Unmasking Satoshi Nakamoto - new attack on Theymos from Bcashers

[dkbit98]

Bcashers are sharing their new video attack in yotube, social media and Telegram.
It is the same old scenario and target is again Theymos.
Video title is clickbait  'Bitcoin - Unmasking Satoshi Nakamoto' by Barely Sociable.
They also claim this:

Bitcoin's creator satoshi Nakamoto has remained a mystery, until today. (spoiler: Adam Back)

They claim that Satoshi Nakamoto is Adam Back aka adam3us (Sr. Member in bitcointalk forum)

No need to watch all video (if you don't want), and I timestamped just for the part when they mention theymos:
https://youtu.be/XfcvX0P1b5g?t=862

[rhomelmabini]

This is his introduction https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=15672.msg1873483#msg1873483 way back but I don't think their claim was even close to the truth. Who knows? BTW, thank you for sharing this @dkbit98.

[Lauda]

If you see members on the forum involved in that, list their names and a simple tag and flag and its over can be executed.

[stompix]

They also claim this:

Bitcoin's creator satoshi Nakamoto has remained a mystery, until today. (spoiler: Adam Back)

They claim that Satoshi Nakamoto is Adam Back aka adam3us (Sr. Member in bitcointalk foru)

He claims he's not:
https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/1259979639092588551
And if you want something nice, here is   Calvin Ayre accusing Adam of being a scammer when he claims he is NOT Satoshi.  

Other than a few laughs when you're really bored, does somebody else care what shitcashers and shitvisionaries claim?

[dkbit98]

Other than a few laughs when you're really bored, does somebody else care what shitcashers and shitvisionaries claim?

Not really but main point of this topic is attacks on theymos,
and less regarding claims if Adam Back is Satoshi Nakamoto.
Also I can't prove that Barely Sociable channel has any real connections with cashers/visionaries or he just watched their propaganda videos.
152k people watched this video so far in one day

[rhomelmabini]

but main point of this topic is attacks on theymos,
and less regarding claims if Adam Back is Satoshi Nakamoto.
Also I can't prove that Barely Sociable channel has any real connections with cashers/visionaries or he just watched their propaganda videos.
152k people watched this video so far in one day

The title "Unmasking Satoshi Nakamoto" was just a clickbait then, it's the same title of Barely Sociable video. I don't really care if AB was SN let's just thank him for what he did. Well, it's not surprising the channel has 377k+ of subscribers.

If you see members on the forum involved in that, list their names and a simple tag and flag and its over can be executed.

Don't give them a hint, that will be another scope for Barely Sociable they might come up.

[nutildah]

What a bunch of bullshit. Entertaining, but ultimately bullshit.

- There still remains no cryptographic proof that Craig Wright is Satoshi; same goes for Adam Back. Gavin claiming Wright is Satoshi (briefly, mind you -- he doesn't anymore) is not "proof".

- Satoshi did not write the emails from satoshi@vistomail.com, this has been known for quite some time.



https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w6vy4/i_am_not_craig_wright_we_are_all_satoshi_satoshi/cxtvqte/

- The theory of Adam Back being Satoshi is nothing new. Frankly, it's my favorite one! However, much like the creator of the YouTube video, I don't have anything concrete to back it up.

- Let's say Adam Back is Satoshi and he invented Bitcoin: shouldn't we respect his opinion on the implementation of a bigger block solution? Or do the Bcash and BSV guys know better than him?

- Lastly, as far as theymos' moderation is concerned: I believe the thinking was that changes that had to be implemented via hard fork rendered a coin no longer "Bitcoin"; it became an altcoin, and therefore discussion about it should be moved to a different subreddit. The same thing happened when Bcash came around.

[NotATether]

Looks like those numbskulls forgot to read the signed contracts of the forum funds. gmaxwell isn't even in the contract.

[dkbit98]

What a bunch of bullshit. Entertaining, but ultimately bullshit.

- There still remains no cryptographic proof that Craig Wright is Satoshi; same goes for Adam Back. Gavin claiming Wright is Satoshi (briefly, mind you -- he doesn't anymore) is not "proof".

- Satoshi did not write the emails from satoshi@vistomail.com, this has been known for quite some time.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w6vy4/i_am_not_craig_wright_we_are_all_satoshi_satoshi/cxtvqte/

- The theory of Adam Back being Satoshi is nothing new. Frankly, it's my favorite one! However, much like the creator of the YouTube video, I don't have anything concrete to back it up.

- Let's say Adam Back is Satoshi and he invented Bitcoin: shouldn't we respect his opinion on the implementation of a bigger block solution? Or do the Bcash and BSV guys know better than him?

- Lastly, as far as theymos' moderation is concerned: I believe the thinking was that changes that had to be implemented via hard fork rendered a coin no longer "Bitcoin"; it became an altcoin, and therefore discussion about it should be moved to a different subreddit. The same thing happened when Bcash came around.

Thank you for providing good reply, explanation and your point of view.

Looks like those numbskulls forgot to read the signed contracts of the forum funds. gmaxwell isn't even in the contract.

I am surprised they didn't add red paint and horns to theymos profile picture, and surname 'evil' 

[DireWolfM14]

I haven't watched this video yet, but I'll make a point of it.  But really this isn't anything new, and the whole thing strikes me as childish deflection.  Since these shitcoiners want to bill their respective scam as "the real bitcoin" they want to theymos to fallow along, and have "bitcointalk" promote their scam.  They haven't been able to convince, bribe, extort, or bully theymos into succumbing to their wishes, so the last thing they've got is slander and peddling their conspiracy theories.

[mk4]

Oh damn. I just watched this like 30 minutes ago and I was wondering what Bitcointalk would think of it as I really haven't dug deep into the "who is Satoshi" fiasco.

One thing's for sure, though I really don't know the accuracy of his information, and while the video was really really well made(in an entertainment perspective, great editing and such), the video maker was low-key almost going to promote BCH. He was sort of giving out the "big blocks good, small blocks bad" vibe throughout the video.

[PrimeNumber7]

They also claim this:

Bitcoin's creator satoshi Nakamoto has remained a mystery, until today. (spoiler: Adam Back)

They claim that Satoshi Nakamoto is Adam Back aka adam3us (Sr. Member in bitcointalk foru)

He claims he's not:
https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/1259979639092588551
And if you want something nice, here is   Calvin Ayre accusing Adam of being a scammer when he claims he is NOT Satoshi.   

Other than a few laughs when you're really bored, does somebody else care what shitcashers and shitvisionaries claim?

Unfortunately, it is very difficult to prove that a person is or is not a specific anonymous person whose identity is a mystery. Given the value of satoshis probable coin, he most likely doesn’t have access to the private keys.

I think some of the moderation decisions around the time the block size debate was getting started were a mistake. I think it probably resulted in the community becoming split, which I view as a negative. Just as attacks on theymos are unproductive, attacks on Ver and other “big blockers” are similarly unproductive and neither even attempts to address differences in opinions/viewpoints surrounding consensus rules and block size.

The fact that everyone involved has the technical ability to do things that may manipulate the direction of discussion, especially on platforms such as reddit, probably played a role in the above moderation decisions.     

[Lauda]

attacks on Ver and other “big blockers” are similarly unproductive and neither even attempts to address differences in opinions/viewpoints surrounding consensus rules and block size.

Wrong. Ver is selling BCH under the Bitcoin banner on bitcoin.com, which is literally fraud. There are dozens of documented cases of first-timers being scammed this way. Roger Ver himself is therefore now a scammer. It is time to stop making excuses for, and defending scammers.

[gmaxwell]

The attack there on theymos isn't new, it's discredited bullshit that Roger Ver keeps paying people to repost.

The entire content of the video except the bullshit clickbait about Adam at the end was taken basically unmodified and in order from one of false "history of bitcoin" posts that Ver is astroturfing.

The author of the video was clearly paid to post this nonsense, since in some cases (e.g. the Theymos / Warren crap) there were conclusive and comprehensive debunkings elsewhere on the very threads he showed in the video which he just ignored. If he had any interest in the truth he wouldn't have included stuff like that.

[DaCryptoRaccoon]

Roger Ver got greedy saw an opportunity to make some money on his own and try to steal the Bitcoin name and now there project's are struggling they want to attack anyone and everyone in bitcoin with there false narrative on how the history played out.

While some of the stuff in the video is interesting it should be taken from the perspective of someone attacking by way of making a mountain out of a mole hill.

The sad thing today is there is not as many people pushing back against these claims and if this is allowed to continue with all the shitcoin's claiming "we are bitcoin" the average person getting into the space could become miss-led by these kinds of things.

The sheer amount of views this has already show's there pushing there narrative as hard as possible with these slick looking videos.

We must not let this effect us and stay strong as a community going forward, though if this sort of thing continues we may even need to go on the offensive.

Even if AB was satoshi or know's satoshi it has no bearing on where Bitcoin is going today and thus has no relevance going forward.

[nutildah]

attacks on Ver and other “big blockers” are similarly unproductive and neither even attempts to address differences in opinions/viewpoints surrounding consensus rules and block size.

Wrong. Ver is selling BCH under the Bitcoin banner on bitcoin.com, which is literally fraud. There are dozens of documented cases of first-timers being scammed this way. Roger Ver himself is therefore now a scammer. It is time to stop making excuses for, and defending scammers.

Every day Roger Ver goes still calling Bitcoin "Bitcoin Core" on that website (and elsewhere) is a wasted opportunity to stop attacking Bitcoin and start making amends.

[DooMAD]

Every day Roger Ver goes still calling Bitcoin "Bitcoin Core" on that website (and elsewhere) is a wasted opportunity to stop attacking Bitcoin and start making amends.

I don't see that happening any time soon, heh.  What's that old adage about conflict being more profitable than peace?  And how about the expression "everybody loves an underdog"?  There are definitely psychological games at play here.  I get the impression that stirring up controversy and polarising opinions helps him attract an audience.

[dkbit98]

The attack there on theymos isn't new, it's discredited bullshit that Roger Ver keeps paying people to repost.

The entire content of the video except the bullshit clickbait about Adam at the end was taken basically unmodified and in order from one of false "history of bitcoin" posts that Ver is astroturfing.

The author of the video was clearly paid to post this nonsense, since in some cases (e.g. the Theymos / Warren crap) there were conclusive and comprehensive debunkings elsewhere on the very threads he showed in the video which he just ignored. If he had any interest in the truth he wouldn't have included stuff like that.

Exactly what I was thinking after I watched the video.
It's obviously paid video with BCH vibe, and that is low even for MemoryDealers aka RV.

Next thing I expect to see is him speaking on his own YT about this video by Barely Sociable.

[Vod]

The attack there on theymos isn't new, it's discredited bullshit that Roger Ver keeps paying people to repost.

It's odd that he would attack Theymos in this way and still respect him enough to use his alias instead of his real name.

[mk4]

The attack there on theymos isn't new, it's discredited bullshit that Roger Ver keeps paying people to repost.

It's odd that he would attack Theymos in this way and still respect him enough to use his alias instead of his real name.

Knowing that the YouTuber was not-so-low-key advocating for big blocks throughout the video, it's likely that he simply just didn't know about Theymos' alleged real name.