POLL: How likely do you think it is that Dorian is Satoshi, founder of Bitcoin?

[ebliever]

I thought a poll structured like this would be more enlightening than a simple yes/no poll on everyone's opinions. What do you think, and why?

[1714823196]

1714823196

[g27wr]

The deputies that responded to the call recently said that the quotes of what 'satoshi' said are accurate.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-la-sheriffs-say-satoshi-nakamoto-man-did-talk-about-bitcoin-to-newsweek-reporter-20140307,0,609860.story#axzz2vLMJEnVv

[jonald_fyookball]

I would say 1% likely cause you don't know what you don't know.  But generally there's clear evidence the guy wanted to be anonymous and you don't use your real name if that's your goal.

[ebliever]

On the one hand, this guy has the right name and a skill set and worldview consistent with what we would expect of the founder of Bitcoin. Not to mention no job/time available in the period in question, and an isolated lifestyle allowing great concentration on the subject.

On the other hand we have the after-the-fact denials, his apparent unfamiliarity with "bitcom", and his questionable English skills, not to mention the conflict between his efforts at privacy and the apparent use of his real name.

That's why I'm ambivalent. I'm surprised the distribution so far is looking to be bipolar.

[progamerbet.com]

I'd say there's no chance. Nobody who is as careful as Satoshi would have used his real name to do everything.

[ebliever]

I'd say there's no chance. Nobody who is as careful as Satoshi would have used his real name to do everything.

The problem with confident assertions like this is they are so easily undermined by plausible alternatives. On another thread I commented that many great efforts at secrecy had been compromised by unfathomable slip-ups, and at the same time on the same thread someone posted a perfect illustration of this, of how the founder of Silk Road was caught using his real name in an email address seeking to hire programmers.

When Satoshi first wrote his paper and signed on to this forum, Bitcoin was nothing. Privacy would have been of little issue at first, growing gradually over time. And by then it would be too late. So he could go to great lengths in other ways, but could only hide in plain sight on this point.

I'm not saying that's conclusive, just giving an example of how the various arguments being put forth pro and con are not very strong. Thus my surprise as how confident most people are - and yet one side or the other must be wrong.

[DaFockBro]

I would say 1% likely cause you don't know what you don't know.  But generally there's clear evidence the guy wanted to be anonymous and you don't use your real name if that's your goal.

Where is the clear evidence that he wanted to remain anonymous?  So many people say "he always used tor." Where is the evidence that he always used tor?

Could this perhaps be a Satoshi myth that has been spread around the forums?  Sort of like an el chapo situation, forum hearsay that added to his legendary mythical status.  "He always used tor and 7 proxies and never posted personal details, he can never be caught!"


I think he probably used his real name because he already felt anonymous posting on obscure mailing lists and forums that only a handful of people read at the time.

Same reason Ulbricht posted his personal gmail.  It was an obscure internet forum that hardly anyone frequented back then.

There's no way Satoshi could have predicted that Bitcoin would turn into a global phenomenon that would make Satoshi Nakamoto a household name and send reporters swarming to his door.

[BitChick]

Satoshi logged in and said, " I am not Dorian Nakamoto." 

I know that he could be Dorian saying that but I would think anyone putting 100% is crazy. 

There is more evidence that it is Nick Szabo. 

[ebliever]

There is more evidence that it is Nick Szabo. 

Can you or someone give a quick rundown of that evidence?

[ebliever]

Interesting. We are beginning to see a tri-polar distribution of opinions!

Close to 50% are certain or almost certain that Dorian is not the founder of Bitcoin.

About ~25% is equally convinced that he is the author of Bitcoin.

A third grouping of ~25% is ambivalent, tilting to the side of skepticism.

And I remain the only respondent choosing 60%. 

[phillipsjk]

It is telling that satoshi broke his silence to say he was not Dorian.

P2Pfoundation link

The real Satoshi risked exposure to clear Dorian's name.

[DaFockBro]

It is telling that satoshi broke his silence to say he was not Dorian.

P2Pfoundation link

The real Satoshi risked exposure to clear Dorian's name.

Means nothing.  Dorian could've just logged in and posted that.

[phillipsjk]

Means nothing.  Dorian could've just logged in and posted that.

Except by doing that, he risks confirming that he is Satoshi.

[mz1000]

There wasn't a 1 or 2 percent, so I voted 0%.

[Bitcoin_is_here_to_stay]

Means nothing.  Dorian could've just logged in and posted that.

Except by doing that, he risks confirming that he is Satoshi.

To whom? He is not videotaped at his home - I hope? - and if he is Satoshi, he knows how to log in without revealing his IP address.

The only thing it reveal it is that Satoshi - or somebody having access to his P2P account - is alive. Not breaking news, imho.

The strange part is - why Satoshi would not use his PGP key? Of course, there is no way for Satoshi to convince us just by posting he is not Dorian - but at least we would know that the person reviving P2P account was Satoshi - and that he is still following (bitcoin?) news

[Searing]

On the one hand, this guy has the right name and a skill set and worldview consistent with what we would expect of the founder of Bitcoin. Not to mention no job/time available in the period in question, and an isolated lifestyle allowing great concentration on the subject.

On the other hand we have the after-the-fact denials, his apparent unfamiliarity with "bitcom", and his questionable English skills, not to mention the conflict between his efforts at privacy and the apparent use of his real name.

That's why I'm ambivalent. I'm surprised the distribution so far is looking to be bipolar.

he also has money issues that we're medical ..and such...seems unlikely he would not tap those $$ also not tell 1 family member you have 400000 bitcoins on blockchain..in case you got hit by a truck?

again using your real name..naw newsweek lady scoured the world for people named like the bitcoin founder found one guy with maybe the skills to do this I'd like to know how many people have this name 50 500 5000 worldwide?

he coulda done it ..coulda lost his keys for all his blockchain coins .... could be that clueless as an act if found

unlikely

Searing

[2Kool4Skewl]

0%

[HeliKopterBen]

When i read the newsweek article, I was looking for something along the lines of communication from an IP address tied to one of his online accounts and also tied to his residence, all date and time-stamped of course.  Either that or a videotaped or possibly voice recorded confession by him with some sort of electronic proof.  Instead she found a guy with the last name Nakamoto who used to be an engineer, along with a confusing conversation.  That is the most pathetic piece of journalism I have ever seen.  Its like a modern day witch hunt.  I am now thoroughly convinced that satoshi will not be found unless he reveals himself.

[brucesewell]

I would say 1% likely cause you don't know what you don't know.  But generally there's clear evidence the guy wanted to be anonymous and you don't use your real name if that's your goal.

That only happens when he realized that this actually involves huge fortune, not when he contributes an idea.

[n2004al]

0%. I don't think that he is the real Satoshi Nakamoto for a simple reason. If he would be the real one an wanted to be anonymous he would change his real name or he wouldn't not use his real name. So, the real Satoshi (if he exist and is not a group of people) must have another name.