Is Satoshi Dead?

[thebaron]

It's pretty easy to figure out who it is if you pay attention to the people who are actively promoting it.

[MysteryMiner]

It's pretty easy to figure out who it is if you pay attention to the people who are actively promoting it.

No it is not! Tell it if You are sure about it and we will laugh!

[luckyindia]

What does it mean to say that SATOSHI is dead....?  Death is for physical animate tangible things.....but SATOSHI NAKAMOTO  refers to a system of perfection,  for the  common good of mankind....He is very much alive......All members of this forum  must learn to respect the founders and senior members of this Forum

[Raoul Duke]

Im not going to link to the article because this post may be removed if I link to it...

Removed by whom?  The Illuminati?

Why hasn't Phinnaeus Gage had his post removed then:  a post that's been floating around for a year?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=67840.0;all

Conspiracy much?

Yeah, Xavier... put up or shut up!

It's pretty easy to figure out who it is if you pay attention to the people who are actively promoting it.

LOL. If I remember correctly, the last thing satoshi wanted was people promoting Bitcoin the way they are doing.

[xavier]

The identity of Satoshi is no secret (a simply Google search and some reading will reveal the persons who are Satoshi - it has already been uncovered by a journalist) - and it is not just a single person.

It is pure speculation. There are many white spots in that story and few things does not glue together.

Pls can u expand on the "white spots"

I was bored earlier and spend more time researching the article. AFAIK everything seems to fit.

RE: BTC Books, Psy

Im only speculating . Obviously Satoshi chose to remain anonymous so for this reason he is unlikely to come forward and admit who 'he' is. I dont know who Satoshi is , the information I have seen is just whats publicly on the web. However having analysed the information , my conclusion is that the highest probability is that Satoshi is more than 1 person, he is the 3 people/

My contribution to this post was just the analysis that i have personally done. As I said if u wanted to get a real confirmation, probably u should ask someone from the early community - Theymos, Gavin or even knightmb. HOwever i think its important to consider who Satoshi actually is hence support for the OPs concern.

[MysteryMiner]

Pls can u expand on the "white spots"

I was bored earlier and spend more time researching the article. AFAIK everything seems to fit.

The initial coins. If Satoshi is multiple people, how all these people agree to dont move initial coins, all agree not to reveal the truth about Satoshi, how they manage the Satoshi GPG key. Such consistency for multiple people in not in human nature.

For this theory speaks the initial dialect used by Satoshi to be changed soon afterwards. This might be proof for one human creating initial Satoshi posts and be later replaced with another.

[MoonShadow]

Im only speculating . Obviously Satoshi chose to remain anonymous so for this reason he is unlikely to come forward and admit who 'he' is. I dont know who Satoshi is , the information I have seen is just whats publicly on the web. However having analysed the information , my conclusion is that the highest probability is that Satoshi is more than 1 person, he is the 3 people/

This is the same kind of speculation that the Good Wife episode engaged in.  It's not without merit, for a small & socially tight group can keep such a character secret.  And as for the argument that Satoshi's posting style doesn't really change (the earlier use of British terminology could have been intentional misdirection, but his/her writing style doesn't really change, imho) the trio could simply have appointed one of their own to be the point man for online communication via the character.  Truth be told, a small workgroup has been suspected from very early on, even before he vanished from the forum and the Internet, because of the breadth of professional grade knowledge necessary to make Bitcoin what it was from the early stages.  One player as the semi-trained programmer (perhaps a computer science college major or graduate with very little production experience?), another player with the economics background and a third with the mathmatics background.  It's both possible and probable that, under such a condition, all three (more?) characters remain on this forum in their less anonymous personnas.  There could be more than three major players, but only three distinct disciplines are required.  That's not to say that one person couldn't self-educate in one or all of these disciplines, but any such person would be a polymath.  Occum's Razor implies that there are three people involved, and only three people, in order to accomplish this feat and keep it quiet.

[maaku]

More likely - and this is coming from someone involved in the creation of an honest alt-chain - he didn't trust himself with the coins. In my case we locked the Freicoin Foundation keys in a safe deposit box, and legally transferred ownership to the non-profit. When those freicoins become worth $50MM, I wouldn't trust myself with the keys! And now I don't have to - if I did embezzle them I'd be held responsible (perhaps criminally) for doing so.

Satoshi didn't want to de-anonymize himself, and if he's human and honest (and not crazy wealthy to begin with) he wouldn't have trusted himself to not spend those coins. So in all likelihood he either (A) set the wallets to destroy automatically, or (B) put them in some sort of tamper-proof time capsule, gave them to his lawyer with strict instructions, or something similar.

At least that's my guess.

[MysteryMiner]

The math and programmer can be single person who are good at computer cryptography. Also I suspect that the programmer at some point have taken look at bots. The way early Bitcoin versions bootstraps and finds peers using IRC is very similar to how older bots connect to each other and C&C channel. Bitcoin at some point accidentally triggered botnet detection on some monitored connections. Search forum for this.

So it is down to two people. Computer cryptographer with some hacking background and economist. But even these two can be united into single person. Economics are not so difficult to understand, many can master them if they abandon all ideological indoctrinations about economics. They all come down to simple mathematics mixed with universal greed and stupidity. So majority with good mathematical and logical thinking can also predict the economical principles of Bitcoin.

The values of coin distribution and block times really are right on spot, the values chosen might be pure luck or really good planning.

[MysteryMiner]

More likely - and this is coming from someone involved in the creation of an honest alt-chain - he didn't trust himself with the coins. In my case we locked the Freicoin Foundation keys in a safe deposit box, and legally transferred ownership to the non-profit. When those freicoins become worth $50MM, I wouldn't trust myself with the keys! And now I don't have to - if I did embezzle them I'd be held responsible (perhaps criminally) for doing so.

Satoshi didn't want to de-anonymize himself, and if he's human and honest (and not crazy wealthy to begin with) he wouldn't have trusted himself to not spend those coins. So in all likelihood he either (A) set the wallets to destroy automatically, or (B) put them in some sort of tamper-proof time capsule, gave them to his lawyer with strict instructions, or something similar.

At least that's my guess.

This is nonsense. If Satoshi could not trust himself these keys, he should send the associated coins to me. Why he should not have them? He might go around snorting coke and killing everyone just because he become richest person on earth by creating the next best thing after internet?

[Herodes]

Satoshi is immortal. 

[thebaron]

Satoshi is immortal. 

It's no coincidence that Dread Pirate Roberts runs The Silk Road.

[DPony13]

What if the Pentagon took Satoshi.
or he's dead.
or not.
maybe he's me..... or anyone of
you for that matter xD

[Raoul Duke]

Fuck it. I give up. You guys got me. I'm Satoshi Nakamoto

[paraipan]

Fuck it. I give up. You guys got me. I'm Satoshi Nakamoto

Great, now I'm pretty safe knowing they will be all watching you 

[Raoul Duke]

Fuck it. I give up. You guys got me. I'm Satoshi Nakamoto

Great, now I'm pretty safe knowing they will be all watching you 

PT to SP is a flea jump... You're not as safe as you might think...

[paraipan]

Fuck it. I give up. You guys got me. I'm Satoshi Nakamoto

Great, now I'm pretty safe knowing they will be all watching you  

PT to SP is a flea jump... You're not as safe as you might think...

[repentance]

If I recall correctly, I joined the forums when about 2 million BTC had been mined and Satoshi had already vanished from public life before then.  Yes, it's possible that he's continued to acquire BTC at every opportunity but it's also possible that he gave away a substantial amount when they were worth nothing, as did other early adopters, and/or sold some of his BTC.

[MoonShadow]

The math and programmer can be single person who are good at computer cryptography. Also I suspect that the programmer at some point have taken look at bots. The way early Bitcoin versions bootstraps and finds peers using IRC is very similar to how older bots connect to each other and C&C channel. Bitcoin at some point accidentally triggered botnet detection on some monitored connections. Search forum for this.

I don't disagree with this position at all, but...

So it is down to two people. Computer cryptographer with some hacking background and economist. But even these two can be united into single person. Economics are not so difficult to understand, many can master them if they abandon all ideological indoctrinations about economics. They all come down to simple mathematics mixed with universal greed and stupidity. So majority with good mathematical and logical thinking can also predict the economical principles of Bitcoin.

While economics isn't a particularly difficult subject when taken from the right tack, there is much more going on here.  Unless it's just a huge matter of luck, Satoshi wasn't just some armchair economist who has read Hayak.  He was a true Praxeologist, and that also implies some degree of understanding regarding common psychology.  Which is something that neither the common economist, nor the common cryptologist (with or without a talent for self-taught computer programming) is likely to be able to grasp.  The social & psychological aspects of Praxeology tend to require a completely different learning style/personality type/Myers-Briggs type than those of the analytical reasoning that computer programming & mathmatics demand.  There is exactly one Myers-Briggs type that can manage both perspectives in the same mind without significant cognative dissonance; and that type is both the least common (by far) of any type and the least likely to be a self-motivated individual.  Said another way, a polymath (as rare as they are) is unlikely to also be an innovator.  I concede in advance that it's possible that Satoshi was, in fact, a self-motivated polymath.  I'm just stating that Occum's Razor implies that such a possibility is not the most likely reality.  The need to have 1) the feeler (a psycologist), 2) the analyst (cryptographicly trained coder) and the 3) visionary (the innovator) still implies at least two people and still probably three; thus a triumvirate.

The values of coin distribution and block times really are right on spot, the values chosen might be pure luck or really good planning.

Agreed.  Again, much of it could have been pure luck, and thus only one kind of mind would have been necessary (the visionary).  Still, I don't really believe in luck for the vast majority of human progress.

[MysteryMiner]

Fuck it. I give up. You guys got me. I'm Satoshi Nakamoto

Sign this statement with any of Satoshi's private keys and we can lock this topic.