Topic: Foggy identities. (Read 182 times)

Satoshi said sth back in 2008 from where my one quote is .
So i guess the majority believes in him and it wasnt a team effort in the start.

But few still dont take his words as facts.

The best answer in this post.  . I will add if satoshi really posted something in 2019 the bitcoin price will not be around 10k in that year.

Satoshi certainly wasn't alone with the idea of a decentralized economy, yet only he was able to develop what we today know as "Bitcoin". Whether a team effort or not, does it even really matter anymore? Satoshi was here for a short time, until the project caught the necessary support to sustain itself without the need of him. It was sufficient and today I don't really think a comeback of his would matter anyway besides being a potential astronomical price magnet, probably Elon Musk x10

The only messages and footprints of his that I trust are those he left behind until he disappeared. Ever since he disappeared, any new footprint is a potential impersonator or bad actor who's got hold of his account(s). Therefore, your quotes dated after his disappearance are worth pretty much nothing.. Especially when it's this clear that isn't his kind of punctuation or grammar, lol.

But when we assume that Satoshi was a team we make a claim that contradicts with what he said (see the relevant quote i gave).

Also if you see the matter from another angle it was a team project.! That s why he choose also a free license and in a broader angle he acknowledged in his paper the work of others. So it is  a team effort . I think there is a contradiction in assuming that someone made a team and then he open source it.
But we can discuss on what point others start contributing..
So i think we can make a strong argument in favor of his position that he did the paper and the initial code.

Lastly i want to repeat being curious or studying the history of  project , trying to approach its origins dispersing scam artists , myths , hypes etc is a just endeavor that can happen without compromising the  Satoshi anonymity. .  And as i said my initial stimulus was reading and seeing people using Satoshi name (i refer to the years 2015-17 and many notable claims to his identity that were accepted) with an ease that was astounding and the (i hope ) temporary download of Satoshi paper from bitcoin.org due to such claims.
So i see a danger here. If we dont try to discuss the history we leave ground for whatever claim to grow .
In that spirit the quotes i gave from Satoshi, a pretender of his legacy and a cypherpunk shed a little light to incosistent stories that circulate with such ease and help to disperse them.


Also lets dont forget that there was a lot of discussion on digital cash on cypherpunk and other crypto lists where for anyone interested you can see how ideas were tested from the best minds.
For example Adam Back once wrote how an Anonymous idea from a decade before Satoshi was in his spirit very close.
So the idea was being  worked in many minds as a team.. you could say..from 1992.

Well despite these quotes I do think that this is nor an exceptional thing nor impossible since it was long speculated that bitcoins was indeed made by a team and a group of people and it was not something that could have been done by a single person. The programming and the introduction it would have taken years for sure. Plus I do not think that it is wrong..... The inventor is always the inventor and he for sure would employee people to help him out with it. That's how a company works for real.
At the same time I do think people already know that the idea of bitcoins did not originate within seconds , rather it was a long process.

For example a quote from wiki :


Which does mean that Mr. Satoshi would have read the guy's article and worked and created the idea and then assembled the team to make this real !! That's just how inventions are, it's always a group effort.

Besides from what I've seen; Satoshi's code is decent enough. You don't need to be mind blowing to come up with a functional product. Plus, although your quotes seem to be a little unfounded, Bitcoin was a team effort. Originally, we don't really know, and there's only speculation out there, or as with your quotes plain accusations. However, Bitcoin has been developed by a number of people, and despite the original product being potentially coded by one person, it has become a team effort even if it wasn't originally so.

This is generally how things work, people usually become programmers because they have their own ideas, they develop their ideas, and then hire people or collaborate with others when they need too. Its why libraries exist, no one wants to reinvent the wheel, so they use preexisting code which has stood the test of time which increases their productivity.

If Satoshi ever makes a future statement, you can bet your buck it'll be through a verifiable way. Since, looking his creation, and his attitude that's the impression he gives off. Unfortunately, these days people love using other peoples names to instill a idea in others, and that's exactly what your quoting. Wherever you found it, its not Satoshi. At least, its not verifiable that it is Satoshi, therefore it is not a Satoshi quote. 

You respect nothing. You are just another sad troll.

Because deliberately trying to blur the lines between the legitimate satoshi and the scummy identity thief makes you just as untrustworthy as the fraudulent impostor.  You are perfectly capable of making a clear distinction between the two personalities, but you have chosen not to.

I respect the anonymity Satoshi wanted.
But the reason i dig little is because unfortunately his 'persona' was used , as  weapon in strifes
as exploitable material and that stroke me . How it is possible cypherpunks or developers so easily
to play with the name and also blame others who want to dig?

If satoshi has said something, anything, in 2019, I'm pretty sure we'd be aware of it.  Please stop making shit up.

Times move forward. I think..!
So an interesting question is : Is an identity shaped in the one direction or the other?

'Satoshi-2008' is skillfull programmer and system builder. That what he said and  gave proof of work in both sides.

In 2016 a cypherpunk Z describes an identity that i tag with another name because it says that 'Satoshi-2016' was a team.
That team has as leader a certain person XY and that person had the core idea and wrote the more code.

And last person XY says he is 'Satoshi-2019' . Now that is a new tag because he claims 'Satoshi-2019' is not a team but programmers he hired and that he is not skillfull programmer and he has not build a related system . He said that in a Bitcoin Wensday conference.

So if we should lay more ground in proof of work and the time arrow then :

• 'Satoshi-2019' and 'Satoshi-2016' are identites inconsistent with Satoshi-2008
• Satoshi-2019' and 'Satoshi-2016' are  inconsistentwith each other
  
• Satoshi-2008' is not related with person XY
  .

I guess person XY or Z could make another claim , but
each inconsistent claim lowers their credibility in the matter especially if not accompanied with some kind of proof.

Can you show proper links for those alleged quotes?
I mean that I've found the second one on the internet, but no sign of the first one.

The "team effort" quote already adds CSW to there. And CSW couldn't prove he is what he claims he is, even more, trying to come up with fake evidence.
So what you write makes me believe that your intentions are also "foggy". If you try to prove once again something about CSW with this, you are knocking at the wrong doors.

Satoshi on his programming skills ( 2008-11-09  from cypherpunks email list )

Cypherpunk comment on CW programmer skills (2016-05   from cypherpunks email list  )

CW (pretender of  satoshi identity from 2015) on his programming skills ( 2019-05 ):