41–50 of 182 posts
imo it's pretty obvious that he was Hal Finney, potentially with collaborators, and no amount of scripted emails, etc. disproves it for me
He was interviewed when he could no longer speak. He was asked if he was Satoshi. He just smiled.
It's just the kind of joke Hal would play.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's incredibly dangerous of these "journalists". Putting targets on people's back as well as possibly being slander. Any bitcoin oldheads know it's not Peter Todd based on tons of behavioral, timestamped, and logistical evidence. The actual leading candidate is Len Sassaman if you look objectively at the evidence.
> It's incredibly dangerous of these "journalists". Putting targets on people's back [...] The actual leading candidate is [named other individual/family target] Am I misunderstanding something, or do you want to edit that?
imo it's pretty obvious that he was Hal Finney, potentially with collaborators, and no amount of scripted emails, etc. disproves it for me
It sounds like you know Hal was running a marathon while Satoshi was emailing. Did you also know their stylometry doesn't match?
Stylometry was known at the time, Hal might have changed his. People have been using computer stylometry for years to rule in or out pretenders to be Shakespeare.
Emails can be sent with a timer.
I'm honestly surprised that all of the alleged satoshis haven't been kid napped by armed gangs trying to get the billions locked up in the first mined blocks.
Most kidnappings seem to involve kidnapping people who do in fact have the resources to pay to some extent. They don’t seem to occur in a speculative fashion where “maybe this person can pay…”. Anyone who knows, knows the coins haven’t been touched in a suspiciously long time, and moving Bitcoin is not always anonymous…
For potentially tens of billions of dollars, I'm willing to bet that some criminals would make an exception.
imo it's pretty obvious that he was Hal Finney, potentially with collaborators, and no amount of scripted emails, etc. disproves it for me
This paper makes a pretty good case that the late Len Sassaman was Satoshi. Its a pretty thorough examination regardless if you think it was Len or not and doesn't come to a definitive conclusion.
Headline: ‘I am not Satoshi Nakamoto’: Subject of HBO documentary denies he invented bitcoin https://lite.cnn.com/2024/10/08/investing/satoshi-nakamoto-i...
Is there anything positive at all in the Crypto industry? CO2 emissions, fraud, attacking democracy is on the negative side. What’s on the positive? Why is it still legal? It feels like Crypto at the systemic level is an open vulnerability not an asset. It’d be nice to have this vulnerability to get fixed.
Mind you, I don't think in its present form it is worth it (POW is intrinsically power-intensive; a lot of things about the banking system that seem like bugs are actually features; etc).
But I think A) value stored in tokens, and B) decentralized ledgers and nonrepudiation are things that are may want to have as core financial services in the future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It sounds like you know Hal was running a marathon while Satoshi was emailing. Did you also know their stylometry doesn't match?
It's not definitive proof. Stylometry was known at the time, Hal might have changed his. People have been using computer stylometry for years to rule in or out pretenders to be Shakespeare. Emails can be sent with a timer.
That person was also familiar with Hal's PoW implementation (where Hal mentions it was an implementation of this guy's concept) 3 years before the Bitcoin paper, but attempted to obfuscate that fact.
Absolutely insane. (1) It's not Peter Todd. Anyone who knows Peter Todd and/or was around in the early days, can clearly tell Satoshi and Peter are not the same person. (2) No good comes from speculation over the identity of Satoshi. When someone living is named, their life becomes absolute hell and the security risk imposed on them is very real. When someone dead is proposed, that hellish experience is passed to the…
Not a good reason. The person who developed bitcoin is responsible for billions (maybe trillions) of dollars of fraud and crime. They are responsible for a ludicrous amount of waste and carbon output. They should be held to account by the public.