Pages:
Author

Topic: Satoshi Identity Revealed LOL - page 3. (Read 4148 times)

legendary
Activity: 2604
Merit: 2353
October 13, 2024, 12:49:33 PM
Bitcoin was invented in 2009 when Peter was 23 years old. Looks like they both are Satoshi Smiley
Peter Todd is not Satoshi.
Adam Back is not Satoshi.
Hal Finney is not Satoshi.
Nick Szabo is not Satoshi.
Craig Wright is definitely not Satoshi.
Elon Musk is not Satoshi.
Vitalik Buterin is too young to be Satoshi.
From 2009 to 2011, Edward Snowden was in Tokyo studying Japanese. Snowden is not Satoshi.
(here you can put anyone you can think of on the list who has an alibi.)
They were, or are, part of it. Satoshi was a group project, probably involving a lot of caffeine.  Grin
Yes, if it was a crew or a group project as you say, it would explain why Craig Wright is so confident and arrogant when he claims to be Satoshi Nakomoto, he knows it was a team, and he belonged to it one day, or he considers having fully been part of it at least, and thus being one of the several Satoshi Nakamoto existing. IMO Hal Finney was the main author of the white paper but he wasn't able to code, to test and to market it alone, so he asked some people to help him for free, against IOU or just cash money.
legendary
Activity: 4410
Merit: 4766
October 13, 2024, 10:34:46 AM
The proposal to adopt a fork that makes early unmoved coins inaccessible is a creative and technically sound solution, but I wonder if it might set a dangerous precedent.
Doing the same thing by doxing a person and then harassing or threatening them is equivalent or even worse.    My point isn't to advocate for that but to highlight that if you're not okay with undermining Bitcoin's properties by confiscating their coins you really ought not be comfortable with the hunt for their identity to threaten their life to confiscate their coins.

even suggesting that doing forks due to one entity is silly. as it opens a never ending precedence that not all UTXO's can be trusted to be viable, EG coinbase deposits being destroyed because some dev group decides coinbase/blackrocks custodian has too many..

also with many years of being in the bitcoin community and your opinion is that finding satoshi is about coin stealing.. yet this forum alone has hundreds of posts wanting to know who satoshi is.. to interview him about his opinions, reasons and attitudes towards bitcoins development, not to coerce him into moving the coin

yes there is a viable threat to anyone with a hoard, that someone will try to blackmail them. but to think that its the main reason is just silly.
most people with criminal motives dont want/need names/home addresses, they would want IP addresses of the node

you yourself are a publicly known figure and have received more bitcoin than radio-ham QSL cards, yet we dont see you being blackmailed by the community at your front door with a $5 hammer. most just want to ask you technical questions, even scammer CSW is not trying a $5 hammer attack on your personal residence, so your own experience shows you dont have terrorists at your door hounding you night and day trying to steal your PC or threaten your family

also you should know by now about bitcoin economics. if the coins did move and cause market price impact, that impact is short lived once the coins have moved as the underlying economics then return, in short, it becomes a short discount period.. to suggest a fork that opens up a never ending impact vs a short lived discount period.. id go with the suggestion to just let satoshi move his coins, other people get discount and then the price recovers.. no need for a fork to destroy coin, and it should not even be a suggestion
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
October 13, 2024, 10:02:20 AM
The proposal to adopt a fork that makes early unmoved coins inaccessible is a creative and technically sound solution, but I wonder if it might set a dangerous precedent.
Doing the same thing by doxing a person and then harassing or threatening them is equivalent or even worse.    My point isn't to advocate for that but to highlight that if you're not okay with undermining Bitcoin's properties by confiscating their coins you really ought not be comfortable with the hunt for their identity to threaten their life to confiscate their coins.
sr. member
Activity: 966
Merit: 306
October 12, 2024, 10:11:18 PM
On HN I left a reply that I thought might be worth repeating here,

> Do you support unmasking Satoshi if it is possible?

No.
It is like a dox against Satoshi Nakamoto too.

Should speculation about satoshi's identity be subject to doxxing rules?

People outside bitcointalk forum can try to find Satoshi Nakamoto's identity and publish their findings but in the forum, by rules I think we need to obey rules and avoid this action, personal doxxing.
staff
Activity: 4284
Merit: 8808
October 12, 2024, 10:01:13 PM
On HN I left a reply that I thought might be worth repeating here,

> Do you support unmasking Satoshi if it is possible?

No.

The only argument I've heard to justify this which is at all credible is that the ownership of a particular pool very early coins may be a matter of significant public concern. I'm dubious of this argument given that it's a couple percent of the total and people seem to not care at all about other similar consolidations in Bitcoin. And it's normal for very wealthy people to be largely unknown e.g. in the US we have absolutely no idea who most billionaires are, a lot of the supposed lists are just speculation and nonsense. (a fun related story )

But for the purpose of this discussion I'll accept that ownership of those coins matters. (I don't think we'd make any progress on debating that)

But if the motivation is those coins, we're not even sure they belong to Satoshi. And to the extent there is a concern it's a concern that their use could be disruptive to the economy, their identity alone is unlikely to help -- like why would Adam Back vs Petertodd matter for that question?

So what I think is that if we think carefully about what all this means and we're honest about it-- this demand for their identity is so that the public can use coercion to make them destroy their coins. The author of the documentary said the quiet part out loud in a surprisingly extortionary sounding tweet: "Satoshi, if you have access, you could burn the stash. Bring an end to this. Protect yourself, protect the network."
I think that kind of coercion would be immoral. But worse than immoral it would be unnecessary:

If the users of Bitcoin feel so threatened by these unmoved early coins that they're willing to ungratefully violate privacy of Bitcoin's creator, a person who might not even own those coins, in an act which might harm the creator seriously but not even address the concern ... they could instead just adopt a fork that makes those early unmoved coins forever inaccessible. -- and perhaps let whomever owns them come out to argue against it.

(Heck, people have already created such forks though that wasn't their motivation-- some forks have diverted all not-recently moved coins to the forks creators, as a kind of premine).

The fact that they haven't indicates that they don't feel that way. To summarize, I think trying to pursue Satoshi's identity is:

An ungrateful attack on someone who gifted the world with something new and interesting and whom wronged no one, motivated by fear of some trove of coins that may not even belong to the target, a fear which would not be addressed by merely knowing their identity (even assuming the coins were theirs), and if it does address it-- it would probably be through coercively depriving them of their coins by subjecting Satoshi to threat and attack... when all along the people supposedly being protected could, if they cared about it enough, simply neutralize "the threat" themselves by adopting a version that didn't have it, or by just not using Bitcoin at all. Clearly they don't feel that strongly.

But attacking someone elses privacy and safety is something many people don't consider much of a cost, I guess.

I just don't buy it.

If it sounds like I've made up my mind on the issue, remember that I've had some 14 years to think about this question.

And because I answered elsewhere on HN:  The petertodd claim is unjustified, grasping at unsurprising coincidences.  I'm personally pretty confident that Peter isn't Satoshi, as much as it's possible to be without knowing who Satoshi is. I've never heard *any* credible claim or rumor that *anyone* knows.  And because Satoshi was clearly trying to conceal their identity and clearly pretty good at it I think it's likely we'll never know.  The issue is that any bit of information you find might be real, it might just be a coincidence, or it could be a false signal Satoshi left to mask their identity.  Because of this we know practically nothing about Satoshi other than that they were able to do the things we know they did at roughly (not even exactly) the times they were done.   Because of this there are probably hundreds of thousands of people who could be Satoshi or more, most of whom we've never heard of, and so confirmation bias and coincidences will utterly dominate any attempt at reasoning it out.

Especially with crypto-related kidnappings and torture on the rise, speculating about Satoshi's identity could get the targets killed.  Even if you reject my above argument against identifying Satoshi, any kind of argument for there being a public interest in the subject only applies when when actually know who Satoshi is.  It doesn't apply for people who kinda sorta may be because there is some weak sauce evidence that only seems like something at all given the almost total lack of actual evidence.  And having your privacy invaded *sucks* even when it doesn't immediately cause you or your family to get kidnapped and extorted.
sr. member
Activity: 1022
Merit: 363
October 12, 2024, 06:17:09 PM
Saw a tweet a while ago and it says:

Quote
JUST IN: New HBO documentary claims to have uncovered the true identity of Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous creator of #Bitcoin.

Damn betting my btc asset its just a hearsay and possible viewers increase since crypto is going mainstream. Maybe HBO should invite some users here like theymos and others who might give them more clue instead.

Edit: Didnt watch the clip yet, but already seen some comments like pouring in. The video will be aired on October 8th, 2024 2am CET ( 9pm EST)

Source:
https://x.com/WatcherGuru/status/1841901176562094484?t=jaH8reXCbJSvuu2ouXQcYA&s=19
During the week, the idea of revealing the identify of Satoshi nakamoto was really a big topic around the social medias, specially on X(formally known as Twitter), Aside HBO' documentary on the subject, there were several other platforms that tried to speculate on who Satoshi nakamoto really is, some popular figures were mentioned and some even accused of being the Satoshi the whole world was looking for, those accused came out to debunk the idea and deassociate themselves from being the creator of bitcoin.

Let's just say that sometimes, people get bored, and to alleviate the boredom, they take up a new task, one they are sure that will capture the attention of a lot of people in the industry, and so far, it's working for HBO, I personally see all of this as nothing but a way for them to get more popular and gain more followers as well.

Its hot topic since imagine finally Satoshi identity will be revealed and its like HBO have huge confidence to show it since its like they are really sure towards their investigation made. It didn't end up well as they really didn't unveil the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto since people are not convince with their findings and the person they point out to be the real creator strongly denies their claims.

I guess the search for the Identity of Satoshi doesn't end yet, But maybe people like them should respect if the person behind Satoshi Nakamoto want to remain unknown.
legendary
Activity: 2422
Merit: 1083
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
October 12, 2024, 02:25:05 PM
Saw a tweet a while ago and it says:

Quote
JUST IN: New HBO documentary claims to have uncovered the true identity of Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous creator of #Bitcoin.

Damn betting my btc asset its just a hearsay and possible viewers increase since crypto is going mainstream. Maybe HBO should invite some users here like theymos and others who might give them more clue instead.

Edit: Didnt watch the clip yet, but already seen some comments like pouring in. The video will be aired on October 8th, 2024 2am CET ( 9pm EST)

Source:
https://x.com/WatcherGuru/status/1841901176562094484?t=jaH8reXCbJSvuu2ouXQcYA&s=19
During the week, the idea of revealing the identify of Satoshi nakamoto was really a big topic around the social medias, specially on X(formally known as Twitter), Aside HBO' documentary on the subject, there were several other platforms that tried to speculate on who Satoshi nakamoto really is, some popular figures were mentioned and some even accused of being the Satoshi the whole world was looking for, those accused came out to debunk the idea and deassociate themselves from being the creator of bitcoin.

Let's just say that sometimes, people get bored, and to alleviate the boredom, they take up a new task, one they are sure that will capture the attention of a lot of people in the industry, and so far, it's working for HBO, I personally see all of this as nothing but a way for them to get more popular and gain more followers as well.
?
Activity: -
Merit: -
October 12, 2024, 02:08:43 PM
- Sassaman is a very bad candidate. If this is their conclusion, then they totally failed to do proper research.
Please, could you tell why do you think that? Thanks.
sr. member
Activity: 1316
Merit: 379
Fully Regulated Crypto Casino
October 12, 2024, 08:29:22 AM
Ultimately, the true meaning of this story is that nobody should care about who Satoshi is or was.
He wanted to disappear, and we must respect his privacy, even stopping the speculation of people who made a choice.

We should focus on Bitcoin, not Satoshi, whose discovery was by far more important than his identity.
We should all focus on learning about Bitcoin instead of learning who Satoshi was.

It's just so funny how HBO came up with a name (Peter Todd) and fake Documentary to convince the world into believing he's Satoshi, what I think is that if Satoshi wanted to be known he won't or the group of people behind that name won't had made themselves anonymous, why i said group of people is because I think it's relating to the CIA based on how secretive the person behind the name seems to be and they being the CIA would've figured out who he is but then they care less. HBO is clueless and only came up with the documentary just to gain more subscribers, they're fully aware that everyone's really anxious of knowing the person behind the name (Satoshi) and creating a documentary, even though it's too good to be true would attract more people, they played a smart one but I don't believe that thrash documentary. Like you said, what I care more about is building my Portfolio and owning lots of Bitcoins.
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 5637
Blackjack.fun-Free Raffle-Join&Win $50🎲
October 12, 2024, 05:24:47 AM
......For me personally, there is nothing in the whole story that was not already known before, because in the end all the so-called evidence are just assumptions. In my opinion, Adam Back is a much bigger candidate for Satoshi than Peter Todd, who was around 15 years old when Bitcoin was invented.
You got that a bit wrong. Peter was 15 years old when he wrote to Adam in 2001. Bitcoin was invented in 2009 when Peter was 23 years old. Looks like they both are Satoshi Smiley

Thanks for the correction, I didn't check online and apparently got it wrong while watching the documentary. All things considered, Peter Todd had quite enough time to "invent" Bitcoin, especially if he had an experienced mentor like Adam Back as an advisor.

Still, maybe it's better that Peter Todd isn't Satoshi, the more you dig into his past, the more unpleasant things you find.

Publicly filed court documents have now revealed specific allegations of sexual misconduct involving former Bitcoin Core developer Peter Todd. Todd sued transgender cryptographer Isis Agora Lovecruft for defamation in a California court in April, demanding they delete a tweet calling Todd a "rapist." This week, Lovecruft moved to dismiss the complaint, and both Lovecruft and zcash co-founder Zooko Wilcox filed declarations in court describing Todd’s alleged behavior. In their declaration, Lovecruft accused Todd of sexual harassment, including unwelcome and violent sexual statements during consulting work on a bitcoin project. According to Lovecruft’s filed declaration, Todd told Lovecruft in a San Francisco cafe, “I’m going to shove my cock in you so hard and beat you until you beg for more.”
legendary
Activity: 3276
Merit: 2442
October 12, 2024, 05:08:29 AM
Satoshi is Jesus Christ’s second coming.

Nobody has seen him but we all know he did exist. It is because we have proof. We have his forum posts which are actually the pages of the crypto bible and the bitcoin whitepaper is… the holiest of all texts.

Satoshi the prophet, delivered us bitcoin like Prometheus gave us fire.

Who gives a damn about his real identity anyway, What really matters is what he said.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 16328
Fully fledged Merit Cycler - Golden Feather 22-23
October 12, 2024, 04:53:23 AM
Ultimately, the true meaning of this story is that nobody should care about who Satoshi is or was.
He wanted to disappear, and we must respect his privacy, even stopping the speculation of people who made a choice.

We should focus on Bitcoin, not Satoshi, whose discovery was by far more important than his identity.
We should all focus on learning about Bitcoin instead of learning who Satoshi was.
member
Activity: 196
Merit: 54
October 12, 2024, 03:25:18 AM
Satoshi wanted Diaspora invites so created a new account (why would he create it with his real name?) and you want me to believe (with a coffee cup in your hand casually sipping coffee in rain Grin) that you had this so-called realization which connects every dot.
I do not believe for a nanosecond that the man who pulled off Bitcoin, below the nose of so many 3-letter agencies, used his real name on this forum and was careless enough to not pay attention to which account he logged in. Cool story, bro!
Regarding Peter mentioning Bitcoin sacrifice, it does not mean anything as this statement was made after the interview and IMHO he was just messing with your little brain because he knows you would be tracking all of his posts and he just gave you a rope Grin
And why Satoshi did not reply to his super technical post, there could be thousands of reasons but for your super retarded brain: he was just a newbie with one post history so Satoshi might have thought of not engaging with him.
HBO, you really disappoint me this time. It's better that you put all your energy and imagination into 'Game of Thrones' next season, but I have to admit even there you are lagging behind.
member
Activity: 462
Merit: 24
October 11, 2024, 05:10:18 PM
Bitcoin was invented in 2009 when Peter was 23 years old. Looks like they both are Satoshi Smiley

Peter Todd is not Satoshi.
Adam Back is not Satoshi.
Hal Finney is not Satoshi.
Nick Szabo is not Satoshi.
Craig Wright is definitely not Satoshi.
Elon Musk is not Satoshi.
Vitalik Buterin is too young to be Satoshi.
From 2009 to 2011, Edward Snowden was in Tokyo studying Japanese. Snowden is not Satoshi.
(here you can put anyone you can think of on the list who has an alibi.)
They were, or are, part of it. Satoshi was a group project, probably involving a lot of caffeine.  Grin
jr. member
Activity: 56
Merit: 2
October 11, 2024, 10:26:56 AM
......For me personally, there is nothing in the whole story that was not already known before, because in the end all the so-called evidence are just assumptions. In my opinion, Adam Back is a much bigger candidate for Satoshi than Peter Todd, who was around 15 years old when Bitcoin was invented.
You got that a bit wrong. Peter was 15 years old when he wrote to Adam in 2001. Bitcoin was invented in 2009 when Peter was 23 years old. Looks like they both are Satoshi Smiley

legendary
Activity: 2828
Merit: 1497
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
October 11, 2024, 09:58:12 AM
This does not solve anything and just falsely accused someone who adamantly denies being that individual.
I would suggest watching Searching for Satoshi - either one.

Just finished watching the one made a year ago and it was more educational of who is not Satoshi.
Thanks for the suggestion, appreciated nevertheless.
Todd, as Lucius said, probably was in agreement, so he is rather just a target to be discussed, that's the main point of this hype all around this film after all.
Somebody asked me to send the link of the film but that is not possible.
All I can do is send the trailer from it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiVLCs0qUI4

The other one which was from a broadcasting company is made available from their youtube channel which is named the exactly same as the docufilm I watched from an independent filmmaker:
trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdoT2ipYTvE
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 792
Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim
October 11, 2024, 07:33:20 AM
Are all of the interviews in the trailer original? I got the feeling that several of them were interviews I saw many years ago, though I could be wrong.

My current feeling on Satoshi's identity is:
 - Sassaman is a very bad candidate. If this is their conclusion, then they totally failed to do proper research.
 - 50% chance it's someone nobody's ever heard of, and nobody will ever figure it out
 - 35% chance it's Hal Finney. (Over time, I've moved more probability into this category.)
 - 10% chance it's someone else in the Bitcoin-verse
 - 5% chance it's a group within the CIA

But I'm really not a fan of the whole "search for Satoshi" genre. Being anonymous, Satoshi is an excellent myth and source of inspiration, since we can't see much of his flawed humanity. Mythical-Satoshi is a humble man who, with a lot of persistence and skill, but not with a level of brilliance beyond the reach of us mortals, single-handedly created a clockwork device so powerful that it shook the world. And then, in an action which nobody in the traditional halls of power would ever take, he had the wisdom to walk away: a modern Cincinnatus. I like that myth very much, and I'd rather it not be tainted by association with an actual human.
I think that Hal Finney is a good candidate to be Satoshi but I remember that a few month ago some users were arguing how he couldn't be Satoshi. I can't find those posts but I also read on internet that on April 18, 2009 at 8 AM, while Finney was running, Satoshi was doing some activities.
By the way, what increases his chance of being Satoshi is that Satoshi's Bitcoin addresses have been untouched and at the same time, Satoshis identity hasn't been revealed. Is it possible to not touch billions of dollars and stay anonymous when the whole world is chasing you? It's impossible to my mind and that's why I think, there is a high chance that Hal Finney is Satoshi but at the same time that running event ruins this theory, so I'm very confused.

By the way, there is also a very high chance that it can be a CIA project and I'll explain why: The CIA recently stated that it is looking for people living in Russia, Iran, North Korea and China. The CIA wants to hire people as spies in these countries. Did you guys notice that? CIA has been hiring spies for decades but as the world advances, so are advancing tracking methods and so is it becoming hard to break regulations.
So, here is CIA that hires people and has to pay to them. The CIA has payment options like bank transfer, instant money transfer, etc but none of them are the best method to send and receive money anonymously, so the CIA had to do something and they invented Bitcoin, a pseudoanonymous currency. Now you might ask me, why didn't CIA invent something similar to Monero? Because the CIA needed a currency that would be good for adoption. No government is going to adopt Monero because it's extremely anonymous but Bitcoin is a little soft but still anonymous in right hands. Overall, Bitcoin with it's structure, was an ideal candidate. So, they created it, created a myth of Satoshi who then disappeared and CIA left a currency that the society thinks is a really decentralized because Satoshi is dead and it has no owner.

There is still so much left to write about it but I'm leave it as it is, long story short.

@theymos, did someone try to reach out to you

No, I only heard about the documentary when I read the headline on CoinDesk today.
What was in their mind? You are one of the best candidate for any crypto related interview, especially for this one. They included a snapshot from Bitcointalk on their documentary and didn't contact you? That's very dumb Cheesy
copper member
Activity: 168
Merit: 4
October 11, 2024, 05:32:13 AM
This does not solve anything and just falsely accused someone who adamantly denies being that individual.

I would suggest watching Searching for Satoshi - either one.

Just finished watching the one made a year ago and it was more educational of who is not Satoshi.

Thanks for the suggestion, appreciated nevertheless.
Todd, as Lucius said, probably was in agreement, so he is rather just a target to be discussed, that's the main point of this hype all around this film after all Grin
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 5637
Blackjack.fun-Free Raffle-Join&Win $50🎲
October 11, 2024, 05:15:00 AM
Anyone have watched the documentary? Can anyone share a brief synopsis of the program. Not finding some on internet or any upload site of the documentary.

I watched the documentary, so I will try to briefly describe what it is about and write some of my impressions.

First of all, the documentary is not exclusively about the search for Satoshi, but mostly deals with some basic things and examines only the role that BTC has played since its inception until today. There, of course, you can see people like Jamie Dimon or Warren Buffett with their famous statements, claims that BTC is only good for selling drugs online (Silk Road) up to the mention of the famous blockchain wars over the size of blocks with comments from who else but Roger Ver Bitcoin Judas who in the documentary plays the role of a saint who tried to save BTC from people like Adam Back or Peter Todd.

Furthermore, we also have Gavin Andersen's statements about how he is convinced that CW Faketoshi is the real Satoshi. There was also one of the Tether Boys (Samson Mow) who was accompanied by a failed Serbian prince who should make the world aware of the need to accept Bitcoin Roll Eyes

What is of most interest to everyone is that the author apparently had an agreement with Adam Back and Peter Todd who voluntarily participate in this documentary and I think that any lawsuits by Peter Todd are out of the question considering that he apparently approved the publication of this documentary.

I have to admit that the author has on several occasions quite upset Peter Todd with some questions, especially with the thesis about that famous post which the author claims is the result of Peter Todd mistakenly logging in with his own account and not with Satoshi's account and that actually completed the thought from the previous post - and that Peter Todd at one point deleted a lot of his online history, including one comment in which he claims that he allegedly deleted a lot of BTC, to which the author suggests that this is about Peter Todd actually deleting private keys that are associated with Satoshi mined coins.

For me personally, there is nothing in the whole story that was not already known before, because in the end all the so-called evidence are just assumptions. In my opinion, Adam Back is a much bigger candidate for Satoshi than Peter Todd, who was around 15 years old when Bitcoin was invented.

I check on HBO phil but I wasnt seeing it there or not in the new list of stuff to watch.
Im waiting for someone to upload on social media to chefk what those guys cooking for this satoshi re
veal drama.

The documentary is not actually shown on HBO Max (as far as I know), but on HBO programs that are a separate part of their service.
legendary
Activity: 2828
Merit: 1497
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
October 10, 2024, 01:38:39 PM
This does not solve anything and just falsely accused someone who adamantly denies being that individual.

I would suggest watching Searching for Satoshi - either one.

Just finished watching the one made a year ago and it was more educational of who is not Satoshi.
Pages:
Jump to: