Topic: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? - page 97. (Read 143064 times)
i dont think satoshi nakamoro was 25 years by 2008 i think he its older person maybe 30 or 40 by that year or much older.. and the fact is CLEARLY satoshi nakamoto (nick)/name dissapear but the people behind tha name still here on this FORUM 100%.. who its is? nobody know.. but he estill here and reading all the post even make comments on the post...wake up people noboddy make something BIG and disspear..
Satoshi is love, Satoshe is life
~Jren
~Jren
We can confirm this.
One thing I just saw. In the paper "he" writes:
"Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending.
We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network. [...]"
Does anyone write "we" when he is only one person?
In scientific papers, it is common to refer to yourself as "we". The only conclusion you may draw from this is that he's probably been a student at some time in his life "Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending.
We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network. [...]"
Does anyone write "we" when he is only one person?
Of course. We ourselves always write like this.
One thing I just saw. In the paper "he" writes:
"Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending.
We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network. [...]"
Does anyone write "we" when he is only one person?
In scientific papers, it is common to refer to yourself as "we". The only conclusion you may draw from this is that he's probably been a student at some time in his life "Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending.
We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network. [...]"
Does anyone write "we" when he is only one person?
I noticed he uses two spaces after each punctuation symbol.
So?
So nothing, you make up your own conclusions, that's why I didn't add mine.
Pleased to be welcomed with a two-letter question anyway.
I noticed he uses two spaces after each punctuation symbol.
So?
I noticed he uses two spaces after each punctuation symbol.
Satoshi is a demon war-lord from the third circle of hell
One thing I just saw. In the paper "he" writes:
"Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending.
We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network. [...]"
Does anyone write "we" when he is only one person?
"Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending.
We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network. [...]"
Does anyone write "we" when he is only one person?
Ok. Who is the owner of this website? How things are going? Someone HAS to know him.
Who purchased bitcoin.org?
Who purchased bitcoin.org?
The real question is: who are YOU who ask such questions?
Is that why no one has shown me the handshake? I aint masonic enough for y'all. Or is it because I have a tendency to digress about things unrelated to the topic which we were originally discussing and got lost in thought on things not relevant?
Enough evidence exists that Sirius (Martti Malmi) was one of those people who created the Bitcoin. So he might be Satoshi. 
Reading through several pages and threads I'm still curious: what is the link of the profile Satoshi this forum?
The profile with 5 whitish currencies?
The profile with 5 whitish currencies?
can only say wow ..!, Satoshi Nakamoto has rocked the financial world
Has anyone ever thought maybe Satoshi is Ulbricht? and that's why the FBI came down so hard on him and we haven't heard from him since?
Completely ridiculous. At least we know that Satoshi is a mathematical and programming genius, who was at least 25 years old by 2008. On the other hand, Ullbricht has no background in these fields.
But I think if Satoshi is DPR then Ulbricht is a patsy, and the whole thing doesn't make a lot of sense.
I'm pretty well convienced that Ulbricht was a patsy anyway, and wasn't ever the true DPR anyway. I've seen no evidence to convince me that Ulbricht was more than a hired administrator.
If this article has not been linked before. Interesting reading:
https://likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-nick-szabo/
https://likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-nick-szabo/
Satoshi Nakamoto is The Original Dread Pirate Roberts Before Ross Ulbricht. I have a strong feeling :X
Has anyone ever thought maybe Satoshi is Ulbricht? and that's why the FBI came down so hard on him and we haven't heard from him since?
Jump to: