531–540 of 905 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He hasn't kept ahead of the destruction of the dollar very well. The dollar is trading pretty much at 30-year historic highs relative to all other currencies. You have to go back to ~2000 to find a stronger era, and then the 1980s before that. https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/dxy
They're talking about the decline in the purchasing price of a dollar over the past decade, not its value relative to other currencies at the moment
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> his financial incentive to hide his identity as Satoshi under US securities law I don't think you can attribute this to financial incentive. The actual Satoshi could forfeit 90% of their BTC and still have more than they could know what to do with. At those kinds of levels I can see personal security being a higher consideration. Either way it would give no indication who might be Satoshi because all candidates wou…
> The actual Satoshi could forfeit 90% of their BTC and still have more than they could know what to do with. Ha, that may be technically true but when did you ever find a billionaire who would be OK with it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He hasn't kept ahead of the destruction of the dollar very well. The dollar is trading pretty much at 30-year historic highs relative to all other currencies. You have to go back to ~2000 to find a stronger era, and then the 1980s before that. https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/dxy
They're talking about the decline in the purchasing price of a dollar over the past decade, not its value relative to other currencies at the moment
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He hasn't kept ahead of the destruction of the dollar very well. That hasn't been his goal. For the last two decades he's been running a huge charitable foundation...
Was that in between his visits on Epstine island?
Someone can do more than one thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone who has read his material would be likely to repeat the same analogies and trivia. As for the hyphen errors, they are common for people for whom English is their second language. I commit hyphen errors similar to what is described all the time because English hyphenation makes absolutely no sense. In fact, reading the list of examples, the mistakes listed makes more sense to me than the correct way of writing…
As a Swede I also do all of these things. And it doesn't feel like anything special, I imagine hundreds of thousands of people do the same.
I think there's a pretty good chance Adam Back is Satoshi, but I don't think this is a great article. Perhaps he's rendering a careful scientific process in a way that makes for a readable narrative, but as written, it sounds like a lot of gut feel and confirmation bias. The biggest new contribution to the Satoshi question seems to be ad hoc stylometry. To have faith in his methodology, he should be testing it on ide…
It seems very unlikely to me. I've had personal correspondence with Satoshi, and met Adam Back in person, and I can't see it. Actually I don't see how anyone involved with Blockstream could be identified as Satoshi. They never believed in what Satoshi was doing and built their whole company around the claim that Satoshi had screwed up the core of the system's design, despite that nothing about the design or its assum…
Satoshi can't spend any of his bitcoins without tanking bitcoin's price. So Satoshi needs to find some other way to support himself. Creating bitcoin related companies is one way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Pretty compelling story. Not necessarily for its revelations, but for the fact that John Carreyrou and the NYT decided to publish it at all. When is the line crossed from journalism into doxxing? Whoever created Bitcoin has a legitimate safety reason to stay anonymous. Anyone suspected of holding that much wealth becomes a target - as does their family.
I hate this idea that doxxing is some kind if crime. “Who is the creator of bitcoin?” is a matter of great public and historical interest. Finding out who he is, is the purest form of journalism.
The thing is, up until the advent of the internet it basically didn't matter - although in some cases, e.g. the German left-wing terror group "RAF", rich people did end up getting v&, in some cases killed. But that was a rarity.
But now with the possibilities of modern technology? Being able to be active on the Internet without hiding behind a pseudonym is a rare privilege. Wrong political opinion? Some nutjob from the opposite side can and will send anything from "pizza pranks" to outright SWAT to your home (or your parents, or ex-wife, or anyone they can identify as being associated with you). And if you got money? Stalkers, thieves, robbers, scammers, you will get targeted.