Is Satoshi actually Richard Stallman?

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Take a look at the YouTube stats of this video. Look at what link is at the top. Note the view count for that link.

Phin, step away from the conspiracy theory 

My post had nothing to do with any conspiracy theory.

YouTube stats:

Date    Event    Views
A
12/06/10    First referral from – forums.somethingawful.com    371
B
05/21/10    First referral from related video – Thorium Remix 2009 - LFTR in 16 Minutes    305
C
04/15/10    First referral from – www.stumbleupon.com    2,341
D
12/10/09    First referral from Google search – richard stallman    698
E
09/08/09    First view from a mobile device    2,592
F
07/27/09    First referral from related video – Richard Stallman Eats Something From His Foot    426
G
04/10/09    First referral from – www.google.com    735
H
02/06/09    First referral from YouTube search – richard stallman    8,509
I
02/06/09    First referral from YouTube search – stallman    1,322
J
02/06/09    First referral from – www.facebook.com    415

[1714093340]

1714093340

[1714093340]

1714093340

[1714093340]

1714093340

[phillipsjk]

Don't people have a their own coding style that is hard to shake? Somebody should compare EMACS source code to Bitcoin source code.

The lack of GPL license is a compelling argument against the theory, but RMS has used more liberal licenses in the past: when he feels it is to his advantage (such as the LGPL for libraries). If Shatoshi is really RMS, that may explain the annonymity though: he would not want to admit he found a case where the MIT license is more pragmatic.

[wolftaur]

Don't people have a their own coding style that is hard to shake? Somebody should compare EMACS source code to Bitcoin source code.

The lack of GPL license is a compelling argument against the theory, but RMS has used more liberal licenses in the past: when he feels it is to his advantage (such as the LGPL for libraries). If Shatoshi is really RMS, that may explain the annonymity though: he would not want to admit he found a case where the MIT license is more pragmatic.

I'm pretty sure they're two different people. If RMS wrote Bitcoin you'd have to press C-x f M-a M-e s to see your balance, and something with ten times as many keystrokes to send a coin. That, and Bitcoin doesn't allocate the entire swap partition.

[NF6X]

The bitcoin client has at least three orders of magnitude too few features to have been written by RMS.

[wolftaur]

The bitcoin client has at least three orders of magnitude too few features to have been written by RMS.

Are you sure about that? They did release a UNIX that had no kernel.

[NF6X]

The bitcoin client has at least three orders of magnitude too few features to have been written by RMS.

Are you sure about that? They did release a UNIX that had no kernel.

Touché.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Nah, he was speaking in very general terms about some way to send money, quickly, easily and anonymously to content creators. That's not far off from what he's been evangelizing for decades, so I see no significance in his mentioning it at any particular time in 2009.

Has RMS made any public comments about Bitcoin?  In light of his past commentaries, he should have something notable to say about Bitcoin.  If his public mentions of such cryptocurrency ideas cease after Bitcoin's metoric rise around October 2010, about the same time that Satoshi disappeared, this might be a significant link.

Where do you want to start?  "Richard Stallman" bitcoin     -->  http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Richard+Stallman%22+bitcoin  About 132,000 results

[twobits]

It is not Stallman's coding style, choice of tools/libraries, or licensing style.  So highly doubtful.

[wolftaur]

The bitcoin client has at least three orders of magnitude too few features to have been written by RMS.

Are you sure about that? They did release a UNIX that had no kernel.

Touché.

We could probably argue that CoinHunter is RMS though:

* Sees someone else's work and decides he can do better, so clones it
* Can't make it compatible with the original
* Obviously doesn't like the MIT license
* Security is an afterthought
* Bug fixes take three tries to get right
* Won't shut up about how much better he is than everyone involved in what he cloned
* Adds "features" to clone that cause more problems than they solve (try a 'grep -z foo /dev/zero' on a Linux box belonging to someone you don't like)
* Arrogance infinitum
* Makes long-winded speeches about how flawed the original is and how he's fixing them all
* Can't understand why his clone doesn't immediately take over the whole industry
* Has small but insanely fanatical array of followers who believe everything he says and reject any logic

I think I'm kicking the carcass of a horse that's not only dead but was eaten by saber-toothed tigers here.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Genjix/Free_software

Richard Stallman, a programmer at MIT hit upon the idea of using copyright law against itself to develop a license called copyleft. Copyleft says that this Wikipedia article, this piece of music or this piece of source code that is protected under this license must be shared. Furthermore for software programs the source code must always remain public- if I redistribute that program then I must also distribute the source code with it. Any changes I make, they have to be released too. He setup the Free Software Foundation to protect these licenses. For music, writing and art we have the Creative Commons. For documents and source code we have the GNU Free Documentation License and GNU General Public License. Each license particular to the media, and each with customisable variants for different situations; all protecting the user and free expression.

[todu]

Nah, he was speaking in very general terms about some way to send money, quickly, easily and anonymously to content creators. That's not far off from what he's been evangelizing for decades, so I see no significance in his mentioning it at any particular time in 2009.

Has RMS made any public comments about Bitcoin?  In light of his past commentaries, he should have something notable to say about Bitcoin.  If his public mentions of such cryptocurrency ideas cease after Bitcoin's metoric rise around October 2010, about the same time that Satoshi disappeared, this might be a significant link.

Where do you want to start?  "Richard Stallman" bitcoin     -->  http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Richard+Stallman%22+bitcoin  About 132,000 results

Correlation does not mean causation. A Google search for "Richard Stallman" porn returns 290,000 results, none of which stars Richard as the porn star. According to your logic, it should be about twice as likely that Richard is a porn star than that he is Satoshi.

[wolftaur]

Correlation does not mean causation. A Google search for "Richard Stallman" porn returns 290,000 results, none of which stars Richard as the porn star. According to your logic, it should be about twice as likely that Richard is a porn star than that he is Satoshi.

I guess even he doesn't want to GPL his nads...

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Nah, he was speaking in very general terms about some way to send money, quickly, easily and anonymously to content creators. That's not far off from what he's been evangelizing for decades, so I see no significance in his mentioning it at any particular time in 2009.

Has RMS made any public comments about Bitcoin?  In light of his past commentaries, he should have something notable to say about Bitcoin.  If his public mentions of such cryptocurrency ideas cease after Bitcoin's metoric rise around October 2010, about the same time that Satoshi disappeared, this might be a significant link.

Where do you want to start?  "Richard Stallman" bitcoin     -->  http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Richard+Stallman%22+bitcoin  About 132,000 results

Correlation does not mean causation. A Google search for "Richard Stallman" porn returns 290,000 results, none of which stars Richard as the porn star. According to your logic, it should be about twice as likely that Richard is a porn star than that he is Satoshi.

Surely, you don't think that I didn't know that. Hence the question. With so many results, where do should we start?

[NF6X]

According to Rule 34, now RMS is a porn star.





I'm never turning off "safe search" again. 

[Bitcoin Oz]

A search of the term "Richard Stallman" satoshi  gives 34 000 results.

33 999 of which are the bitcoin forum blowing hot air.

 

[Phinnaeus Gage]

A search of the term "Richard Stallman" satoshi  gives 34 000 results.

33 999 of which are the bitcoin forum blowing hot air.

 

SA in the house?

[todu]

Nah, he was speaking in very general terms about some way to send money, quickly, easily and anonymously to content creators. That's not far off from what he's been evangelizing for decades, so I see no significance in his mentioning it at any particular time in 2009.

Has RMS made any public comments about Bitcoin?  In light of his past commentaries, he should have something notable to say about Bitcoin.  If his public mentions of such cryptocurrency ideas cease after Bitcoin's metoric rise around October 2010, about the same time that Satoshi disappeared, this might be a significant link.

Where do you want to start?  "Richard Stallman" bitcoin     -->  http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Richard+Stallman%22+bitcoin  About 132,000 results

Correlation does not mean causation. A Google search for "Richard Stallman" porn returns 290,000 results, none of which stars Richard as the porn star. According to your logic, it should be about twice as likely that Richard is a porn star than that he is Satoshi.

Surely, you don't think that I didn't know that. Hence the question. With so many results, where do should we start?

You already knew "Richard Stallman" porn returns 290,000 results?

P.S.

Just trolling with you. No suggestion intended.

[phillipsjk]

Correlation does not mean causation. A Google search for "Richard Stallman" porn returns 290,000 results, none of which stars Richard as the porn star. According to your logic, it should be about twice as likely that Richard is a porn star than that he is Satoshi.

Surely, you don't think that I didn't know that. Hence the question. With so many results, where do should we start?

You already knew "Richard Stallman" porn returns 290,000 results?

P.S.

Just trolling with you. No suggestion intended.

Well todu apparently checked every one of those results for a guest appearance from RMS .

[rotrott]

I thought Bruce Schneier more than Richard...he does have a section on sending money using cryptography in Applied Cryptography.

[JeffK]

Given the general nature of the people on these forums, I'd be far more inclined to guess Satoshi is Eric S Raymond