Link between DPR and Satoshi

[seanneko]

Just stumbled across this article:

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

Apparently one of Satoshi's early wallets transferred 1,000 BTC to DPR's wallet.

Does anyone have a link to said transaction? Thoughts?

[bg002h]

A January 2009 address was used to send bitcoins to DPR. That's the thrust of the article and claim (probably valid) of Ron and Rivest.  Whoop dee doo.

Probably of no consequence but could shake the markets at a time no one can put fiat money into an exchange.

(Reposted in this thread with a more informative title...in case you were wondering why the identical post in the haha thread)

[revans]

A January 2009 address was used to send bitcoins to DPR. That's the thrust of the article and claim (probably valid) of Ron and Rivest.  Whoop dee doo.

Probably of no consequence but could shake the markets at a time no one can put fiat money into an exchange.

(Reposted in this thread with a more informative title...in case you were wondering why the identical post in the haha thread)

Or how about.


On March the 20th of this year a wallet belonging to a Bitcoin founder transferred what at the time was $60,000 to DPR.

[Magazine]

A January 2009 address was used to send bitcoins to DPR. That's the thrust of the article and claim (probably valid) of Ron and Rivest.  Whoop dee doo.

Probably of no consequence but could shake the markets at a time no one can put fiat money into an exchange.

(Reposted in this thread with a more informative title...in case you were wondering why the identical post in the haha thread)

Or how about.


On March the 20th of this year a wallet belonging to a Bitcoin founder transferred what at the time was $60,000 to DPR.

ooo the plot thickens!

[str4wm4n]

plot gettin mad thick yo, mad thick

[amincd]

I thought the best guess was that none of the bitcoins mined by Satoshi had been moved so far. Also, Satoshi was weary of bitcoin being used even to make donations to Wikileaks in 2010, for fear that it would draw scrutiny to Bitcoin too early in its development. I can't see how he would support bitcoin being used to enable an illegal drug market at around the same time.

[beetcoin]

I thought the best guess was that none of the bitcoins mined by Satoshi had been moved so far. Also, Satoshi was weary of bitcoin being used even to make donations to Wikileaks in 2010, for fear that it would draw scrutiny to Bitcoin too early in its development. I can't see how he would support bitcoin being used to enable an illegal drug market at around the same time.

the wikileaks issue was hot during that time. selling drugs on SR wasn't widely discussed, and it would help popularize BTC... which i think it did.

[fluidjax]

No real facts, transactions ID's, etc. pretty weak reporting.

[Melbustus]

Ok, for one thing, Hal Finney tweeted "Running bitcoin" on Jan 10th 2009 (and it's well known that he was one of the first users)

The point is that other people besides Satoshi were running bitcoin in January 2009. There was robust discussion of bitcoin on the cypherpunks mailing list, beginning with Satoshi's white paper in late 2008. Many curious crypto-nerds probably gave it a try early on.

It's unclear why the article's authors seem to imply that the money is from Satoshi. Oh wait.....no it's not: sensationalism.

[BitcoinAuthor]

that's one of the beauties of satoshi not being around: opponents can't assassinate his character. look, satoshi is guilty by association, so they say. good luck with trying to discredit the SN. it's doubtful he left enough (block)chain for people to metaphorically hang him.

[LiteCoinGuy]

this article just wants to destroy some of satoshis reputation in my view.

[anti-scam]

According to SDL's research none of Satoshi's coins have been spent. His method seemed sound so I'm skeptical of these results.

[skull88]

I don't think Satoshi was someone who had something against a market like SR, don't believe he funded it though.

[Remember remember the 5th of November]

Just stumbled across this article:

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

Apparently one of Satoshi's early wallets transferred 1,000 BTC to DPR's wallet.

Does anyone have a link to said transaction? Thoughts?

Perhaps it's this one? https://blockchain.info/tx/2ccc3f59d28c709770a8bc478b112e10feda4bf55197c2e48deaa0eb6bca0311

And the earliest of the inputs is this one I think https://blockchain.info/tx-index/427/0. At that time, only a handful of people were mining including Satoshi.

[Anonymous]

Still nothing published. My comments on hn were downvoted because I called the article linkbait, and frankly, it's looking more and more like FUD. Hanlon's razor applies though. Oh well, let's wait four more hours...

[Remember remember the 5th of November]

Just stumbled across this article:

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

Apparently one of Satoshi's early wallets transferred 1,000 BTC to DPR's wallet.

Does anyone have a link to said transaction? Thoughts?

Perhaps it's this one? https://blockchain.info/tx/2ccc3f59d28c709770a8bc478b112e10feda4bf55197c2e48deaa0eb6bca0311

According to the article, the transfer was made on March 20th, 2013 from "an account...that had been created in January 2009". Perhaps that means from an address that had been created in January 2009? Does that mean from a coin that was created in January 2009? Or just the address (in which case, it's address reuse which in my opinion implies that it probably isn't Satoshi)? Or maybe just some group of addresses that the researchers believe are linked together?

It's shoddy journalism, so it really could mean just about anything.

Nope, while addresses are not timestamped when created, the transaction that it appears in is timestamped.

[Rez]

Among their discoveries was a particular transfer to an account controlled by Mr. Ulbricht from another that had been created in January 2009, during the very earliest days of the bitcoin network, which was set up the previous year.

Although the authors state that they cannot prove that that account belongs to the person who created the bitcoin currency, it is widely believed that the first accounts belong to a person who identifies himself as “Satoshi Nakamoto,” but who has remained anonymous and has not been publicly heard from since 2010.

So the only thing they have to go on is that the "account" (a misunderstanding of how Bitcoin works) is old and not many people were mining at the time. That's it. That's all they've got.

Sure, it could be Satoshi, but the article is very badly written and assumes there's more "there" there than there is. Satoshi didn't design the software by himself. In fact, notes in the earliest 2009 editions indicate "we" - clearly multiple people were working with him on the software at the time, and/or there were more than a few people helping him bug-test it.

http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=21313152

[PrFen]

DPR is maybe Satoshi?   

[BlackShadow]

Maybe DPR is Satoshi?
 


edit oops just seen previous post

[lindatess]

Well DPR did say he went on to create an economic simulation in his social media account.

To that end, I am creating an economic simulation to give people a first-hand experience of what it would be like to live in a world without the systemic use of force."

It would have been pretty hard to know or get involved with bitcoin in the early stages. I think it would have been spread to close friends of Satoshi, which undoubtedly could be one of themselves. It was some time after that it was posted to a cryptography BBS.