So we must understand the Satoshi was quite aware of what would happen so he decide to hide himself from the beginning? Isn't it a little suspicious?
Well it depends. I doubt he would predict the future of his project, but he was smart enough to use a made up name to begin with.
I remember when people asked me also why I never used my name online, or why my username or anything like that didn't approach my real details. Thought that view of suspicion was a legacy of the 1990s, but I guess we'll still have people immediately assuming that the need/requirement for privacy = the intention to hide illegal/suspicious activity.
Why is it so suspicious to want to maintain privacy? And even if the intent was to hide, for whatever reason, why is that suspicious? Bitcoin was never intended to have a "leader" or "figurehead", which is a huge hint that tells you anyone claiming to be Satoshi isn't.
. (Hal Finney, Dave Kleiman) so we cannot ask them for their logs. Maybe another bitcoin pioneer still have logs.
