Bitcoin Forum

...Is what he should do, like the other time (when he said that he wasn't Dorian).

screw you, man.. I thought Satoshi really is back.  ;D

btw I thought the dorian one was made by a hacker?

I am satoshi

He probably can't or doesn't want to give an opinion, so no dice there :D

When he decided to leave and hand things over to the current team he basically also handed them the power to suggest changes like this..

I don't think he will share his opinion.

Id prefer to see this solved by reason and not by authority.

I thought that it wasn't the original Satoshi who posted that one because due to the inactivity of his account and to the ToS of P2P foundation, anyone can already snatch out that username since it has been inactive for several months.

He wouldn't come out to solve a stupid little quibble like this, otherwise people would expect him to pop up and solve every problem that people couldn't reach consensus on right away.

The message about not being Dorian was posted on a compromised account

I thought so. but don't you think it's odd that whoever it was in control of that account didn't make any additional comment? like lying about this and that.

deep

That is exactly what I was wondering about, he could've manipulated the price quite a bit in the first hours that rumours start to spread.

Or the account was blocked very soon after that comment and he never had a chance.

The fun logical extension is that Satoshi hacked his own account to appear to be non-existent but obviously knew the password the whole time and used the long way to get in :P

who is dorian ,can i have a link?

google?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satoshi_Nakamoto#Dorian_Nakamoto

http://btcartgallery.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/AP407286670412.jpg

It is the post that I like the most in this thread yet. Satoshi's opinion isn't necessarily worth more than somebody's else.

The real Satoshi is probably dead. That Dorian post wasn't made by Satoshi (assuming everybody know that) but I get your point. You want somebody to heads up and clear the situation. I feel you, but this isn't corporate. There is no CEO. This is a decentralized technology and nobody have right to make the rules. Everybody can express their opinions.

so that first message was not made by satoshi himself ?

I wouldn't hold your breath  :o

I definitely believe he is watching to see how the blocksize debate pans out but I don't think he is going to post anything.

Boom! Here I am.  ;)

He won't come to solve "politics" trouble, he won't interfere in bitcoin anymore

i don't really know if this guy is gonna come back for the blocksize debate.
duh, it wastes the time. if he was actually getting here, he would announce, however, satoshi is banned, i doubt that if he is getting to clear.

The interesting part about the Bitcoin decentralization experiment, is that after sometime, those involved in it when it increases to a large enough degree, cannot agree with each other about anything, so progress becomes impeded.

Then people choose organizing bodies in the hope that it will change, but the more power/influence the individuals in that body have, the more they go in oft mutually exclusive directions for a variety of reasons, power/ego/greed/other, then even those in the leading body with lofty principles will clash with the former.

Then, the 'public' would naturally want to find out about which 'leader' they should believe/choose and open discourse begins. Before long, some clever candidate realizes that emotions affect votes more than logic does, and before you know it, there's Satoshi Nakamoto in a photograph holding a baby looking like a swell guy.

There is actually a very good reason why centralization exists, the Bitcoin experiment can be seen as something of a macrocosm of society and how it functions in view of mutual benefit - which is arguably the main point of all societies.

Were Nakamoto to stick his oar in, he'd ruin his own experiment.

it is going to clear itself soon...

Because it's only BS if not signed by Satoshi's public key

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
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=3FTe
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

Price is bouncing back and people are talking about Satoshi again... It's a happy mood in bitcoinworld today.

If satoshi were back, there would be like 20 threads about the same. Never believe a single thread that states something like that in its clickbait-y title.

if he satoshi back, whether it will affect the price bitcoin  ??? ?

Mmm... The whole idea that Satoshi had (or my interpretation of his idea) was that the system shouldn't have a single voice making the decisions. It sucks how politics are getting in the way of progress but I don't think he should or will intervene.

And anyway, if I have my facts straight (please correct me if I'm wrong), the blocksize that he first presented was much larger than what the core developpers eventually agreed on. Most likely we can figure out what he would have wanted simply by looking back at the system he originally started.

a thing that would not affect the price, would be him admitting that he is not going to dump his stash or that he didn't dumped with the 1200 ATH, because i suspect he dumped some at that peak

i dunno why but i believe firmly that satoshi is still here, under another name

No one thinks the block size should remain 1 MB forever. Literally no one. Everyone in Bitcoin knows that's unsustainable. The question isn't whether to raise the block size, it's how and when.

I believe that he's keeping up with everything bitcoin related, but doesn't want to come back to such trivial question like blockchain size,
but rather to allow the community to decide for themselves, in spirit of decentralization.

cheers

Don't worry, he's give a solution through Gavin.

;D

Why?

I think he should stay gone forever... people will just blindly follow satoshi.. that isn't good.

I agree 100%. He follows everything that is happening but he won't react (even though he would solve this debate in a blink of an eye) because he always envisioned Bitcoin as a completely decentralized, community project. One person can't and shouldn't make any decisions.

And if he was to come back and solve a block size debate, how long do we think would be until we wouldn't need his "help" again in the future?

why he is probably dead?
there is any proof or a topic where people talk about his death?!?

It won't be back

He is not going to interfere in the bitcoin decisiones anymore

Called it! :P

Satoshi and Variety has many common charachteristics. However, Satoshi is a genius helped by a team of highly qualified man. There are many analysis to find out who really is.

For me, it is not important who is Satoshi.Satoshi wants to establish a mechanism which is self sufficient. Thecnical issues can be discussed and changes are the Tao of the life.There will be a change if it is inevitable.Let it flow.Let it find its soal, Tao is the way of water.

Block debate will always be there and i think the statistics are 60-40 , and may be Satoshi is the one who run this forum..
I pretend to say this because recently made reddit warning was much likely same as the debate reply from satoshi's account.
I guess Both are interlinked to each other.

http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html



" I have been following the recent block size debates through the mailing list.  I had hoped the debate would resolve and that a fork proposal would achieve widespread consensus.  However with the formal release of Bitcoin XT 0.11A, this looks unlikely to happen, and so I am forced to share my concerns about this very dangerous fork.

The developers of this pretender-Bitcoin claim to be following my original vision, but nothing could be further from the truth.  When I designed Bitcoin, I designed it in such a way as to make future modifications to the consensus rules difficult without near unanimous agreement.  Bitcoin was designed to be protected from the influence of charismatic leaders, even if their name is Gavin Andresen, Barack Obama, or Satoshi Nakamoto.  Nearly everyone has to agree on a change, and they have to do it without being forced or pressured into it.  By doing a fork in this way, these developers are violating the "original vision" they claim to honour.

They use my old writings to make claims about what Bitcoin was supposed to be.  However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions.  For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network.  Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution.  I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.

If two developers can fork Bitcoin and succeed in redefining what "Bitcoin" is, in the face of widespread technical criticism and through the use of populist tactics, then I will have no choice but to declare Bitcoin a failed project.  Bitcoin was meant to be both technically and socially robust.  This present situation has been very disappointing to watch unfold.

Satoshi Nakamoto "

it's fake, and satoshi didn't sign any msg ever, so there is no way anymore to know if it can be him or not

i think he was to completely remain anonymous

besides this i think that satoshi would be in favor for bigger block because the original core has not any cap, he was planning to improve ddos defence but he ended up making the 1mb limit as a quick precaution

exactly, i cant beleive why people want to discuss it again and again, guys the message was not sign, end of history.

Somedays i wish that he never left, so he can fix all those problems from the core dev team, is sad, because we should not have problems from the core dev team...

Satoshi would never be in favor of a contentious hard fork supported by only two devs, one of them very eager to bend to state agencies (Gavin) and the other pushing for blacklisting and anti-Tor policy (Hearn).

All other bitcoin experts, including Nick Szabo who is the most likely candidate to be Satoshi (up to +80% probability if you do a thorough, rational and objective analysis of both their works and their writing style), favour a more gradual block size increase among other things because increasing the block size x8 is a huge security risk.