No one has his public key... he has never signed anything!!! unless you know this guy, you will never ever get a provable signed msg from mr nakamoto
It was the Bitcointalk forum that inspired us to create Bitcointalksearch.org - Bitcointalk is an excellent site that should be the default page for anybody dealing in cryptocurrency, since it is a virtual gold-mine of data. However, our experience and user feedback led us create our site; Bitcointalk's search is slow, and difficult to get the results you need, because you need to log in first to find anything useful - furthermore, there are rate limiters for their search functionality.
The aim of our project is to create a faster website that yields more results and faster without having to create an account and eliminate the need to log in - your personal data, therefore, will never be in jeopardy since we are not asking for any of your data and you don't need to provide them to use our site with all of its capabilities.
We created this website with the sole purpose of users being able to search quickly and efficiently in the field of cryptocurrency so they will have access to the latest and most accurate information and thereby assisting the crypto-community at large.
Satoshi Nakamoto satoshi at vistomail.com
Sat Aug 15 17:43:54 UTC 2015
Previous message: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin XT 0.11A
Next message: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin XT Fork
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
I have been following the recent block size debates through the mailing list. I had hoped the debate would resolve and that
a fork proposal would achieve widespread consensus. However with the formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely
to happen, and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous fork.
The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth.
When I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near
unanimous agreement. Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is
Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto. Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it
without being forced or pressured into it. By doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original vision" they
claim to honour.
They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to be. However I acknowledge that a lot has
changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions. For example I
didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network. Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system
while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust
solution. I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.
If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and
through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project. Bitcoin was meant to be
both technically and socially robust. This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.
Satoshi Nakamoto