satoshi but then also been the first developer using his real name?

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#29
post #12

> But with Craig Wright fraudulently claiming credit and invoking a copyright claim to take down the Bitcoin whitepaper, we’re forced to revisit the topic and recenter the discussion around the Cypherpunks who actually built Bitcoin. No, we're not. We can dismiss the fraudulent claims of Craig Wright without being "forced" to do anything else.

If that's the case why has Craig continued to gain prominence and have more and more sway over BTC? Bitcion SV is worth $4B now. He's been able to monopolize the mindshare on Satoshi and misdirect the narrative.

BSV is a small cryptocurrency, the market cap is smaller than the joke coin Dogecoin. $4B is less than half of a percent of the market cap of Bitcoin.

Furthermore, an investment in BSV isn't necessarily a validation of Craig Wright's claims.

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi

#30

My money (er, bitcoin) is on Hal Finney. I knew Hal from occupying the dorm room next to mine at Caltech. Being Satoshi is just the kind of elaborate prank Hal would have loved. Besides, I've never met anyone as smart as Hal, and I've met a lot of smart people. In his last interview (when he could no longer speak) he was asked if he was Satoshi, and he just grinned. As for where the missing bitcoins are, my bitcoin i…

I thought that Hal denied being Satoshi in his final days?
Post reply on HN