.
.
.
Let's start with who is Mike Hydes? Craig Wright has better marketing than him.
Everyone can make such a bold statement, everyone uses the name of Satoshi to gain attention and popularity while in reality no one knows who Satoshi is. He was either Hal Finney or CIA or someone we don't know and will never be able to know.
... I don't really have an answer to "who is Mike Hydes" as that's the same question I am trying to find answers to lol. I don't care if Craig Wright had better 'marketing' than him to be really honest here.
Here's how I'm currently thinking atm:
> If you know the identity of a character that created something really huge and some people are trying to desperately find out who it is, why would you go about trying to gain media's attention?
- Craig Wright wasn't someone who knew Satoshi(dunno that yet either) but claimed that he
is Satoshi.
He made a big deal about it and took it to court and everything to get the world's attention but obviously nobody really bought it and eventually
he couldn't prove he was Satoshi and backed down from his ever-so-confident claim.
- Mike Hydes on the other hand, claims that he knows the people behind the pseudonymous name of Satoshi Nakamoto
but only writes Medium posts and posts on LinkedIn. Mike's case isn't about if people buy it or not but that he even
wrote work history and 'built' his entire profile off of the fact that he worked with 'Satoshi Nakamoto' to help 'create' Bitcoin.
> The part that doesn't make sense is that he doesn't make a big deal out of it like all the other people who claim to "know" or "is" Satoshi but rather centers the writing of his posts as if he's talking
to the ones who already know Satoshi or those stumbling upon his profile. He doesn't put efforts into advertising that he knows anything but just stays eerily chill about it.
It's definitely a joke when he says that Satoshi is a combination of two women and one of them is Vitalik's aunt. C'mon, that's really a joke. I suggest you to read
my post, it makes more sense than Mike Hydes.
Okay, as far fetched as that claim sounds to be, nobody really cares now, do they? As much as I spend couple spare time for looking into far-fetched conspiracies like those of Satoshi's, I don't understand your competitive-ness in "who has a more convincing coincidence" lol, I could care less if your conclusion of coincidences makes more sense since in the end, it's just conspiracy. I only indulge in people's wild fantasies since it's interestingly entertaining to see people come up with the most wildest claims from the far ends of their imagination.
I will never understand this effort people put in to try and guess and prove who Satoshi is or was. What is the end goal? Fame? Short term 'clout'? What is it?
Say Satoshi is proved to be who Mike Hydes says. What happens next? 'Mike Hydes' will appear in a few news articles here and there and then nobody will remember him. The people behind Satoshi will be in big trouble and will likely lose their Freedom forever. Even if the Freedom is not lost, losing Privacy can be just as harsh. Possibly even worse.
So why is it so important to find out who Satoshi is?
For the first question, most people just indulge in the fact that they could 'connect the dots' to create these wild claims. As we know, humans are curious creatures, meaning that we always look for coincidences, patterns, etc etc, you've heard this before, yeah? So the end goal varies from person to person. For my instance, I don't really care what happens since it's just a conspiracy until proven otherwise and as I mentioned above, it's entertaining to watch people make the most absurd 'connections' to validate their beliefs.
Second one, if Mike Hydes is right, well... he should've stayed quiet or something lol. What happens next seems to be already pre-determined by what you've explained so no need for me to say anything.
Last one, it's not important to find out who Satoshi is, maybe it seems important to some, but for me, it doesn't affect me in a personal way at all so I wouldn't care.
I posted this thread since I wanted to see if anyone actually knew who this 'Mike Hydes' character is, and second of all, for those who'd be crazy enough to go through this rabbithole and continue to desperately connect the dots to keep their sanity... and to see if they find anything interesting with this information I've provided.
Maybe with the whole HBO documentary on Satoshi, floodgates has been open again, with people claiming to known who is Satoshi, in this case, it's supposedly "two lady", which is another theory that we haven't heard before. But for sure we will debunked it, as we already know that Satoshi indeed has disappeared and won't surface anytime of the day to protect himself and his creation. ...
Mike Hydes' story on knowing Satoshi goes back before the HBO doc. so idk what that's about. It seems that Mike's claim is a new theory for the community that hasn't been said before, or at least not well-known enough for people to even take that into account.
Once again, don't care what happens to this endless search for our Bitcoin creator Sats Nako, read my statements above since I don't want to repeat the same things more than twice
I've seem to reply very late on this thread since I forgot I even made this LOL
Anyways, even though the responses are basically the same things over and over and over and over again, I'm glad to hear the thoughts of those who've replied.
For those crazy theorists, I hope I've found another rabbithole for y'all to bury y'all's faces into. Should keep y'all busy for a while LOL
With that said, I hope everyone has a great night(my region)/morning/afternoon!
