Topic: Writing analysis on Satoshi Nakamoto. - page 3. (Read 6806 times)
Casascius is a reasonable person but I probably remember that moronic Bitcoin 2.0 proposal too. Such scamcoin 2.0 proposals pop up from time to time but for most part they are a result of spending too many bitcoins on Silk Road weed, not attempt to hide who is Satoshi.
Limechat is a well known IRC client, especially on iOS.
Many devs in the core team use a Mac to code and communicate via IRC.
The publisher of Limechat is a developper named Satoshi Nakagawa.
Any other question ?
Many devs in the core team use a Mac to code and communicate via IRC.
The publisher of Limechat is a developper named Satoshi Nakagawa.
Any other question ?
How can we get a writing analysis done on all of Satoshi's written works to see if there is consistency among them?
Someone already did it. I read about it more than a year ago, but can't find that paper now.
http://www.fastcompany.com/1785445/bitcoin-crypto-currency-mystery-reopened
Quote
I started with some amateur textual analysis of Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin paper, extracting fragments of phrases and running them through Google. I figured I'd see if any of the ones in the paper appear elsewhere online. People tend to repeat themselves. The trick is to plug in unique-sounding fragments and place them in quotes. That way you only get a handful of results to comb through. I struck out on the first few, which all appeared solely in the Bitcoin paper, and there was one irrelevant link. Then I tried the term "computationally impractical to reverse." It resulted in 26 results...
Wooo. Thanks!
How can we get a writing analysis done on all of Satoshi's written works to see if there is consistency among them?
Someone already did it. I read about it more than a year ago, but can't find that paper now.
http://www.fastcompany.com/1785445/bitcoin-crypto-currency-mystery-reopened
Quote
I started with some amateur textual analysis of Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin paper, extracting fragments of phrases and running them through Google. I figured I'd see if any of the ones in the paper appear elsewhere online. People tend to repeat themselves. The trick is to plug in unique-sounding fragments and place them in quotes. That way you only get a handful of results to comb through. I struck out on the first few, which all appeared solely in the Bitcoin paper, and there was one irrelevant link. Then I tried the term "computationally impractical to reverse." It resulted in 26 results...
EDIT: ...and some info here - http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/10/10/111010fa_fact_davis
For history's sake. Historians make a living at this kind of thing.
Historians make a living a)Teaching new historians and 2)Selling cars and real estate.
How can we get a writing analysis done on all of Satoshi's written works to see if there is consistency among them?
Someone already did it. I read about it more than a year ago, but can't find that paper now.
The analysis first must answer is Satoshi a single person or group. Or probably group that used only single spokesperson. As far as I know only Seppuku Fujitsu used Satoshi's identity to communicate.
Quote
The software has been said to be beyond the work of one person.
Not all programmers are noobs. The original client is very well written but I have seen even more impressive code made by single person. How can we get a writing analysis done on all of Satoshi's written works to see if there is consistency among them?
Someone already did it. I read about it more than a year ago, but can't find that paper now.
How can we get a writing analysis done on all of Satoshi's written works to see if there is consistency among them?
Writing analysis is remarkably easy to cheat. The easiest way is to impersonate someone else's writing style. E.g. some author or journalist. 
I thought Satoshi Nakamoto is a pseudonym for more than one person. I just don't think you can do a simple semantic equation with 'his' writings to find true similarities. I wouldn't expect that from top cryptographers.
The third time, Casascius is Satoshi Nakamoto. Everything from timing to ability, style and motive matches.
But I or anybody else can't prove it, so it might as well be somebody else or multiple people.
But I or anybody else can't prove it, so it might as well be somebody else or multiple people.
It's the 3rd time u mention that Satoshi = Casascius. I got why u do it. U try to hide that Satoshi is YOU!
That would be really nice if it were true
The third time, Casascius is Satoshi Nakamoto. Everything from timing to ability, style and motive matches.
But I or anybody else can't prove it, so it might as well be somebody else or multiple people.
But I or anybody else can't prove it, so it might as well be somebody else or multiple people.
It's the 3rd time u mention that Satoshi = Casascius. I got why u do it. U try to hide that Satoshi is YOU!
The third time, Casascius is Satoshi Nakamoto. Everything from timing to ability, style and motive matches.
But I or anybody else can't prove it, so it might as well be somebody else or multiple people.
But I or anybody else can't prove it, so it might as well be somebody else or multiple people.
Let's settle this once and for all.
Irrelevant and pointless. I mean name a single good reason why it would matter?
Irrelevant and pointless. A human doesn't need a reason to know the truth.
Let's settle this once and for all.
Irrelevant and pointless. I mean name a single good reason why it would matter?
For history's sake. Historians make a living at this kind of thing.
Hmm, Hazek, you wouldn't happen to be associated with Satoshi Nakamoto, would you?
Let's settle this once and for all.
Irrelevant and pointless. I mean name a single good reason why it would matter?
Jobs?
Let's settle this once and for all.
Irrelevant and pointless. I mean name a single good reason why it would matter?
How can we get a writing analysis done on all of Satoshi's written works to see if there is consistency among them? I am becoming more convinced we are dealing with an organization here a la Bavarian Illuminati, who started many of the world's revolutions.
If we can prove that there is no consistency among the communications of Nakamoto, we can prove that Bitcoin's first implementation is the work of many anonymous individuals.
People have said that Satoshi Nakamoto has been very hard to communicate with. The software has been said to be beyond the work of one person.
Let's settle this once and for all.
Update: http://www.fastcompany.com/1785445/bitcoin-crypto-currency-mystery-reopened
If we can prove that there is no consistency among the communications of Nakamoto, we can prove that Bitcoin's first implementation is the work of many anonymous individuals.
People have said that Satoshi Nakamoto has been very hard to communicate with. The software has been said to be beyond the work of one person.
Let's settle this once and for all.
Update: http://www.fastcompany.com/1785445/bitcoin-crypto-currency-mystery-reopened
Jump to: