Bitcoin Forum

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdvQTwjVmrE
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3358695/Suspected-Bitcoin-founder-paid-85m-worth-cybercurrency-buy-gold-software-told-good-insurance-funny-money.html
http://www.wired.com/2015/12/new-clues-suggest-satoshi-suspect-craig-wright-may-be-a-hoaxer/
http://www.neowin.net/news/bitcoins-alleged-founder-has-home-raided-by-police
http://s13.postimg.org/f5xcunblz/craig.jpg

Not at all. Satoshi wouldn't be publicly talking about bitcoins.

Another misdirection by the media.

It's probably some businessman seeking attention from the media.

No not any cost, satoshi doesn't like to be public so why he will talk freely about bitcoin like craig wright is doing right now. And all of those news are to get some traffic to their blogs and videos. I don't find truth behind these news.

Yep, this is all just like the other "Satohis" they've found in the past. In reality, there's a little Satoshi in all of us, :).

he just people who want to be famous
 ::)
Wright had listed two PhDs on his since-deleted LinkedIn page, one from Charles Sturt University in Bathurst, Australia, in computer science. But that university now tells Forbes that it never gave Wright any PhDs, although it granted him three master’s degrees in related fields: Networking and Systems Administration, Management (Information Technology), and Information Systems Security.

The major news, and media organisation researchers/writers/reporters still can't seem to grasp the concept of openSource.  Seems to be standard practice for all the news corporations to misead/misinform/fabricate information on anything they fear, and don't understand.

Look what they did to the groups that used to frequent 4chan, irc channels, icq, and other mediums. Successfully labeling a constantly changing unnamed leaderless groups of random people as a "hacker collective" called "Anonymous".  News organizations consistently apply labels, and affiliate associates to events.  The publication under Satoshi was just a clever blueprint for integrating already available open source applications.  Nothing had to be invented in the beginning.

Hell I used to play around with some of the software underlying the bitcoin platform before it was considered a "speculative commodity"/currency long long ago.  If I remember correctly, It was under the same category as the fold@home way back in the early parts of 2000-2002(I think that's what it was called from MIT).  Collective computing, solving complex operations.

While people outside the cryptocurrency community may be influenced by these pseudo-stories the news companies try to feed the public. The die-hards, and those from within the community will always know the truth.

If you want to know who/what is behind Bitcoin, learn about open source software (GNU License), programming, and system integration.  Then get in a time machine, and go back to before 2002 (Things changed in an interesting way in regards to obtaining valid, credible facts/data after 2002 ... acK).


Remember Bitcoin, and cryptocurrencies don't exactly help the current worldwide monetary system yet.  I believe it's still regarded as a threat ( If allowed to become mainstreamed/widespread adoption , the reports I read seemed to point out frequently) to the current banking, holdings, trading, credit conglomerates.  These same companies have unlimited budgets when it comes to subverting use of cryptocurrency for "national security", and other purposes.  If it wasn't for that illusive "unknown AI entity" crawling through all the major data centers, and private networks, and the blowback from the die-hards, I am damn sure cryptocurrencies would of been snuffed out/pacified/destroyed back before BTC skyrocketed past the price of gold.  Was friggin DEFCON 5 red alert for the IMF/Federal Reserve when that happened, lol shareholders were NOT amused.

Sorry to rant, but It's just something to keep in the back of your head.  There are forces that are purposefully, and accidentally subverting this idea of a publically held/updated/maintained ledger that will never be controlled by governments/shareholders.

This is a technology that benefits all who breath oxygen. Subversion is not going to stop till a way is found that will benefit all the public, and privately created entities profiting off the current monetary system. Innovating new business models that incorporate both fiat, and cryptocurrency based allocators of resources into related business operations is the only way to avoid substantial hardship for various sectors during the adaptation period.

Wow xD I have a feeling you are actually Satoshi Nakamoto, jokes I was taking press approach, well I learned a thing or two from you and I thank you for taking the time to write this valuable information.

And for the rest I think I would agree with you, that it couldn't be him, but I was afraid to be the only person who doesn't believe this, also his email logs that had his PGP keys, I don't know how they can fake that, but since they didn't release the emails and proof that emails are actually real I think they are in the wrong place.

Also Craig said he is Satoshi, like he told everyone that he is! I think he is obsessed with Satoshi like the rest of the community that sometimes he think it's him, until he believed it.

On 2009 I have been lurking around and I used to have a good amount of BTC which I lost after in instawallet, I also came to contact with maybe real maybe fake Satoshi Nakamoto at 2011, when I made a bitcoin related page on facebook, still can be found here:
https://www.facebook.com/iloveyoubitcoin/
one of the people who liked the page is named satoshi nakamoto, same guy added me on Google+ and he still use it as of today, it could be Craig?? or a random fan, I will never know, it could be a troll as well, but for a long time I believed I knew satoshi nakamoto lol but now actually I don't care, since bitcoin is all crap now and crypto currencies became ICO and a form of ponzi/scam with all respect to greedy developers but it's the truth.

Bitcoin have been copyrighted and have a central control, the only thing people can actually do is like refuse the XT client? really? again I don't know your opinion might be different.

No. I think it was just a joke. If he is, he will be the prime target from all sort of extortions and cyberattack- he won't have a peaceful life...

The way he explained his 1 million Bitcoins are locked by 2020 to potentional investors is alone clear sign of scam attempt. Not to mention the 1 million Bitcoins mined by Satoshi alone is more a popular simplified version on the matter than a reasonable amount given how quickly new and new people joined Bitcoin. 1 million Bitcoins for one person doesnt add up at all.

Dr wright never had 1mill bitcoins.. all he gave his friend was public keys of loads of addresses (emphasis on public, which anyone can copy and paste) to 'suggest' he was worth $85mill, the deal fell through because Dr Wright couldnt pay real bitcoins as he didnt own any of the private keys to do a transfer.

its like writing a cheque for $85mill.. it looks good to see that many zero's on a piece of paper, but the cheque is gonna bounce because the signature doesnt match

Bitcoin copyrighted, perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are trying to say? The entire source code, and platform is released with an MIT license.  As long as you include the same license, everyone is free to copy, modify, distribute, monetize the software underlying Bitcoin, and most of the other cryptos..   Someone could trademark the name Bitcoin still, I think... Will have to check on that..

While a determined group may be able to exercise the ability to control all the nodes, install/implement custom software that doesn't allow inputs from targeted groups, or people.  That would inherently alienate the end-users.  I would think simply moving to a different altcoin not dominated by a single group would be the solution to that problem.  

When the people who are broadcasting bitcoin nodes, block finding/confirming transactions with miner, and crypto trading platforms are jailed, and/or charged for those activities.  Then you will know Bitcoin has been assimilated into the current monetary structure controlled by hierarchically established entities.  If you have to purchase a license to use send/receive cryptocurrency, ASIC mining hardware, from your state/government then you will know of centralized bitcoin control.  Nobody can freeze assets on the blockchain as is, it is imperative that it stays that way.  Even if senators, presidents, or other reps cry for control/regulation under ruses such as like money laundering(Physical USD is still the best for this), illegal markets, violation of current monetary laws, and other nefarious reasons to get the masses scared (Problem-Reaction-Solution time right? Pffft...) inherently obliging/supporting to all the proposed new laws around this "speculative commodity"/currency.  Look at who is all stuffing those shiny quarters in input slot of the Pseudo-Representative of the state/government proposing the new laws.  

Or, such is the case in the USA (most castrated country I think when it comes to monetary policy) watch for them ninja bills that seem to keep finding themselves attached to happier named bills that have no relation, to the primary bill.  Attached to pass.  If the house, and senate can pass through bills such as the original Patriot Act into law.  Anything is possible.

I am sorry but I do not think he would let himself be discovered as easy as this.  I am sure he is out there and he if he is selling bitcoin out for a currency exchange, he will be doing it a little more low key than something like this. He has went through all of this to keep himself out of the light, then they want us to believe that he is out there now selling off $85m for gold.  Get real.  Media like that is for those who want something else to believe in.

Not sure why are you making yet another thread on this guy since it has been discussed enough. This guy is a hoaxer and wanted fame to make people think that he created Bitcoin which gives you massive status in the tech world and would open any doors to your future projects and funding of those, it's not that hard to understand the motive.

Great analogy here! And I wasn't aware that he only sent the public keys -- I thought it was private as well.

another misdirection of media i think,and lets be realistic,if craig was satoshi and bitcoin founder,why he's sold bitcoin and buy gold?he think bitcoin will be end?and so if you change your subject and search satoshi nakamoto on google,i think media will much more talking about satoshi as founder of bitcoin. :)

No, I think he was just a miner from the very beginning.  He has been cashing out and his writing is much different than satoshis.  He could just be a scammer looking to avoid taxes.

Satoshi nakamoto wont let himself reveal on internet world.  And talk about bitcoin in media.
If he wanna be famous it would since bitcoin start :)

This guy craig just wanna be famous itself actually.

Nope ,Donald Trump is the new Satoshi .Fact is nobody is satoshi Nakamoto except Satoshi Nakamoto.Anybody can come up with such stupid shit and claim to be him.Criag weight is just some random dude trying to get attention by posting fake news.

I don't think that Craig is Satoshi Nakamoto, why take so long to just reveal him self like this.
People won't just belief that he is for me doesn't matter who he is I like that he found it so. I am happy for it.

I don't think he is satoshi nakamoto. Unless he can prove he's pgp key.

Maybe he was just only want to be famous. This issues has been happen several times ago.

Some people declare that he is satoshi nakamoto.

The two keys used to prove him has suspicious history. I do not believe he is Satoshi. From his action, if he is, he would have been exposed earlier.

i'm not sure about this,but the only thing make me little to believe this is the fact of his news and about his arresting,and some fact when i'm seacrh on google,we all will find this :
Craigh Wright : Outed as the man behind the persona 'Satoshi Nakamoto', Craig Wright is believed to be the founder of Bitcoin.
but i dont too much care about who really he is.

The Gizmodo article is pretty convincing if you ask me.

http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692

What I can't understand if the email was hacked and all the evidence was shown from the satoshi vistomail account. Then why from the same vistomail account did he then deny being Satoshi.

Fuck, one of these days I wish Maria6.0 would explain all this to me.

There is no proof in the article. There's plenty of circumstantial evidence and hints, but no proof. In contrast, there is absolute proof that some of their evidence was forged.

Interesting, but I don't know why you would want to fake it. Just having to deal with all the people harassing you when you don't even have any of the supposed bitcoins. Fame? Screw it if you ask me. Rather have the cash.

What are you guys thinking about? he is totally not Satoshi Nakamoto

Because then when you look for a job, people will pay you MAJOR money to work for them since you created a world-changer.

craig is an arrogant prick from what I have seen and can't imagine him keeping a secret like that. He
seems like the type that would remind you daily that he invented bitcoin.

 No I don't and ifor me it is not important too. The main thing is that bitcoin is here and clearly hre to stay.
However the quest for Satoshi gives Bitcoin some nice (positive PR)

of course he is not, he is just one of those wanna be satoshi, that you will from here until the end of the time

many other like him will try to be satoshi in the future, and the same shit will rise everytime

i think that the real satoshi, if want to get out from his position again will do it anonimously at first

I cannot believe that him is Satoshi Nakamoto. Cannot believe that such kind of character like Satoshi be able to appear publicly in that way. From being to many reserved and anonymous since the beginning in someone very open and mediatic like it is Craig Wright. To not mention here something heard from it which according to me is a bullshit (told that bitcoin is a commodity). Anyhow I am not an expert to be able to ask scientific proofs in order to verify his identity. So, if he is really Satoshi let give such kind of proofs and everything is solved immediately.

Yes, his personality is exactly the opposite of what we know of Satoshi. That alone would disqualify him from serious consideration.

I find it funny that he shared public keys to "prove" his worth, without signing any of them. Anyone minimally familiar with bitcoin ought to know enough to demand the latter. And the "evidence" cited by Wired (et al) was a joke as well. I hope the authors who broke this story learn a few lessons about reasonable skepticism and thinking through the strength of evidence provided (and how it could be faked, and how that can be tested).

By now even Dorian seems more convincing than Craig

I wonder who the next Satoshi will be  ::)

Odds are that Craig = Satoshi.

But for now we will simply await the soon to be released Craig/Satoshi whitepapers regarding incorporating Turing architecture in Bitcoin, and other feedback from his years of SuperComputer use modelling bitcoin.

Comes at a good time.  Bitcoin is gaining momentum due to the global financial situation.   You can see from all the heavily publicized news story frenzy yesterday that R3CEV/Hyperledger is desperately trying to stall / redirect interest from Bitcoin to Blockchain.  They don't want Bitcoin to get ahead of itself and jeopardize their own option of establishing a Cryptocurrency.

I like the quote from the following story:
Source: http://www.afr.com/technology/blockchain-for-banks-still-at-the-gluten-stage-20151209-gljy9m
Excerpt: "Blockchain is a bit like gluten," says Tim Swanson, head of research at R3CEV, a New York start-up backed by 30 banks. "Everyone is talking about it but no one knows what it is in great detail."  Like all fads it could fade unless backed up, he adds. "People have to deliver something within the next 12 to 18 months or they will go back to their existing technology vendors."

Right now this is a footrace between Bitcoin & Hyperledger.  I feel that Ripple/Ethereum are pretty much effectively now going to simply just downward slope into eventual death by non-use.  They may survive in some sort of tiny pockets of use, but they are effectively being marginalized.  R3CEV/Hyperledger is currently THE potential competition to Bitcoin.

So how does Craig/Satoshi play into this.  Well, savior returns to give bitcoin a boost, incorporate Turing, solve some Scaling problems etc.  Problem is.... Satoshi has to remain Satoshi to do this.  Craig knows this, and so does rest of Bitcoin land.  Or at least they think they know it.  Craig/Satoshi got outed.  They considered running with the truth.  Got too wierd.  So he's been stuffed back in the bottle.

Regardless.... I will be curious as to Craig/Satoshi's next whitepaper, which according to Craig/Satoshi should be this coming year, hopefuly early year.

NO
he lied about his degree
he lied about building his supercomputer together with SGI (if he even has one)

why do you still think its him is beyond me (well except you think that this news is the reason for the last price spike or you are craig; or both)

No - you are simply quoting assumptions, and misdirection.  He's got a lot of degree's so if one of them is misquoted then that just a non-issue.  And in regards to SGI, it is a PROVEN, FACTUAL Supercomputer.  And SGI itself has clearly acknowledged its existence and offered the simple, and very plausible, explanation in which it was simply built through the purchase of grey market parts.

But this is WAY above your intelligence capability.  It's basically a financial issue.  If you buy direct from SGI.... it costs you an arm and a leg.  If you purchase from grey market... it only costs you a few fingers.

Sort of financial supply chain math 101.

I think that the best solution is to check the Satoshi Nakamoto address in way to find if this "man" has sold its bitcoin for buying gold. There will be surely some movement on that address.

proof it


again proof it. the statement from SGI i have read did not say he has one. they just said he did not buy one from them (but HE claimed he has built it together with them....so he lied)


ROFL

NO

[/quote]

PS... more like oneLESSxmr.
I'd change my user name to avoid ridicule.  xmr will go to zero, unless you and your 5 friends that hold it want to keep play trading.  Just because it is possible to create a gazillion useless altcoins doesn't mean it is wise to.  Altcoins are all mostly just pyramid schemes.

"Prove".  not proof.

Go look at the 500 list.  Look at owner records.  Track owner records.  And with that PROOF, your theory goes POOF.

POOF!

besides that i learned that its not too hard to fake an entry on that list i did never say he did not have a supercomputer. i just said he lied about building it together with sgi.

Well look at you backpedaling. 

See how easy this was?  And it can be done across the board with almost all the rumour/gossip/assumptions surrounding Craig/Satoshi.

You can just go down the list regarding the "Proof".  In the end it all ends up being not quite what it is insinuated to be. 

And I love your backpedal style..... You plant a suggestion that maybe the entry is faked.  Then you cover your butt with a statement that you aren't actually suggesting it doesn't exist.  Then you go back on the attack and accuse him of being guilty of lying about something (which is only a possible interpretation of the evidence - and not even a very likely interpretation).

How did that go again..... POOF!  ;D

backpedalling?
maybe you should learn to read:

i did never edit that quoted post... so you for yourself what i have written.
but at least no i know why you still think he is satoshi... you only read what you want and not what is written  :D

I do not believe he is him. His interest in claiming to be Satoshi, and the fact he does not provide the most simple proofs (signature, etc) is paradoxical.

If I want to show myself as myself, I would use the simplest proofs, not the complex ones (showing degrees and Bitcoin knowledge).

I repeat... backpedaling.  The clear implication was the denial of the supercomputer story.  Again, perhaps this is above your intelligence level.  But I doubt it.  I think you are well aware of what the implications of your language are.  You start with the scary "He Lied!!!" then tie in the supercomputer.  

It is the same M.O. in all the evidence against Craig.  Big scary statement.... vague attachment to a subject.... allow people to jump to conclusions.  

But when pushed for specific facts / possibility of alternative theories... backpedaling on the solidity of the overall implications.

Here is an interesting test for you.  I will star with your statement that you never claimed he didn't have a supercomputer.  Lets stick with that for a second.

So, #1 - Are you man enough to admit that it is POSSIBLE that Craig is running / in control of a Globally Top 20 Ranked Supercomputer?

#2 - If you can admit to #1, can you admit that it is possible that he has indeed been using it to model bitcoin scalability issues for the past years?

#3 - Are you man enough to admit that if #1 & #2 are possible, then it is possible that he may be in a position to soon be releasing Very Important information in relation to the entire Bitcoin Tecnology?

Again, I just want to see if anyone out there is man enough to admit that it is POSSIBLE.  Because I don't see anyone willing to absolutely with 100% certainty state that Craig's SGI Supercomputer doesn't exist.

I mean - show some guts you whimps.  Is it POSSIBLE Craig has a supercomputer - regardless of whether you misrepresented his statements of SGI involvement, or whether he flat out lied about it.  And if it IS possible, then is it POSSIBLE that he's telling the truth about using it for Bitcoin modeling?  And if that is possible, then is it possible that regardless of wheter he is Satoshi or not - that this could have big implications.

I guess the bottom line is that you can't play both sides of the fence.  Either take a stance that the Supercomputer absolutely 100% does NOT exist, or admit all these things are possible?

Yup - I think you should look into the "teapot theory" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot).

So if you're not *man enough* to admit there can't be a teapot out there then I guess there is - eh? :D

Seriously - the guy is a fraud - it is obvious to pretty much everyone apart from some people that probably also think there are teapots orbiting the sun. ;)

More misdirection and confusion.... Craig never went out claiming he was Satoshi.  Wired and Gizmoto supposedly dug up documents and outed him against his will.  

I want to see a single incidence of Craig himself publically coming out after the stories were released and saying, "Yes, I am Satoshi".  Never happened.  He never wanted to be outed.  Now he is simply trying to figure out how to release his info - whether he has to prove Satoshiness, or can he release and pretend it is coming from the originally anonymous Satoshi - and everyone pretends none of this ever happened and we keep playing the game of Craig/Satoshi.

One thing is for sure.... Wired / Gizmoto released info no one, including Craig/Satoshi, wanted released.

Problem is.... you can't put the genie back in the bottle.  It is what it is.  Quit stalling.  Move on.  

The real issue is Bitcoin needs hte knowledge this man has because Bitcoin must scale and rise to challenge R3CEV/Hyperledger soon, or risk dropping forever into 2nd position.  IF R3CEV/Hyperledger succeeds,a nd IF they decide to introduce their own Fiatcoin - then Bitcoin may be regulated into an illegal blackmarket currency, or it may be allowed to survice as "digital silver" the 2nd place coin.  But their is a RISK - a POSSIBILITY - that Bitcoin loses everything if certain issues aren't addressed rapidly.

i dont think he is real satoshi nakamoto,because i dont know who really he is,and donw know about his story,and why is he use "nakamoto" if he really satoshi nakamoto,oh this is make me confuse,and start from now idont really care about Craig and Nakamoto,i just care about bitcoin :D

Without SOLID proofs (Ssatoshi's original keys, signed message from one of his oldest addresses etc.) I refuse to accept anyone who claims to be Satoshi.
Other evidence can be fabricated quite easy as we see in Wright case, example: entry of his blog supposedly dated 2009 was manipulated and added at later date.

I will repeat, I want to see a single incidence of Craig himself (OR ANYONE SO FAR) publically coming out after stories were released identifying them as Satoshi, and saying, "Yes, I am Satoshi.  It is me.  I admit it.".

Quit inferring that Craig/Satoshi is like touring the globe promoting himself as Satoshi.  So dishonest.  I think one of the biggest factors pointing to Craig = Satoshi, is the complete lying and manipulative pictures being painted.

Everytime I see people posting "Craig Wright keeps claiming he is Satoshi", it simply increases my belief it might be him.  I mean, why else would everyone have to resort to dramatic overexageration and lying - unless there was something more to the story. 

How's that old saying go.... "I think thee protests too much"

i have no problem admitting 1 and 2.
i doubt 3 but yes, it is possible - but this has nothing to do with 1 and 2. you, me and anyone else can say very important things about bitcoin technology. a supercomputer does not qualify for that.

I would admit that it's possible, but very unlikely to be true. imho your point doesn't have value; the same would be for me to say that it's possible that
you can generate identical wallet as someone else - once again it would be possible, but not probable at all.

Here are some fact for you; Satoshi didn't move any of his known coins, which you can hardly say for C.W. , and there was story how C.W invested in gold,
which under no circumstances Satoshi would do; why invest in something you are fighting against..

Sort of speechless how easy that was.  Simple truthful discussion about possibilities, without any drama.  In regards to what actually ends up coming out of this... I reckon time will tell.  My thinking is that Craig = Satoshi will eventually be pretty much apparent to all, and proved.  But I may be wrong.  I am open to that possibility. 

please dont misquote me and change the meaning of what i said:

actually if satoshi come back his opinion should not be valued more than anyone else's. its a decentralized consensus system which doesnt need any leader. IMHO a leader could even destroy it - just because it can be a single point of failure. luckily i think current bitcoin ecosystem is leader resistant ;-)

but i think i get a feeling what your agenda is: you stated you have one and we should find out... so lets give me a try:
the whole craig-story is made up by some bigger btc fund (or only craig itself) which wants the following:
 - influence on bitcoin (eg the scaling simulation and the important things about bitcoin technology you mentioned)
 - higher price (not sure why price should be higher if satoshi is found, but if current rise is fabricated by them they would only do that if they think the price would rise even higher)

i cant prove it... its just a guess ;-)

To be honest from all the articles i have read i havent been convinced yet that he is definatly not Satoshi.  however does it really matter, i think bitcoin is better off if satoshi is never identified.  the link to a single man could be bad for its image, and the whole mystery thing is great also.    ;D

Its 100% bullshit hes just an attention seeking businessman.

Nope, I think this issue has been cleared few days ago that proved Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto.. I think its not really important to know who is Satoshi Nakamoto, just my though indeed

If he were the real Satoshi, and wanted people to know, he'd have admitted it. If he weren't, he should do the right thing and admit that. Therefore, one way or another, he's still lying by omission.

I am not dorian...  8)

There's a little Dorian Satoshi in all of us!

we can't say anything without any proof that Craig Wright is the real Satoshi Nakamoto. he may be a big businessmen and doing the business same as like we do but he has done a big transactions of $ 85M to buy gold really attracts the media and all of us.

Definitely. We don't know who the real satoshi is until he signs a legitimate PGP key. All I can say is that Craig Wright is not satoshi.

If Craig Wright was the real Satoshi Nakamoto, then why would he sell that much Bitcoin to buy gold. The maker of Bitcoin would be a smart guy, he would know how good Bitcoin is.

There is absolutely no chance that Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto.

And he hasn't signed a PGP key yet, so there is no trace of the real Satoshi. He could be one of our own, as in someone on this forum.

https://bitcointalk.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc is satoshi's public key, for what it's worth.

Satoshi could actually really be lurking the forum, not impossible...

This would only prove key possession, not that that the person signing a message with a given key is real satoshi

I think there was never an issue. Craig Wright is obviously not even close to what could be Satoshi. It's once again the media/news sites that spread this nonsense everywhere to attract some traffic to their sites.

It does make Bitcoin more popular, and that's a nice thing,

I do not think that Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto because Satoshi Nakamoto was too smart to get caught up into some of the stuff in which Craig Wright got caught up.  It is that simple in my mind!  How could the creator of a cryptographic platform, that was nominated for the Nobel Prize, have sensitive emails intercepted by some boneheaded reporters?  Nope, wouldn't have happened to the Satoshi that I came to know.