Topic: Who was Satoshi Nakamoto? - page 4. (Read 1062 times)

What was the reason to do that?

Was it in a specific post?, was it in general?

I remember reading a post where they were discussing about whether to post their real names or pseudonyms, but I don't recall reading Satoshi Nakamoto in that thread.

To me, it doesn't matter either. Satoshi, whoever he is, implemented the ideas of Nick Szabo, Wei Dai, Adam Back etc. Even if he is none of the suspects, to me, the real creators of Bitcoin are those. Satoshi *just* practiced their theory, but the brilliant minds of Bitcoin are those of Nick and the rest.

The Russian article was written in 2010, but the wayback machine sends us to 2006. How could there be a link to a 2010 post in 2006? Also, the Russian article does not only refer to bit gold, but to Bitcoin (i.e., contains links to bitcoin.org). It was definitely published after Bitcoin. Something doesn't hold water here.

Yes having seen the answer by BHC I believe that perhaps he is right. Adam Back couldn't have been Satoshi.

Btw this conversation between all of us proves that we just speculate. I thought that Adam Back was Satoshi, but apparently he couldn't have been and I just changed my mind in a few minutes after reading the posts above.

Nick Szabo is a good candidate indeed!


I think it works the other way around. I mean if you look at the article that was written in 2010 (it's in Russian), it references BitGold, so I believe "Links to this post" links to articles that refer to BitGold.

All have alibis and evidence that say that someone is considered to be Satoshi but in the end it comes back to a mystery that may never be revealed about who Satoshi is.

Regardless of the evidence or not in the end everything remains the same where there will definitely be doubts about the person who claims or the person who is considered as Satoshi especially with the initial goal that he wants to be someone unknown (personally) then it is very difficult to validate anything about who Satoshi Nakamoto is.

I personally don't want to speculate too much about Nick Szabo being Satoshi at the moment because it would just be a waste of time because in the end the truth will be doubted even if there is some evidence that seems convincing that he is Satoshi.

That doesn't make sense, in my opinion. Adam Back recently leaked his conversation with Satoshi, in which Satoshi presented him the whitepaper. If Adam was into Satoshi group, why would this conversation even exist? Faking a private conversation like that seems far-fetched.

Sounds more plausible that Nick used a British word or two to cover himself up. He had to switch to another writing style anyway.

---

Can somebody answer me these questions of mine? So, in this blog post Nick Szabo demonstrates bit gold, the direct precursor to Bitcoin. I think I made somewhat of a discovery, but it's probably me having insomnia, so forgive me if they're already presented before.

• Why does the blog post's date say "December 27, 2008", whereas in the URL, it is apparent that the post was published on 2005? If you use wayback machine, you can check yourself that in 2006, it said "December 29, 2005". Date doesn't change if you edit your blog post IIRC. It's as if he deliberately modified it a few days after the Bitcoin whitepaper was published in Meltzdowd mailing list. What doesn't stick to this story is that Nick wasn't aware of Bitcoin until 2011, when he published his first ever comment on Bitcoin. It just doesn't sound right that he hadn't figured it out prior 2011, given that it was practically his life work.
• In wayback machine again, 2006, why is there a link to a "Bitcoin" post from the future? How can such a thing have happened? It exists in archive.is as well.

These are some interesting revelation especially, the quote from Theymos about a forum section having some posts and the possibility of some identity revealing text.
It might be possible that this was the case with the fact that, this was the early days of the innovation with it still looking to gain prominence in the digital world and finance at the time.

Even still, I have doubts as Satoshi Nakamoto was well aware of most, if not all of the reasons that constituted the failure of the early digital currency projects, well enough to prioritize safety, privacy and security on all ends, not just for the human entity’s sake but for the future of Bitcoin itself.

The information shared by that guy on reddit is very informative to say the least, but then, I am wondering why he is no longer posting on this forum if he was once here, he could have been a good asset to this forum, as most of us would have loved to learn more from his experience as a true bitcoin OG who must have had some private connection with satoshi, because, I personally do not believe that the guy would know much as he knows without some internal private connections with those guys he mentioned on his reddit post.

Anyways, that is if all he said is true though, because for me, the mystery around who Satoshi Nakamoto is; is still yet unsolved, and I doubt it will ever be solved.

Satoshi is a legendary figure already, however not enough time has passed for people to really realize how big of a legend he is and how big he will become, take a look at the disappearance of Amelia Earhart, almost 90 years have passed since she disappeared and there are still people looking for her, Satoshi in my opinion will be way bigger than her as I have no doubts that at some point in time he will become the richest person alive and maybe even the first trillionaire, so I can assure you that there will always be someone looking for Satoshi trying discover his real identity for the foreseeable future.

You are wrong  when you say, ''I don't think we will be able to figure out
who he really is, and this name Satoshi Nakamoto''

your word ''we'' is excluding me. Satoshi Nakamoto has read this thread, and he knows
who is speculating for secret motives and who is just really have no clues. yes you all know his
Japanese pseudonym but there are 70 people in the Bitcoin community know his real identity
but won't like to admit because they are working for governments' secret service.  

Bitcoin inventor chose a Japanese pseudonym does not mean he is Japanese, he cited Adam Back's
HashCash and Wei Dai's name in the Reference no.  1.  in the Bitcoin White Paper does not make
Adam Back or Wei Dai the writer of Bitcoin White Paper.

Satoshi met Hal Finney when he travelled with Wei Dai in London on 26 October 2008. Satoshi met
Nick Zsabo and Bitalik Butterin in 2015 in London for the first time in DevCon. and Craig Wright in
2018 in London.

Satoshi has been cornered by the governments agents
those who have hijacked his Bitcoin project from him.

They are running this forum and Bitcoin Blockchain.

They say ''we are all Satoshi.''

Satoshi is visible but unseen
to the blind media reporters.

you  need to understand
the phrase -

I am, 'Satoshi Nakamoto'

I am not alone.

A Samurai is a Samurai.
No matter where
he was born ?

Satoshi is an Immortal,
He is not one of you
in the Bitcoin Forum.

He is just a pseudonym
to you you all.

but to me -
I am, Satoshi Nakamoto.

I am myself.

Search and
you will find
Satoshi.  



  




 






 

 

I don't really care, like many others, who Satoshi is. The reddit post provides a funny speculation, which seems reasonable and of course you did well to create a topic just for fun. But god, we have tooooo many topics like this. Anyway!

Let's speculate once more (because we secretly like speculating):

If Nick Szabo is the whitepaper guy, how can we explain the brittish spelling? The brittish spelling is also curious, because if you observe the emails, Satoshi uses a ton of American English words, like "newbies" etc.

So, my speculation would be that Adam Back wrote the whitepaper and Nick Szabo wrote the code. And then, Nick Szabo was answering the emails etc.

No disrespect to your thoughts but I feel Satoshi Nakamoto is a mystery and very much anonymous and that's the reason he created Bitcoin which follows the similar protocols about hiding one's identity and I don't think we will be able to figure out who he really is, and this name Satoshi Nakamoto itself night be a pseudonym used by the person whom we are referring as Satoshi Nakamoto. We may see such news about mail exchanges and similar ones even in the future like how we have seen in the past but I don't think anyone can find about much about Satoshi Nakamoto but will be always remembered for the revolutionary idea and invention of Bitcoin.

When you do not know anything about, who is Satoshi Nakamoto ?

then it is better for you all to stop speculating.
Search in the meta data and you will find his IP, search the  account
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/admin-1
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/--2
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/satoshi-3

Ask the experts to search if you are not metadata expert.

Otherwise you have to wait until Satoshi's situation change.

non of those developers is Satoshi Nakamoto.  They are just bunch of opportunists.

Stop speculating and leave Satoshi alone, if you do not care at all about a man who
has created this bitcoin blockchain and you all are exploiting it and living a luxury life
with bitcoin money, while Satoshi is suffering very badly.

It's possible that Satoshi would have just created Bitcoin and publicly released his identity, but he didn't, and I think his reason was to keep Bitcoin decentralized. If at all Satoshi Nakamoto were two individuals who wanted to keep a trace of their identity, long before now, they would have been discovered because the government itself is looking for every possible lead to uncover Satoshi's identity. 

Sometimes I used to ask myself: if Satoshi was really alive and had those millions of bitcoins in his wallet, would he not have felt tempted to look for means to access his fortune? I just concluded that Satoshi is dead. 

This story seems quite convincing, but it would have been uncovered right after Bitcoin price reached $1k or when
 began to become popular in the spaces

Why you think Hal Finney is the Satoshi, while he himself said he is not the Satoshi he also mentioned Satoshi is some Japanese dude in one of his last posts on Bitcointalk, you should check this thread if you haven't read it yetI hope this is enough to give you an idea that Hal was not Satoshi, he was also door knocked on by the CIA or whatever agency was, you can read the news anywhere by using some keywords. The point is, that Hal is not Satoshi. Now talking about your post of Reddit.

I would be convinced but it might be another story to cover up real  Satoshi as many crypto users are doing it, as they have been left with no other choice, what I don't understand is, what bad could happen if real Satoshi came in from to public eyes, will he/she be in any kind of danger as things are out of his/her hands now. So, considering this fact, I also think Satoshi is no more, as you said two dudes the one who wrote WP and the other who wrote the code are both dead now. I find it sad if it's real then this should not have happened, things should have not gone like this. But if it's fake, then no prob.

If you read what Wikipedia says about him then you’ll see that he has denied being satoshi on several occasions. Btw, I also saw another article about the Op and I think that’s where this so called TheInternetGuy got the idea from that Nick Szabo is satoshi Nakamoto and then he decides to go online and just write as if he and Nick discussed about it where it got confirmation. I don’t think this is something worth debating on.

If not for this thread I don’t think I would have even know that someone called Nick Szabo exists.

No one knows for sure, period.  No we do know that its not Craig Wright, but outside that it could be a combination of quite a few cryptographers. 

Here's an interesting story I read recently/happened to randomly come across.  Now no one knows for sure who Satoshi is, which is part of his genius.  I personally think it's Nick Szabo for many reason.  I've actually spoken with Craig Wright and Szabo individually on twitter, and Craig jut doesn't give me that vibe.

Szabo created bitgold /coined the term smart contracts etc.  He' an economist, cryptographer, etc..and he just fits the bill.  Plus Szabo is a bit of an asshole, and I hear Satoshi was much the same in forum PMs.  You could tell he was a bit brash just from his forum posts too.


   

(what an iconic/legendary photo.  Including our  own forum mod Greg Maxwell.  If you haven't read his posts, or his blog, I highly recommend it.  We are very lucky to have him here!!

https://www.experiencelab.info/2018/06/unveiling-bitcoin-team-led-by-nick.html?m=1  (for the record I believe this article to be total bullshit, but who knows).

A while back I wrote a topic [1] on why identifying SN would not be in our best interest. I recommend giving it a read.

Identifying this individual would provide governments worldwide with a tangible target for scrutiny, beyond mere anonymity. The potential repercussions include a surge in negative publicity and unfounded allegations against the newly revealed persona. Despite the speculative nature of any accusations, the community could face an unprecedented wave of FUD.

[1] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.57454873

Some people think that they have figured it out.


With this part I agree. One of the biggest Bitcoin advnatges is the anonymity of its creator and I don't think that anything good could come out of finding out who really was behind all this.

until now there is still a lot of debate surrounding the name "satoshi nakamoto" some say that it was an individual or a group. but whatever it is, the most important thing is how bitcoin has developed to where it is today and introduced us to a sophisticated and decentralized transaction system. whoever the creator is and whatever he does is something that is no longer too important to discuss, because satoshi nakamoto has decided to be anonymous and leave the bitcoin space and we have to respect that.

I get why people might suspect Nick Szabo, but speculating beyond that is pointless, IMO. How does ThatInternetGuy knows such details as to who wrote the code? If I had to guess a candidate, then it'd be Nick but only Nick. In this little research, the author has found out similarities between Nick's writing character and Satoshi's, therefore concluding he might have written the whitepaper and forum posts, but it is also known that Nick has had quite a good expertise in C++. Just because Len committed suicide at about the same time satoshi stopped posting, does it mean it was him? Of course not.