Topic: Original November 2008 version of the Bitcoin paper - page 2. (Read 2948 times)

has anyone managed to find the unvarnished paper? there are rumors that a work-up paper exists as well.

It appears that the paper on bitcoin.org is a lightly polished revision of the original. There are no changes in basic information, but a few sentences are rephrased for clarity.

Remember that one of the first merchants to accept Bitcoin for purchases was a spinner of yarn and maker of Alpaca socks....

Cryddit.

Grammar rules on strong verbs aren't as strict as they once were. Even native speakers today used "broadcasted".

@OnkelPaul

I read the document. It was pretty good. Thanks for sharing.

If someone is into sleuthing, he might try his skills on this approach at discovering some info not present in the PDF files:
https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2014/06/19/how-you-will-not-uncover-satoshi/
Apparently, the document ID is a hash of some fields of the document. Only some of these fields are retained in the PDF file, and the article above indicates that you might be able to recover other field values by bruteforcing them.

Onkel Paul

Yup, this looks pretty genuine, even though I wonder why the sha256 hash of the document is mentioned on the web only recently (there's a discussion in the cryptography mailing list http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.encryption.general/22386).

The edits between the 2008 and the 2009 version that I see are mostly small clarifications. What I consider really interesting is the use of "broadcasted" instead of "broadcast" in the first version - I'm not entirely sure but to me that indicates that the original author's native language might not be english. I have seen this kind of mistake made by german speakers, but others are probably also prone to mixing up english language idiosyncrasies such as this ("to list" -> "has been listed" but "to broadcast"->"has been broadcast"). However, english isn't my native language either, and it's possible that native speakers make such mistakes, too.

Onkel Paul

By the way, the "CreationDate" attribute of the PDF states 20081003134958-07 for the first version and 20090324113315-06 for the second version, so it looks like the timezones of the creating computer(s) were american. According to DST rules, both would fall into the daylight saving time date range, so this were either two separate computers set up for different timezones, or one computer that was switched from one timezone to another one.

Thanks for the share. Didn't know the version hosted on the Bitcoin website wasn't the original one...

And such an odd website for the original paper to be hosted, lol

Has Satoshi retired and joined a knitting community?

Is not it the same as of the following 2...

1. www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

2. www.coinlearn.org/whitepaper.php

I did not save a copy of the original bitcoin paper.  A URL for it was posted to several mailing lists I was on, but the paper itself was not.  The version of the paper now hosted at that URL is - although I can't spot the differences on a casual reading - not the same version.  It appeared a few months later. 

I have sadly been unable to provide the original paper to several people who have asked me for it. 

However, when I asked Satoshi once to make sure we were looking at the same version of the paper, he did send me its hash to verify it, and that email is in my archive.

The magic string is: 

427c63b364c6db914cf23072a09ffd53ee078397b7c6ab2d604e12865a982faa

I mention this because, right now, there is a version of the paper at https://www.blacksheepatorenco.com/bitcoin.html  which matches.

Cryddit