Topic: Satoshi Identity Revealed LOL - page 7. (Read 4148 times)

Nobody is saying that. In fact it's the exact opposite: the CIA or NSA could have easily, as a small side project by one full time employee, invented Bitcoin. They could have done this as an experiment, and then it got out of control.


Crypto has been used to invent an entire new class of crimes. Before crypto, terrorists did not shut down a hospital and then demand several hundred pounds of paper bills. That would simply not be practical. Crypto has made cyberextortion possible and practical, to say nothing of money laundering, tax evasion, and other crimes Bitcoin enabled (at least initially, until chain analysis became common).

I think those who think that "the government was Satoshi!!!" miss the point that in 2009 a lot of Bitcoin's component had been already invented, and mainly by independent researchers:

- blockchains were known since the 1990s as a concept (Chaum, Haber, Stornetta, Bayer ...)
- Proof of work was introduced in 1992 by Cynthia Dwork and Moni Naor, and Hashcash, Bitcoin's proof of work method, was invented by Adam Back in 1997
- Wei Dai's b money and Nick Szabo's bit gold also introduced some other core concepts, although we don't know if Satoshi knew their work before his original concept.
- P2P networks also were popular since the late 90s/early 2000s

This is not to dismiss Satoshi's genius. Often combining the correct parts isn't immediately obvious and can lead to a big achievement.

But those who think that Bitcoin was created by "the gov" or "the CIA" or whatever (mostly, U.S.) agency may think that it was so revolutionary that it needed some year-long secret research by multiple people, like when the nuclear bomb was invented, when what was necessary was mainly an "Eureka" moment to combine the correct parts of the puzzle.

I also do not believe in the honeypot theory. Honeypot to catch whom exactly? What would they achieve with this? Cash is still much more anonymous and fiat in general is much more popular for most criminal endeavours ...

Meanwhile, just hours before the series launch, Polymarket is getting increasingly funny, at moments not a single person was anymore above 10%. The Sassaman and Szabo theories seem to have collapsed. Popcorn ...

I am in Italy, where HBO isn't available yet.
I have to source some creativity to get hold of this documentary in a decent time.
I saw the trailer, and it didn't click on me.
I hope they are saving the best for the actual documentary.

I have waited patiently to see this day and I have just did. As I'm typing, it's 5 hours before they release that video and I can't wait to see the person they think who is behind Satoshi Nakomoto and if after that time there is no concrete evidence about Satoshi, then ladies and gentlemen, forget about Satoshi identity because this is not just waste of time, we are giving this people some publicity and views on their channels because they know how important Satoshi is to Bitcoin community.

Wait a minute, if sastoshi identity perhaps mistakenly leak and people are trying so hard to make it public, wouldn't he be the first person to let people know or am I over thinking it? Will Satoshi be that foolish to let his privacy down for some media work after giving us the best p2p electronically trabsfer digital asset that is censorship resistance, come on HBO, get another script or focus on the popular serious of game of throne you are known for.

A lot of persons has tried to reveal who Satoshi is and have failed. If you are expecting that it will be revealed today then your wasting your precious time. Its just another documentary that, making some research on unveiling Satoshi. Ill say its just another guess so don't be too hopeful to hear any good result.

Am glad you are not getting your hopes high. One thing I believe is that without anyone with the proof of a signed signature of Satosh's wallet, I wont believe any rumor I see online. Meanwhile this is just another way to gai clout online and that is why HBO is using this strategy to attract people.

The thing about some clues pointing out he is not Satoshi, well, if I would start now a secret project the first thing to hide my identity would be claiming I've only been once on a visit to Europe and insert a few evasive lines about studying somewhere where they teach Chinese or some other alphabet so the Stompix will never be on the list of suspects at all 

The problem with proving someone is Satoshi is that if the guy denies it or he is dead you can't make sure he was even if
- you find the keys in one of his laptops (it was planted there by the CIA)
- his wife says so (she was paid by the real satoshi to say that)
- he left a will (it is fake)
and so on and on!

I think the only possibility in which Satoshi is truly revealed and accepted is the one in which it was a governmental agency doing it and they discretize the papers after 50 years.

Dave Kleiman?`on he is death... adam back

OP, you are right to have disregarded this and not even bother to further with the watching of the movie, there are simple guidelines to know the true Satoshi. If someone had tried hard but failed and even proceeded to court and lost, how much more is the propaganda of a documentary via a movie? Well, if it is true, this will sell so much when it's finally released and I believe the Satoshi Nakamoto name is the target for this propaganda to sell and not mainly a claim to the name itself.

You are right, and welcome to the Forum! Check out the rules, and have a great time out there.
Follow them and you are going to get the best experience on the forum.
I do think that that documentary won't change anything in the long run, though it's interesting how it will end.

Ultimately, the creation of Bitcoin is what truly matters, and the technology has outgrown any single individual. Whether Satoshi's identity is confirmed or not, the decentralized nature of Bitcoin remains its greatest strength.

Maybe @theymos has some personal reasons to think so - because most of us don't have any great knowledge about LS in the sense of what kind of person he was compared to the person who introduced himself on this forum as Satoshi. There is some evidence or rather clues that point to LS as a possible candidate, but his widow says that she does not believe that her late husband was Satoshi.

In addition, when (if) someone is already going in the direction of making a documentary on that topic, wouldn't it be logical that the widow of the man who will be presented as Satoshi should not be contacted about that story at all?

I do agree with you, but at least the community got pumped a bit, even though I think most of us out there think it will be a waste of time, basically, with, as you said - more questions than answers, it's still an event so witness 

Am sure we are all going to be left with more questions than answers...

So how will this whole reveal be done, some underground research then that they (HBO) managed to connect the dots and find out guy after  so many years...or is it the pseudonymous Satoshi that went to them to crack open the mystery of the decade 

You know what, let's wait and see ...hope not another Craig 

Tomorrow we will see some people claiming to be Satoshi and will be interviewing some basic questions.
This is really scary because bitcoin will have a real owner and we will see the beginning of the downfall as happened to some CEOs who were destroyed because they created something so useful.
This is not the first time we have heard stories about Satoshi's identity being revealed but the results are just as fictitious as no one has been able to prove it accurately with evidence.

Even if that happens, I wonder what questions will be aired first and I am sure people will air how he hid his identity so it is difficult to find. LOL

The most waited time is by tomorrow, the 8th of October; after tomorrow, it will be all over, and people who watch the documentary about Satoshi will tell us what it is all about, whether it's a simple storyline being acted to look true or a fabricated story formulated to gain attention.

However, whatever is analyzed and concluded by people who watch the documentary by tomorrow, I don't care to know,  and i believe that some many people here would the same "don't care to know". What we do know is that Satoshi's identity is unknown to everyone. Nobody can solve the puzzle of that unless when Satoshi comes out fully to sign a message on his Bitcoin wallet. Then we will all accept that's the real Satoshi. Nothing apart from that it's a mere imagination of whom they thought Satoshi to be.

I think the cable television HBO is just trying to get attention from the public just like some others did in the past but however, before anyone or any platform can convince people about uncovering the creator of bitcoin Satoshi Nakamoto, it will require a lot of proofs of which there can't even be enough proofs to make people believe, perhaps even if Satoshi Nakamoto decides to reveal himself or theirselves today it will still be very hard for a lot of people to believe so i still assume that the motive why bitcoin was created to be decentralized is the reason why he/they became anonymous till date. However, let's just forget about Satoshi revealing himself/theirselves in the future and focus more in the development of what he/they created (bitcoin), i think that's what we should be more interested in.

Exactly what was my take on everything when I saw this topic, I think humans don't do well with settling with the fact that they don't actually have the answer to many questions and that's why they have set up some many stupid solution which are all just assumption to quench that thirst of their never ending curiosity and that's exactly what I feel they would do with this documentary too.

If they say it's Craig or Dorian Nakamoto, I'm never buying HBO subscription again. These companies are getting worse and worse, trying to capitalize on things people might watch. They don't care if it's low level shows for idiots, fake research and all that.

Sassaman is a convenient choice because he died shorty after Satoshi stopped posting, but I don't see any information about him being interested in cryptography. If you really wanted to, you could find a number of hackers and coders who died in 2011 or 12. 

Polymarket is going nuts right now, with a huge inflow of money betting on Szabo


was there a leak from the documentary?

That side, I see people including Theymos saying Len Sassaman is a bad candidate, but what's the actual reason for dismissing him?
For Hal Finey, we have the supposed timing of that email that he couldn't have sent., for the ones being alive we still have the serious question why not touching 60 billion standing there, so what is discrediting Len's claim?

Like a lot of good baseless conspiracy theories, there is a good bit of internal logical consistency with this theory. Besides Satoshi being some person who actually physically died (or was incarcerated), there's no other way to explain how some living person would sit on $60 billion without spending it. But the US government could do this, and keeping the secret would be worth it (because $60B is peanuts for the US gov).

And the way honey pots work, they would lose their leverage over it if they revealed what they did. And then imagine what they would have thought when they saw Bitcoin becoming huge and spawning a new industry: "oops" . They would never ever want to reveal what they had done because it would be very embarrassing--and it would reveal "sources and methods" e.g. the very idea they would do something like this would now be out there.

Edit: I take back what I said about there being no evidence! There is a post about this in the famous "Bitcointalk.org" forum about this theory here:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.64609653

It must be true now! LOL