Git commit ostensibly from Satoshi in recent transaction

[nimda]

https://blockchain.info/tx/77822fd6663c665104119cb7635352756dfc50da76a92d417ec1a12c518fad69

From a3a61fef43309b9fb23225df7910b03afc5465b9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
    From: Satoshi Nakamoto <satoshin@gmx.com>
    Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 02:28:02 -0200
    Subject: [PATCH] Remove (SINGLE|DOUBLE)BYTE

    I removed this from Bitcoin in f1e1fb4bdef878c8fc1564fa418d44e7541a7e83
    in Sept 7 2010, almost three years ago. Be warned that I have not
    actually tested this patch.
    ---
     backends/bitcoind/deserialize.py |    8 +-------
     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)

    diff --git a/backends/bitcoind/deserialize.py b/backends/bitcoind/deserialize.py
    index 6620583..89b9b1b 100644
    --- a/backends/bitcoind/deserialize.py
    +++ b/backends/bitcoind/deserialize.py
    @@ -280,10 +280,8 @@ opcodes = Enumeration("Opcodes", [
         "OP_WITHIN", "OP_RIPEMD160", "OP_SHA1", "OP_SHA256", "OP_HASH160",
         "OP_HASH256", "OP_CODESEPARATOR", "OP_CHECKSIG", "OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY", "OP_CHECKMULTISIG",
         "OP_CHECKMULTISIGVERIFY",
    -    ("OP_SINGLEBYTE_END", 0xF0),
    -    ("OP_DOUBLEBYTE_BEGIN", 0xF000),
         "OP_PUBKEY", "OP_PUBKEYHASH",
    -    ("OP_INVALIDOPCODE", 0xFFFF),
    +    ("OP_INVALIDOPCODE", 0xFF),
     ])


    @@ -293,10 +291,6 @@ def script_GetOp(bytes):
             vch = None
             opcode = ord(bytes)
             i += 1
    -        if opcode >= opcodes.OP_SINGLEBYTE_END and i < len(bytes):
    -            opcode <<= 8
    -            opcode |= ord(bytes)
    -            i += 1

             if opcode <= opcodes.OP_PUSHDATA4:
                 nSize = opcode
    --
    1.7.9.4

[mungjeezy]

It could be from someone acting like they are Satoshi.

If this is Satoshi, I believe it is his first appearance since Gavin started meeting with the CIA in 2011.

[escrow.ms]

woot...

[Jaymax]

Erm, so what does this patch achieve in context that is so significant for the Creator to reveal that He walks amongst us yet?

[kjj]

Call me when he signs it with the genesis key.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

This only means one thing: God MP just got bumped down a notch. 

[westkybitcoins]

Erm, so what does this patch achieve in context that is so significant for the Creator to reveal that He walks amongst us yet?

Yeah, this is what I'm wanting to know....

[CompNsci]

Call me when he signs it with the genesis key.

Yes, that would be the only way to really prove it. Plus why would Satoshi be writing from gmx.net ?

[JackH]

He always used a gmx email. Question is just if this is him doing whatever he is doing....

[Nubarius]

Is there any sensible explanation as to why he would choose to communicate patches in such an obscure way? I find it very strange, but I can't figure out why anyone would try to impersonate Satoshi in this way either.

[drawingthesun]

No way this is Satoshi. No crypto proof, obscure communication was never Satoshi's style.

[Peter Lambert]

No way this is Satoshi. No crypto proof, obscure communication was never Satoshi's style.

Maybe he switched to Satoshi from his normal identity and forgot to switch back before submitting this?

[nimda]

No way this is Satoshi. No crypto proof, obscure communication was never Satoshi's style.

Maybe he switched to Satoshi from his normal identity and forgot to switch back before submitting this?

Now, which one of the devs enjoys being infuriatingly clever?

[Ozymandias]

No way this is Satoshi. No crypto proof, obscure communication was never Satoshi's style.

Maybe he switched to Satoshi from his normal identity and forgot to switch back before submitting this?

Now, which one of the devs enjoys being infuriatingly clever?

Imagine Satoshi is secretly Luke-jr, then go to your happy place

[Elwar]

He has returned to install a poison pill into Bitcoin!

He is mad at us all!

We were not yet ready.

[bb000]

Erm, so what does this patch achieve in context that is so significant for the Creator to reveal that He walks amongst us yet?

As far as I can make out the change is not to bitcoin itself but to the bitcointools python library, which allows python applications to work with bitcoin but is not used by the normal bitcoin-qt client. The change described was checked in by Gavin Andreesen in 2012 https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcointools/commit/1aa2244c7aa622fc97e7c8de778fe027acc5a0a9 - it appears to be a change to how bitcoin transaction scripts are decoded when viewing a block.

This file is also used by Abe and Electrum Server, Abe includes the change, Electrum server has a version before the change.

TL;DR - the change does nothing to bitcoin and is not significant.

Edit - the block in question causes an error in Electrum Server and explains how to fix the error. See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=271761.20 - the original change was made in anoncoin in C by s_nakamoto in 2010 http://projects.i2p/projects/anoncoin/repository/revisions/f1e1fb4bdef878c8fc1564fa418d44e7541a7e83 but did not get converted to python code until 2012. The block could have been created by anyone.

I never came across anoncoin on I2P before - anyone know it's background?

[Elwar]

the bitcointools python library, which allows python applications to work with bitcoin

This...is...HUGE!!!

[Jaymax]

That's what she said!