Hal Finney is Satoshi Nakamoto

[aoluain]

WTF is the obsession with trying to find out who Satoshi was/is?

It wont change anything about Bitcoin itself because it is bogger than any one person
regardless of who they are. Satoshi walked away and in doing so actually enhanced
the project, made it truly decentralised and open source.

So it was Hal - ok then what next?

No matter who believes it was this person or that person it hasnt been nor will
ever be unanimously agreed upon - threads like this are just rehashing what has
already been debated many times previously.

[yhiaali3]

I'm really tired of people who keep asking, "Who is Satoshi?" or who make desperate attempts and spend a lot of time trying to prove that someone is Satoshi!!!

I've said it before many times: if Satoshi wanted to reveal his identity, he would have done so easily. Why would he, when he has tried so hard to conceal his identity?

Let's respect the decision of the great creator of Bitcoin, who sacrificed fame, money, and everything else for the sake of this beautiful icon. Let him disappear in peace.

[Darker45]

May I know the purpose of you digging this issue once more? To what end goal are you necroing this otherwise dead matter? If at all, how can Bitcoin, its community, its adoption, and so on benefit from this?

OP, Jameson Lopp has an apt advice for you: "Accusing someone of being Satoshi without providing bulletproof evidence makes you a massive asshole, because you're painting a target on them. Even if that person is dead, you're endangering their family."

[X-ray]

Here we go again...
OP it's not like you are the first guy in the world making this speculation claims  
There have been a bunch of people who claimed Hal was Satoshi, but I also remember reading all the reasons why he isn't Satoshi.
On top of that there are many other candidates for Satoshi, and I prefer that his real identity remains unknown.

seriously unless satoshi himself revealed his identity all of these theory, doesn't matter how complex it is, will just be a speculation, because nobody knows who satoshi really is and there's not enough evidence.
like as you said, it's better to just let satoshi identity remains unknown, because that seems to be his intention, so why bother.

[Cryptohygenic]

It now gets weird of stressing on how to dig Satoshi Nakamoto out from his privacy.
Different insights has suspeciously come and argued about who really Satoshi Nakamoto is but have not been literally proven.
So I feel obsessed when I see further discussion of this like some others that can not literally prove their claims.
Maybe we should ponder on this some bits
1* What change will the reveal of Satoshi make to the bitcoin or your personal life?
2* In the development of decentralized finance as bitcoin, is it security wise encouraged for Satoshi to reveal himself?
3* Is your interest more of his development on bitcoin or just to get him known?

[Kelward]

Here we go again...
OP it's not like you are the first guy in the world making this speculation claims  
There have been a bunch of people who claimed Hal was Satoshi, but I also remember reading all the reasons why he isn't Satoshi.
On top of that there are many other candidates for Satoshi, and I prefer that his real identity remains unknown.

seriously unless satoshi himself revealed his identity all of these theory, doesn't matter how complex it is, will just be a speculation, because nobody knows who satoshi really is and there's not enough evidence.
like as you said, it's better to just let satoshi identity remains unknown, because that seems to be his intention, so why bother.

When I saw the title of this thread, I thought to myself 'here we go again, an argument that leads to nowhere, a few theories here and there and the topic will be obsolete like the others. If by any remote chance it becomes true that Hal Finney, was Satoshi Nakamoto, what impact will it mean for Bitcoin today? I guess none, Hal, is late, so it's not like he'd be answering any questions for Satoshi, if it's finally proven that they're the same. Our take home is that Satoshi Nakamoto, created Bitcoin and decided to be anonymous, which is great for Bitcoin that is decentralized and represents privacy and freedom for it's holders.

[btc_angela]

May I know the purpose of you digging this issue once more? To what end goal are you necroing this otherwise dead matter? If at all, how can Bitcoin, its community, its adoption, and so on benefit from this?

OP, Jameson Lopp has an apt advice for you: "Accusing someone of being Satoshi without providing bulletproof evidence makes you a massive asshole, because you're painting a target on them. Even if that person is dead, you're endangering their family."

And we are already in 2025, in the early years of Bitcoin, no one has proven who Satoshi is, there could be a lot of candidates but without proof, we can't do nothing.

Just like what the OP has posted, it has been posted before, debunked already and yet he tries to bring it up again. I guess the community is already tired of this thing again and again. The community has move on already, and it's for the betterment that we don't need to know who Satoshi is.

[Donneski]

Here comes another unproven theory of who is speculated to be the real identity behind the anonymous Satoshi Nakamoto. Tomorrow, another person will also come up with another theory to also convince us that a certain individual or group of persons is(are) Satoshi Nakamoto. We've heard enough of this cock and bull theories but what I don't know is why some of us in the forum are still trying to prove a valueless point.
If for any reason you discover who really Satoshi Nakamoto is, what value will that knowledge add to you? Think about this question so you can stop spamming us with similar unnecessary theories

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

WTF is the obsession with trying to find out who Satoshi was/is?

Many threads, about a hundred, on Satoshi Nakamoto in Bitcoin forum. You can not stop it, but I agree with you that those attempts failed and will fail, and don't help Bitcoin anything.

Satoshi Nakamoto disappearance from Bitcoin community, and his anonymity are big gifts for us, so why do people want to find him and destroy his gifts?
I gathered every Satoshi Nakamoto thread.

We are all Satoshi Nakamotos by running Bitcoin full nodes, using Bitcoin blockchains, and having bitcoins.

[NotATether]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2813.msg39045#msg39045

I read all of Hal's posts and one of them really caught my attention. On January 15, 2011, he suggested to raise bitcoins to send Satoshi to the Financial Cryptography conference. Right after, one of the participants said that Satoshi would hardly accept because he wanted to remain anonymous. This was obvious to everyone on the forum. Why would Hal suggest this? He was an experient cypherpunk who communicated with Satoshi in early days of the project, and obviously knew that Satoshi was a pseudonym. This sounds really strange.

It is vey strange indeed and I might guess that he was trying to get Satoshi (whoever he is) to attend because of his novel invention.

But who knows why he posted that.

It would indeed be weird if he was referring to himself in the third person, because I do not know who is able to put up with that for so long.

[Z-tight]

Op, it is not like you have revealed something that has not been spoken about before, many people also believe that Hal was Satoshi, even in this forum so many members have made similar posts trying to point out connections. The end of it all is still futility because there is no way to completely prove it, so it still ends up as speculation, so being right or wrong doesn't even matter, which is why letting it be is the most sensible thing to do.