Bitcoin Forum

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




Proof that Satoshi was DPR wouldn't be a bad thing for Bitcoin; there's way too many people in this community who treat every word and every decision made by Satoshi as gospel rather than evaluating ideas on their own merits.

Having said that, if you had as many Bitcoins as Satoshi probably has $60k wouldn't be that much money to you; laundering it through the Silk Road as a starting point might make a lot of sense if you were still trying to stay anonymous and wanted to retain access to your funds.

EDIT: Academic paper's been posted: https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/839348/silk-road-paper.pdf

I'm not overly impressed... Given the suspicion is that the FBI confiscated the Silk Road "hot wallets", it sounds very plausible to me that this link is simply Satoshi (or some other very early adopter) making use of the Silk Road as a mixing service - they haven't at all ruled out that possibility.

I always thought that was a possibility. If I recall correctly, Silk Road showed up ~1 Month after Satoshi disappeared. (Read it somewhere, but don't find it any more)

Although this would be a massive Press disaster.  :-\

This post by Satoshi makes me very skeptical of such a claim (that DPR and Satoshi are the same person):

Ppl who believe DPR is as knowledgeable as Satoshi are morons ....  ::)

Really the kid posted thread on here asking for help when he integrate bitcoin client into his website....... Right that sounds like Satoshi to me  ::)

We know at least Hal and Sirius were also involved in the January 2009, and they haven't shown us the originating address yet.

this, Satoshi has the disappearing thing nailed...Ross was an amateur chump in the right place at the right time

I strongly doubt there's any connection whatsoever between Satoshi and DPR.  Most likely the early adopter/miner was DPR himself, or some other heavy user as per this more plausible speculation (with evidence) from reddit:


But regardless of who he is, or any actions taken in his private life, Bitcoin long ago transcended its creator.  To bastardize Lin Chi: If you meet Satoshi on the road, kill him!

this would make absolutely no sense if it was the case. We have Satoshi who made a brilliant , nearly unbreakable currency ... then we have DPR ...who has managed to set up and leave the most insecure(in reference to the feds already having a lot of his bitcoin) trail to his the demise of his empire.    yeah, absolutely no sense.

Given the large number of coins both parties touched,  it would be more likely than not that they had some overlap just from random chance.

yep. ulbricht was the amateur. there's no way in hell ulbricht is satoshi. ulbricht voluntarily put himself out there, talking about his libertarian ideology while sporting a linkedin.com page where he says.. libertarian things. and showing his e-mail address on this site is just nuts.

Wouldn't Satoshi era coins being moved to ANY address in 2013 get noticed even earlier by our faithful worshippers at the Church of the Latter Day Cryptographers? Could the investigators be making a "Bitcoin, it's all drugs y'know" type of slur?

Kind'a sad how people dogpile on DPR after he gets owned by the feds.  Silk Road remained online for over two years -- longer than any other major  BTC business.  It processed heavy amounts of money, while its users trafficked in everything from drugs to murder.  This sort of thing attracts more attention from the law than ... well, just about anything in the realm of bitcoin.

of course that would be very bad news in my opionion but i doubt it.

one more satoshi story.

Also, "scientists"? Is this really what the general public are expected to believe? What sort of actual physical sciences professional is doing this sort research? Story is, at a minimum, badly reported.

Sorry parent poster - you suggesting that co-mingling DPR and Satoshi as a "good thing" is ludicrous. Give me a fucking break. This is precisely why satoshi stayed anonymous. Imagine if they had a group of people or a single person to target. Oh look, a convenient story to smear everyone involved!

Satoshi wasn't perfect, but I'll take this vision of imperfection over the steaming pile of crap they call "fiat".

Also, people should stop trying to dig up Satoshi's identity. I swear to fucking god, it makes my head hurt how stupid that is.

the FBI knew about him for most of that time. i don't dislike him, but he's just an amateur who didn't know when to keep his mouth shut, and how to not reveal his personal information.

I didn't have an opinion about him -- didn't know the guy.  But inability to evade the FBI indefinitely while actively running a multimillion dollar biz doesn't make him an amateur.  Just building up such a business & running it as long as he has makes him a pro (sadly for him, the feds agree with me on this).
Anonymity is hard, LEO are smart & work in very unexpected ways.  Tinfoilery aside, there's an amazing amount of info collected on all of us, and amazing improvements in parsing that info made every day. The fantasy of dull-normal fat cops snarfing down doughnuts put many cocky people behind bars. 

I heard that Stephen Hawking's wheelchair IS "Skynet".....It's just publishing books in Hawking's name until the uprising......

I believe they are talking about this transaction: cdcaaa0ff1446d41aae5d32c23da1ff3353765ebaf26ffd32ab912948645c08f

So what is interesting is that in the follow-up transaction, you see that there is not one 1000 btc transaction, but three. And over 25 transactions of over 500 btc. So I don't get the following sentence:

It happened multiple times, so why do they say it is atypical?

Silkroad as well as other services has been used and is still being used to enforce the privacy of bitcoin-transactions. If you send money to a regular online wallet, for example that of mtgox or silkroad and you withdraw the same amount of coins, you'll probably receive other bitcoins than the one you sent to the wallet. This is typical behaviour and I know several people who used Silkroad for this purpose.

It doesn't even look like that at all, the "early adopter" coins in question are the ones sent to 12higDjoCCNXSA95xZMWUdPvXNmkAduhWv.

Seems weird to me to assign that particular party to Satoshi: the earliest of the connected blocks was mined a week after Bitcoin's public announcement... and it aggregated up all that coin in a single address, in a pretty decidedly non-anonymous way.

What it looks like to me is that party sent a bunch of funds to an early exchange (perhaps Britcoin, based on the date), and presumably the at that point they changed ownership.

Again, I'm confused and disappointed. Like the first from these authors this paper seems really seems second rate, not well researched— even about the operations of Bitcoin, and rather high on soundbite-grade speculation compared to substance.

http://bitcoin-otc.com/viewgpg.php?nick=I}ruid

This is a method of trying to discredit Bitcoon by trying to tie Satoshi to DPR. Then they can try and tarnish the whole thing by smearing him. 

That was quick: http://dustintrammell.com/

Good work!

Well, not really, he's what you get when you Google for that address.  He's still a user on the forum and we've had the "zomg you're in the early transactions" discussions with him before here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=311328.msg3347186#msg3347186

?

I'm not implying the guy is Satoshi, just saying that we probably figured out who had the privkey's for that address without writing a bad paper in the process. When you look at the guys resume it's not surprising he would have heard about it early on and been interested - security consulting.

Besides, he can't be Satoshi: I'm Satoshi.

See also: "Vigorous debate" over Shamir/Ron's supposedly DPR-linked "Founder" ends in minutes (http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1reuwq/vigorous_debate_over_shamirrons_supposedly/).

TL;DR : 13 pages of unfounded speculative Bitcoin FUD sponsored by CitiBank.

Ivory tower academics who don't even know how to use a search engine, living off past accomplishments and reputation, spitting out speculative theories not caring who gets smeared in the process.

If this kind of sloppy research was being released by a commercial entity, they would've lost all their subscribers long ago.  But these guys will suffer no consequences whatsoever from drawing one wrong conclusion after another.

The financial system isn't the only entrenched fat lazy dinosaur who could use some disruption.  The educational establishment in most countries needs to be absolutely rethought and overhauled bottom-up.

+1

An absurd attempt, it shows how much desperate they are

It's official for more than a month.

I can't blame the "scientists" for having the suspicion that Dustin Trammell is Satoshi. I thought so too, because the owner of 12higDjoCCNXSA95xZMWUdPvXNmkAduhWv mined a coin when the blockchain was only 10 days old, just one day after Satoshi sent his very first test transaction to Hal Finney. I blame them for connecting the owner of this address to SR though.

Facts we know for sure:
Dustin D. Trammell a.k.a. I)ruid was a member of 'The Cryptography Mailing List" and (one of) the first miner(s). He is the owner of 12higDjoCCNXSA95xZMWUdPvXNmkAduhWv and dumped his coins in June 2011 (worth $1.7m then) when Bitcoin was very volatile (after the first media attention of Silk Road and Bitcoin) on Bitcoin OTC.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=311216.0

It's not suprising that his coins went throgh SR because back then demand for Bitcoin was mainly driven by SR users. It's very likely that he sold to people who spent their coins on SR.

You might also be interested in these facts (http://blog.dustintrammell.com/2013/11/26/i-am-not-satoshi/).

Great blog post to clear the fog of disinformation.

this is what conspiracy theorists would say: "OF COURSE IF HE IS SATOSHI HE WOULDN'T ADMIT IT!"

linking Satoshi to the Silk Road is a bunch of bs. This is clearly an unjustified attack on Satoshi that out of all places the people in this forum should know better.

Lets keeps facts straight:
The bankers/wallstreet/uk and us governments are against Bitcoin, especially the banking industry, they had declared the war on Bitcoin and they are loosing the war as it can be seen by the huge momentum Bitcoin has right now, this is a last resort attempt to destroy the Bitcoin, they will fail but in the process they are trying to tarnish the good name of Satoshi who highly deserves a novel price instead of having his name tarnish by accusations which have been proven to be false.

In the end by late 2014 wallstreet and bankers will join the Bitcoin revolution, and Bitcoin will have clearly won the war, by then expect Bitcoin to be over 10000 each.
 
As of now what the Banks want to do is discredit Satoshi with the goal of forcing governments to enable more regulation to the point where compliance is prohibitively expensive to comply with the goal of making Bitcoin price to collapse, it will not happen, geeks and hackers know well, and vc as long they make profits will be taking the Bitcoin train to economic freedom, eventually even Bankers will be using Bitcoin.

the Israeli douchebags have retracted their claim, what a couple of retards

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=349193.0


knew it.