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

Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 162 posts

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

#51

Post by kiba »

kybernetikos wrote: post #32
lvs wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really not too sure why you're being downvoted. I think there are a number of people who agree that outing him isn't necessary or valuable. A man trying not to be in the public eye deserves as much.

Not just that - outing satoshi could cause him and any close family significant danger, given that there is a strong chance he is in possession of the secret keys of addresses containing 1M bitcoins. https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-f...

What makes him different from say, Bill Gate?

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

#52

Post by derefr »

norea-armozel wrote: post #13

Why is it important to know who Satoshi Nakamoto is/was? It seems like all this desire to know the person defeats the point of the pseudo-anonymity here. I assume it's meant to keep people focused on the idea of the crypto-currency and less on any specific ideology SN may espouse. But that's just me.

Personally, I want to know who this guy is because he did something really rare: putting together some bits of common, old math—just bits that nobody thought to put together before—into a system with entirely novel (some would say "emergent") high-level semantics. He's an "inventor" in the most crucial sense.

And really, he's created one of the few things in Computer Science that I wouldn't argue with being patented. A blockchain is a configuration of algorithms into a novel abstract "machine", with many possible implementations, which isn't domain-specific, and that nobody had thought of—or, really, was likely to ever think of—without him.

Really, I'm just hoping that he's still actively working on other ideas; I would love to follow his research.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

#53

Post by nickpsecurity »

The Newsweek one made more sense than this one. Especially him saying he wasn't involved in it any more. Imperfect English wouldn't make me think I worked on a project called Bitcoin, which also doesn't even sound like most tech. He certainly issued a rebuttal but would if it was true or false. Same for the email saying he's not Dorian. Meaningless.

So, she might be wrong or right. Who knows. That story wasn't convincing mainly due to how it was presented. I think this guy is onto something about that:

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/03/10/satoshi-why...

So, now we have a new one with leaked emails and blog posts. The writer is wise enough, as Analemma noted, to mention it could be a hoax with some indications of that. It's actually the first thing I think given the two source are both huge red flags, one already has editing, and they center on a sort of egomaniac. An egomaniac who also has financial conflicts of interest and major investments in Bitcoin that might benefit from a false reveal. I'm not buying it until we have good external or first-hand data tying him to Bitcoin like prior work attempted.

The trust chain and leveraging Satoshi's stash without directly moving it is good thinking, though. I predicted that in private conversations as a significant possibility. Learned the trick from Wall St where they have all kinds of ways to make money on less money or static assets. Hell, they even make money on non-existent assets lol. A person sitting on a Bitcoin fortune able to prove it without it being published could do a lot of the same stuff.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

#54

Post by adrusi »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #4

If someone wants to prove they are Satoshi Nakamoto all they have to do is sign a message with the private keys from the genesis block. Until then it's a little pointless to guess.

That's assuming they still have it. Perhaps the reason none of the bitcoin created in the genesis block has ever moved is because Satoshi thought there would be some value in having it be static and never expected bitcoin to have actual value.

They may have deleted that key.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

#55

Post by chroma »

[deleted] wrote: post #46
cba9 wrote: post #42

Apparently Gizmodo has been investigating this for even longer (!) and has a lot of other evidence for Wright=Satoshi too: http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-frie...

[deleted]

I think Gizmodo's is a much less rigorous article than the Wired one. It mostly consists of accusations and circumstantial evidence. Every early player in Bitcoin development has these in spades. In a world where Craig Steven Wright is not Satoshi, we'd see the exact same tenuous evidence.

In contrast, the Wired article stays close to the facts (GPG keys, email addresses, IPs, etc) and hedges its bets. Wright might be Satoshi. He might be a hoaxer. We don't know. It's not as satisfying to read as the Gizmodo pablum, but it's much more accurate.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

#56

Post by mikeyouse »

elif wrote: post #41

I wish people would respect satoshi's wish of anonymity. Having probably the only concentration of wealth over $100M not guarded by a full security detail, it could very well lead to not only his own harm, but perhaps his family members being kidnapped, etc. That is not even to mention the bilderberg/rothschild/etc. type of people that probably aren't big fans.

There are something like 5,000 families in the US worth more than $100M, the majority don't have private security, don't worry about kidnappings, and don't take any real actions to protect themselves from the Bilderbergs (?)

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

#57

Post by kelvin0 »

I'm really wondering why the author of bitcoin would hide their identity? Don't want the attention? Plenty of innovative people are simply footnotes in history. Or is the true origin of this digital currency a dubious agency, who if revealed would stop people from wanting to use it? Is it a second try at Amero? http://forextrading.about.com/od/forexhistory/a/amero_conspi...

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

#58

Post by mike_hearn »

emgoldstein wrote: post #39
Analemma_ wrote: post #6

So far there have been multiple Satoshi Nakamoto reveals which, of course, never panned out. To their credit Wired is hedging their bets, saying Wright could be a determined hoaxer and even providing some countervailing evidence to their own theory. Good journalism, that. Having said that, I looked over the article and this seems to be the most convincing Satoshi Nakamoto theory thus far. There's no need to jump to a…

I think a very small amount of stylometric analysis would cast a lot of doubt on this theory. Satoshi's grammar is always perfect. His sentences are tight. He's clear and to the point. Wright rambles; his grammar is terrible; he seems to have no idea what a comma is for. Scanning his blog for a minute, he comes across as the kind of slightly dotty kook who would try to convince people he's Satoshi with this kind of "…

Not only grammar, but Wright's writings are full of typos and spelling errors, which occur at a remarkable rate, to the extent that he can't spell Silicon Valley! (he spelled it as "silicone valley"). I never once saw Satoshi make a spelling error.

That said, the rest of the evidence is pretty compelling, isn't it?

Satoshi did once say he wasn't all that good with words, despite evidence to the contrary. Perhaps this mysterious collaboration with his dead friend involved the other guy writing the messages.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

#59

Post by draw_down »

kelvin0 wrote: post #57

I'm really wondering why the author of bitcoin would hide their identity? Don't want the attention? Plenty of innovative people are simply footnotes in history. Or is the true origin of this digital currency a dubious agency, who if revealed would stop people from wanting to use it? Is it a second try at Amero? http://forextrading.about.com/od/forexhistory/a/amero_conspi...

I would have done the same thing. People are insane, can you imagine what they would do to the inventor of digital money? (I realize Satoshi is not that, but a lot of people will think he/she is.)
Post reply on HN