Damn rabbit holes got me up past my bed time...
Cjmoles- I read threw a bit of the forum links you posted mostly twards the end. Is the card a key to 1 of Satoshis keys?
Unfortunately the economist artical is behind a pay wall.
As for the picture I'm lost...
Topic: Serious Question - Nullc, are you Satoshi? - page 3. (Read 4229 times)
The truth: the answer to everybody's question regarding the identity of the individual who is responsible for putting together all the "pieces" of the first workable peer to peer digital cash system is right in front of everybody's noses.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
I'll take a longer look over the weekend.
How did you find these clues? Sounds like you know the answer already - how?
Briefly. Card #251 had some sort of code puzzle, the community working on the problem figured out that it was an encryption problem, they decided to brute force it, they built and distributed the client, they learned it wasn't efficient because each client was running independently, so they began the process of working on keeping track of eliminated combinations to distribute the workload across the network for efficiency....etc. Much of this stuff happened via ICQ and email but community recruitment was achieved via the forum thread above....pay attention to the dates and the type of people involved (where they are now is interesting)....notice the time frame when the project went dark....and notice https://www.distributed.net/RC5
Card #256 has not been solved.
It's all there...the rest you can find here and the early mailing lists.
Thanks. Yep, already done - some of it cross-checks w/ some research I've been holding back for a few months... i recall trying to remember something about a dairy, a robot from turkey, a trust, a company called Bitcoin Ltd. (formed Feb 2009), a Yale father and son (one in London, one in Denver), plus an accountant
Extra hint - http://www.economist.com/node/7001738 <---I think you see the bigger picture...makes me wonder what else they used us for....
Basically the ledger created itself as a result of the above processes. Distributing the workload across the network, and keeping track of the sequences used in the brute force attack so that sequences weren't inefficiently ran twice (double spend problem), accidentally solved problems others were working on in co-related projects....the rest is history --> the real work began with all the familiar names and Satoshi Nakamoto is just a face on an unsolved puzzle card; who, by the way, is still waiting to be found so that he can give the secret passphrase away that he's been holding onto for all these years. Smile....
The truth: the answer to everybody's question regarding the identity of the individual who is responsible for putting together all the "pieces" of the first workable peer to peer digital cash system is right in front of everybody's noses.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
I'll take a longer look over the weekend.
How did you find these clues? Sounds like you know the answer already - how?
Briefly. Card #251 had some sort of code puzzle, the community working on the problem figured out that it was an encryption problem, they decided to brute force it, they built and distributed the client, they learned it wasn't efficient because each client was running independently, so they began the process of working on keeping track of eliminated combinations to distribute the workload across the network for efficiency....etc. Much of this stuff happened via ICQ and email but community recruitment was achieved via the forum thread above....pay attention to the dates and the type of people involved (where they are now is interesting)....notice the time frame when the project went dark....and notice https://www.distributed.net/RC5
Card #256 has not been solved.
It's all there...the rest you can find here and the early mailing lists.
Thanks. Yep, already done - some of it cross-checks w/ some research I've been holding back for a few months... i recall trying to remember something about a dairy, a robot from turkey, a trust, a company called Bitcoin Ltd. (formed Feb 2009), a Yale father and son (one in London, one in Denver), plus an accountant
Extra hint - http://www.economist.com/node/7001738
Here we go again ...
What does it matter who is Satoshi Nakamoto? Why is anyone know? There is a system works, it is used. Why all this? Just use.
We all Satoshi.
What does it matter who is Satoshi Nakamoto? Why is anyone know? There is a system works, it is used. Why all this? Just use.
We all Satoshi.
The truth: the answer to everybody's question regarding the identity of the individual who is responsible for putting together all the "pieces" of the first workable peer to peer digital cash system is right in front of everybody's noses.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
I'll take a longer look over the weekend.
How did you find these clues? Sounds like you know the answer already - how?
Briefly. Card #251 had some sort of code puzzle, the community working on the problem figured out that it was an encryption problem, they decided to brute force it, they built and distributed the client, they learned it wasn't efficient because each client was running independently, so they began the process of working on keeping track of eliminated combinations to distribute the workload across the network for efficiency....etc. Much of this stuff happened via ICQ and email but community recruitment was achieved via the forum thread above....pay attention to the dates and the type of people involved (where they are now is interesting)....notice the time frame when the project went dark....and notice https://www.distributed.net/RC5
Card #256 has not been solved.
It's all there...the rest you can find here and the early mailing lists.
The truth: the answer to everybody's question regarding the identity of the individual who is responsible for putting together all the "pieces" of the first workable peer to peer digital cash system is right in front of everybody's noses.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
I'll take a longer look over the weekend.
How did you find these clues? Sounds like you know the answer already - how?
There are those who claim they are nakamoto satoshi and people dont believe in it. Nulc is not out of the list though he is a possible candidate but he cannot be mr. satoshi. It doesnt matter who is nakamoto Satoshi, I guess well leave that controversy there since even if we know who he really is the most important thing is tha bitcoin becomes part of our lives and we thank who that person who created bitcoin.
The truth: the answer to everybody's question regarding the identity of the individual who is responsible for putting together all the "pieces" of the first workable peer to peer digital cash system is right in front of everybody's noses.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
I will provide some clues. Those searching for the guy in this picture have information: http://perplexcitycardcatalog.com/1/256/ the guy in the picture is named Satoshi.
And the group working on this related encryption problem : http://forums.unfiction.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14122 stumbled upon the concept of the decentralized component of "the ledger."
Bitcoin basically presented itself....and the name given to the individual labeled as the creator of the technology can add no value to its existence.
oh and by the way it didnt take him 6 days.. your right your just guessing
That's not what Sergio's research suggested, you should read it.
your 6day guess.. (im still laughing) was based on sergios initial OPINION in april 2013 where he done some maths based on
How many CPUs did Satoshi used to mine the first block?
The Satoshi PC
A good PC CPU in 2009 could do approximately 2^22 double-hashes/second.
(Taking into account NUMBER_OF_PROCESSORS=2, so two threads mine together)
Lets estimate how much time it takes for Satoshi PC to solve the genesis block with 43 zeros:
Initial 22 bits (nonce test/second)
Add approximately 16 bits for a whole day (86400 ~= 2^16)
Add approximately 2.5 bits to make it 6 days
The Satoshi PC
A good PC CPU in 2009 could do approximately 2^22 double-hashes/second.
(Taking into account NUMBER_OF_PROCESSORS=2, so two threads mine together)
Lets estimate how much time it takes for Satoshi PC to solve the genesis block with 43 zeros:
Initial 22 bits (nonce test/second)
Add approximately 16 bits for a whole day (86400 ~= 2^16)
Add approximately 2.5 bits to make it 6 days
which later(autumn of 2013) sergio denounced and worked out that satoshi was running VM software allowing more threads, and a few other details. which i did actually try to help you out with by giving you a hint earlier..
and sergio worked out it didnt take that long at all..
anyway satoshi was one person with one computer.. end of
7 countries police are searching for Satoshi Namatodo any you can say that Nullc is Satoshil i think still no body know that who is satoshi.
seriously are people actually looking for Satoshi? 
oh and by the way it didnt take him 6 days.. your right your just guessing
That's not what Sergio's research suggested, you should read it.
how many hashes do you think Satoshi attempted with his Genesis block production code?.
atleast your talking about hashes now.. one step forward atleast.
but lets laugh further. how many did satoshi reject.. answer: none.
the software did it for him. just like mining today.
its kind of like saying how many hashes did luke Jr reject before getting 1 block a day on eligius ages go.. answer: none.
the miners software did it.
luke JR did not reject anything. hashes just naturally keep hashing until a solution is found. there's no "rejection"
oh and by the way it didnt take him 6 days.. your right your just guessing
but the end point of what you tried to meander away from is simple.
one computer. one person = satoshi
other people, other usernames = helped
Eh? You're not making sense Frankys, I never said anything about changing the parameters that produce the block? I think you need to take a break, you're probably hallucinating through staying awake posting for 48 hours lol (get that sleep you claim to live without lol)
And again: how many hashes (read: blocks, seeing as your semantic quibbling is your only route out of the corner you've painted yourself into
) do you think Satoshi attempted with his Genesis block production code?. It took him 6 solid days! I'm totally guessing when say thousands, granted, but who cares if someone with their name in lights doesn't tell us that? Does not invalidate a reasonable estimate, but then again, original thought is not really your forte. And you've managed to figure out that Satoshi left the machine hashing away to itself to find his goldilocks block header, do you think Satoshi's PC was taking cigarette breaks or something?
And again: how many hashes (read: blocks, seeing as your semantic quibbling is your only route out of the corner you've painted yourself into
) do you think Satoshi attempted with his Genesis block production code?. It took him 6 solid days! I'm totally guessing when say thousands, granted, but who cares if someone with their name in lights doesn't tell us that? Does not invalidate a reasonable estimate, but then again, original thought is not really your forte. And you've managed to figure out that Satoshi left the machine hashing away to itself to find his goldilocks block header, do you think Satoshi's PC was taking cigarette breaks or something? And if Satoshi was deliberately trying to mine a block with very specific properties, how many iterations do you think that took, using a 2009 PC working for 6 days? Probably an order of magnitude higher than thousands of blocks got rejected before Satoshi chose one,
thats YOUR assumption. backed up by nothing.
by the way, hashing a block does not require making a new block per hash.. there are nearly 420,000 pieces of evidance that shows that one block of data is validated from millions of hashes until an appropriate solution is found.. (not the other way round)
again for emphasis:
not thousands of blocks for only one hash.
not thousands of alternate blockdata is rejected and data changed and retried..
oh by the way. the numbers and math was actually locked in as far back as november 2008, should you care to research sergio's finding further as even he has looked at satoshis earlier work.
so when satoshi started up his SINGLE machine in january.. he was not changing settings thousands of times and rejecting it until satisfied, he had the settings already and just let it run until the solution popped up.
one setting, and lots of patience.. probably a couple cups of coffee.. that its
but the end point of what you tried to meander away from is simple.
one computer. one person = satoshi
other people, other usernames = helped
i see no claim about the thousands of blocks he rejected.
as to the high hashrate which sergio (initally) thought was multiple machines used to create the genesis block, turned out to be just one
also sergio done other analysis after that
then he went on later to dig a bit deeper and his thought processes changed the more he learned..
the nonces, hashrate, etc all matched
the hashrates all curled off at the same time when satoshi's system must have been doing common tasks
https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/satoshi-machine-one-mystery-is-solved-and-another-opens/
sergio hints at how the date was locked and other things.. all of which. if you tried harder in your research point to something..
and ill give a hint to you.. "VM"
as to the high hashrate which sergio (initally) thought was multiple machines used to create the genesis block, turned out to be just one
also sergio done other analysis after that
My opinion is that Satoshi was doing multitasking on 5 threads, but since version 0.1 did not allow internal multitasking, and he didn't wanted to run 6 copies of the client (and store 6 copies of the blockchain) he created a special version of the Satoshi client which sent to 5 other "client" threads some hashing work to be done. But these threads were dumb, and only did the hashing part (no pubkey management, no extra-nonce incrementing). So Satoshi had to split the nonce space in order to avoid wasting work. He chose a range of 10 lsbs per thread because that represents a time (100 msec) that does not generate much IPC traffic and can wait for the remaining threads to finish without killing them if the one thread finds the solution for the block.
Best regards!
Best regards!
then he went on later to dig a bit deeper and his thought processes changed the more he learned..
the nonces, hashrate, etc all matched
the hashrates all curled off at the same time when satoshi's system must have been doing common tasks
https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/satoshi-machine-one-mystery-is-solved-and-another-opens/
sergio hints at how the date was locked and other things.. all of which. if you tried harder in your research point to something..
and ill give a hint to you.. "VM"
So what happened to your false assertion that Sergio couldn't know what Satoshi did to produce the Genesis block? What happened to your straw-man waffling about Sergio's entirely different research about the early blocks that are not the Genesis block? That had zero relation to what I was saying? You're now admitting that you made all that up, huh?
And if Satoshi was deliberately trying to mine a block with very specific properties, how many iterations do you think that took, using a 2009 PC working for 6 days? Probably an order of magnitude higher than thousands of blocks got rejected before Satoshi chose one, it doens't take Sergio saying that explicitly to figure that out, lol, or at least not for me. Man, you just don't seem to give up with telling the most convenient lies to suit your shit talking.
When will you learn to stop lying? Lying doesn't work post-Internet, genius
Satoshi went on to be called Crumbs. He's banned from the forum. 
Not impossible
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/mircea-popescu-aka-crumbs-others-490703
Satoshi went on to be called Crumbs. He's banned from the forum.
Sergio figured out how many 2009 PCs Satoshi must have used,
Satoshi (apparently) must have been using over a dozen high-end PCs, hashing away constantly, to get his preferred Genesis block. Highly amusing fact: it took 6 days.
Satoshi (apparently) must have been using over a dozen high-end PCs, hashing away constantly, to get his preferred Genesis block. Highly amusing fact: it took 6 days.
lol
(i.e. he rejected thousands of blocks before settling on the one he bootstrapped the Bitcoin network with).
i see no claim about the "thousands of blocks" he rejected.
as to the high hashrate which sergio (initally) and gmaxwell thought was multiple machines used to create the genesis block, turned out to be just one
also sergio done other analysis after that
My opinion is that Satoshi was doing multitasking on 5 threads, but since version 0.1 did not allow internal multitasking, and he didn't wanted to run 6 copies of the client (and store 6 copies of the blockchain) he created a special version of the Satoshi client which sent to 5 other "client" threads some hashing work to be done. But these threads were dumb, and only did the hashing part (no pubkey management, no extra-nonce incrementing). So Satoshi had to split the nonce space in order to avoid wasting work. He chose a range of 10 lsbs per thread because that represents a time (100 msec) that does not generate much IPC traffic and can wait for the remaining threads to finish without killing them if the one thread finds the solution for the block.
Best regards!
Best regards!
then he went on later to dig a bit deeper and his thought processes changed the more he learned..
the nonces, hashrate, etc all matched
the hashrates all curled off at the same time when satoshi's system must have been doing common tasks
https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/satoshi-machine-one-mystery-is-solved-and-another-opens/
sergio hints at how the date was locked and other things.. all of which. if you tried harder in your research point to something..
and ill give a hint to you.. "VM"
Here's Sergio's original thread concerning his analysis of the Genesis block:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1789665
So Franky(s), where's your big talk now? Nothing to say?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1789665
So Franky(s), where's your big talk now? Nothing to say?
Such awareness:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1790805
Since the genesis block was generated with some external code it may well have been rolling the public key... Even with valid ones— though the output of block 0 is not spendable in any case.
I was aware of the suspiciously high difficulty... and when Bluematt last brought it up in #bitcoin-dev I suggested that perhaps he just left it running, saving the best result, while he did the final preparation for the release.
I was aware of the suspiciously high difficulty... and when Bluematt last brought it up in #bitcoin-dev I suggested that perhaps he just left it running, saving the best result, while he did the final preparation for the release.
edit - https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/satoshi-machine-one-mystery-is-solved-and-another-opens/
Here's Sergio's original thread concerning his analysis of the Genesis block:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1789665
So Franky(s), where's your big talk now? Nothing to say?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1789665
So Franky(s), where's your big talk now? Nothing to say?
Jump to: