Bitcoin Forum

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/23/study-suggests-link-between-dread-pirate-roberts-and-satoshi-nakamoto/?_r=0

After Mr. Ulbricht was arrested last month, the scientists used public information to begin tracing Silk Road-related transactions. Among their discoveries was a particular transfer to an account controlled by Mr. Ulbricht from another that had been created in January 2009, during the very earliest days of the bitcoin network, which was set up the previous year.

Although the authors state that they cannot prove that that account belongs to the person who created the bitcoin currency, it is widely believed that the first accounts belong to a person who identifies himself as “Satoshi Nakamoto,” but who has remained anonymous and has not been publicly heard from since 2010.

Didn't get it. All they said is just there's a 1000 BTC transferred (seems not clear when in the article) from an early adopter's account (Jan 2009) to Ulbricht's account. How many people have accounts in January 2009? How much 1000 BTC costs in the time of the transaction?

Even it is Satoshi's account, so what? It at most proves Satoshi try to support Ulbricht, or buy some thing from Ulbricht. How people gets the conclusion Satoshi is Ulbricht? Totally beyond my understanding.

Ignorant scientists and media.

The first iteration of the dread pirate maybe. But he's sitting on a tropical island :P

::)

I don't think that Ross Ulbricht id Satoshi Nakamoto.

The first step in discrediting Bitcoin by trying to tie Satoshi to DPR

a quote from the study that this is from:
"It could represent either large scale activity on Silk Road, or some form of investment or partnership, but this is pure speculation."

here's the entire thing (one of the links i have today on my site): https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/839348/silk-road-paper.pdf

it's nice that they made a point of stating it was pure speculation. i'm taking it with a large pinch of salt.

I think that with this we have more Satoshis (Nakamoto)  persons than we have bitcoins.

;D

Seems like it's not the first time that they showed some misunderstandings: https://gist.github.com/jgarzik/3901921

One of the earlier adopters bought some weed. So what?

I can see the next headlines...
Bitcoin developers smoke weed..
Would you entrust your money to a protocol developed by junkies?
2/100 of all the Bitcoins belong to a drug addict (another one).

The title of the article makes some bold claims, but doesn't really follow up with anything.

I'm sure the idea of Silk Road came from an early adopter who was familiar with the technology that was being developed. Someone from that original circle later spending some coins on it hardly connects DPR to Satoshi!

Debate ended.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1reuwq/vigorous_debate_over_shamirrons_supposedly/

No, an early miner (person A) transferred them to person B, who transferred them to person C, who transferred them to person D, who bought some weed. No one knows who A, B, C, and D are, so all we can say is "Shocking News: Someone bought some weed!!!!1!1!"

Some people don't know, but silkroad was also a free bitcoin mixer. A transaction of that size was likely an early adopter using it as such. Maybe Satoshi.