Why did Satoshi use GB British English and international English ?

[DarkDays]

I'm not saying anything for sure merely curious why Satoshi would use international English and GB British English.

It can be that Satoshi was/is more than one person.
It can be that he was trying to confuse the followers. (I don't think so).

For a person/s who went to great lengths to maintain its identity unknown, using different types of English grammar as well as posting during different times without a particular pattern for all we know could all be intention.

For sure, Satoshi has planned this very carefully and meticulously so any of this would be irrelevant to work out. Satoshi did come up with a novel idea, so having his/their identity exposed could be a life threatening so absolutely he/they will go to extreme lengths to keep it all under wraps.

[arabspaceship123]

I like what you've said but I think Satoshi was a group. You're correct in 2009 bitcoin didn't have value but they still could've shared private keys. Sooner or later 1 million of 21 million bitcoin's got to have some effect. It's negligent if the team didn't find ways to move the bitcoin years after Satoshi's absence.

If the bitcoin haven't moved from Satoshi's wallet there's a possibility the group behind Satoshi shared parts of private keys between them.

multisiig was not a thing in 2009-2010
there were no 'group' keys

secondly. satoshi was a single person with a single username
he talked and interacted and got help from other people. but they had their own names
like Hal. like Sirius
hal and sirius did not work physically in same room, building, neighbourhood as satoshi. they interacted over the internet
they were independant of each other not thinking of themselves as a 'group'


sats and btc had no value in 2009-2010 there was no reason to share keys. the mindset back then was not save for retirement. the keys had no value and of no importance.

also sharing keys then defeats the whole security model of bitcoin. the idea is to move value by spending value on bitcoin not handing the private keys to people

EG first transaction to hal. was done onchain by spending 10btc. not by giving hal a private key and then him moving them at his leisure

[kaggie]

It's negligent if the team didn't find ways to move the bitcoin years after Satoshi's absence.

Negligent?

You're looking at it from 2021 eyes, not from 2009 eyes where bitcoin was practically valueless.

Until those addresses become available or identities proven, if ever, ascribing morality to why those are locked away is
impossible and not respective of what the individual(s) may have believed.

[Gcrypto786]

It's negligent if the team didn't find ways to move the bitcoin years after Satoshi's absence.

Negligent?

You're looking at it from 2021 eyes, not from 2009 eyes where bitcoin was practically valueless.

Until those addresses become available or identities proven, if ever, ascribing morality to why those are locked away is
impossible and not respective of what the individual(s) may have believed.

No one knows the reality and it's still a myth that the person called "Satoshi Nakamoto" is real, Japanese, etc. until now, all those stories are spreading on the internet but the reality is still hidden.

[hazenyc]

It's right that multisigs weren't a thing for Bitcoin in 2009-2010 within the Bitcoin protocol itself, but aren't there ways to set up multisig keys outside of the network such that you could still have the same effect? Or at least an effect that is similar? I know that alternatives would be prone to all kinds of attacks by those setting it up anyway, but isn't there a way they could have managed it somehow?

While multisig was not a thing, a clever enough person could come up with a multi-sig like method at any point. Breaking a bitcoin key into two halves was always possible -- although not quite the same.

But as frankie says, it was unnecessary.

If you had someone who you thought you should multisig with, you might as well convince them to get into bitcoin or send them coin.

back then privkeys, had no value.
they were not important.
satoshi;s philosophy was if people lost their keys it made the coins left in circulation more scarce

The value of bitcoin was low enough that there was no reason to set up multisigs. Much like mining pools that did not exist yet.

Bitcoin's value had to start some place, which required proving both long term storability and current utility.

This 2011 post shows the mindset:

We all have our own little Bitcoin stash that feels like a present from the gods, and we don't want to give those precious bitcoins away.
Hoarding is fine, early adopters deserve the reward, but you can have it both ways. Hoard and Spend people! The Bitcoin needs to move!

Yes, makes a lot of sense what you and Frankie are saying, just learning over here. Isn't it then quite likely that Satoshi bought a ton of Bitcoin on Mt. Got (founded in 2010), anticipating that he would once prefer to not move those first mined coins? Or is it even possible that he somehow, don't ask me how, but somehow was involved with Mt. Gox?

I just can't get my head around the fact that those BTC are sitting idle and Satoshi feels no urge to move them. He must have benefitted from this, whoever he or she is or they are.

[kaggie]

Isn't it then quite likely that Satoshi bought a ton of Bitcoin on Mt. Got (founded in 2010), anticipating that he would once prefer to not move those first mined coins? Or is it even possible that he somehow, don't ask me how, but somehow was involved with Mt. Gox?

I just can't get my head around the fact that those BTC are sitting idle and Satoshi feels no urge to move them. He must have benefitted from this, whoever he or she is or they are.

Two interesting questions.

Mt Gox was not the first exchange, nor the first user selling bitcoin.
I've always wondered whether New Liberty Standard was Satoshi.

I doubt that he would have been involved at all in establishing Mt Gox (other than ensuring people understood code or internet protocol interactions), because the threat of crossed wires and people claiming money fraud would be too great. SN understood well enough to keep his name hidden because of such a threat. Gox was the third exchange, so there would be no need for Satoshi by then. He would no doubt have steered clear of it to avoid excess trouble.

Satoshi would have as a goal to get the currency moving. He sort of failed at this for the first 8 months of bitcoin's existence. My guess is that the first few months he spent debugging code and had that as his primary focus, ensuring the base layers of his protocol and software were fully functioning. After those several months of testing with Hal and Martti, he then moved onto the next point.

Who knows why he left the mined coins from 2009/2010 untouched? It can only be speculation, but remember his motivation -- to create a peer to peer currency. He had to make it look like the new currency was being used, but also not look like an individual couldn't join. He couldn't look like he would hold the majority forever or no one would want to join. He could even have sent those coin off to the void to create the mystery, and drum interest. Perhaps he hid coin behind different riddles and tests to test the resilience of the network. Him mining made it look like there were more users than there were, before the extra nonce tagging him was discovered.

I can imagine him buying bitcoin, as this would help the market move and provide demand. He couldn't do this on his own. He could be a middle man, but to get the currency to succeed, he had to get others to use it, perhaps as a buyer or seller. He couldn't use the bitcoin from his main address, as that would flag him too much. His domain was known and linked to him through his transaction and Hal's posts.

He would have seen the rise of value from less than a tenth of cent to a dollar by the time he disappeared. If he was older, then perhaps he mined to the void as his gift to the world. If he was younger, perhaps he is still saving it for a rainy day. There are numerous explanations as to why he may not have touched those coin: it would identify himself (opening all sorts of trouble), he may be dead (Hal, David), he may not need to (being rich off of other bought coin), or he may have lost the methods to retrieve it.

Whatever his reasoning and methods, it worked. Growing in large part due to the community that surrounded him as well.

If he were alive, it would be interesting to know what his attitudes were today, because people can change.

Yes, makes a lot of sense what you and Frankie are saying, just learning over here.

We all learn. There are plenty of mysteries in blockchain that are yet to be discovered, no doubt, especially if you consider that even the hashes of the word 'hello' and the names of linux system files have revealed coin.

It is the greatest unsolved mystery of our day.

And truth be told, we may never have the answer to it.

An overwritten drive would leave no forensic evidence if his goal were to remain hidden.

[BuyingBitcoin]

Maybe you discovered that Satoshi Nakamoto are two people who programmed and started Bitcoin.

[hazenyc]

Isn't it then quite likely that Satoshi bought a ton of Bitcoin on Mt. Got (founded in 2010), anticipating that he would once prefer to not move those first mined coins? Or is it even possible that he somehow, don't ask me how, but somehow was involved with Mt. Gox?

I just can't get my head around the fact that those BTC are sitting idle and Satoshi feels no urge to move them. He must have benefitted from this, whoever he or she is or they are.

Two interesting questions.

Mt Gox was not the first exchange, nor the first user selling bitcoin.
I've always wondered whether New Liberty Standard was Satoshi.

I doubt that he would have been involved at all in establishing Mt Gox (other than ensuring people understood code or internet protocol interactions), because the threat of crossed wires and people claiming money fraud would be too great. SN understood well enough to keep his name hidden because of such a threat. Gox was the third exchange, so there would be no need for Satoshi by then. He would no doubt have steered clear of it to avoid excess trouble.

Satoshi would have as a goal to get the currency moving. He sort of failed at this for the first 8 months of bitcoin's existence. My guess is that the first few months he spent debugging code and had that as his primary focus, ensuring the base layers of his protocol and software were fully functioning. After those several months of testing with Hal and Martti, he then moved onto the next point.

Who knows why he left the mined coins from 2009/2010 untouched? It can only be speculation, but remember his motivation -- to create a peer to peer currency. He had to make it look like the new currency was being used, but also not look like an individual couldn't join. He couldn't look like he would hold the majority forever or no one would want to join. He could even have sent those coin off to the void to create the mystery, and drum interest. Perhaps he hid coin behind different riddles and tests to test the resilience of the network. Him mining made it look like there were more users than there were, before the extra nonce tagging him was discovered.

I can imagine him buying bitcoin, as this would help the market move and provide demand. He couldn't do this on his own. He could be a middle man, but to get the currency to succeed, he had to get others to use it, perhaps as a buyer or seller. He couldn't use the bitcoin from his main address, as that would flag him too much. His domain was known and linked to him through his transaction and Hal's posts.

He would have seen the rise of value from less than a tenth of cent to a dollar by the time he disappeared. If he was older, then perhaps he mined to the void as his gift to the world. If he was younger, perhaps he is still saving it for a rainy day. There are numerous explanations as to why he may not have touched those coin: it would identify himself (opening all sorts of trouble), he may be dead (Hal, David), he may not need to (being rich off of other bought coin), or he may have lost the methods to retrieve it.

Whatever his reasoning and methods, it worked. Growing in large part due to the community that surrounded him as well.

If he were alive, it would be interesting to know what his attitudes were today, because people can change.

Yes, makes a lot of sense what you and Frankie are saying, just learning over here.

We all learn. There are plenty of mysteries in blockchain that are yet to be discovered, no doubt, especially if you consider that even the hashes of the word 'hello' and the names of linux system files have revealed coin.

It is the greatest unsolved mystery of our day.

And truth be told, we may never have the answer to it.

An overwritten drive would leave no forensic evidence if his goal were to remain hidden.

Thanks Kaggie for that post! I really appreciate you taking the time to answer that comprehensively!

Everything you said is valid. This story is just crazy. One thing I really don't believe is that he lost the methods to retrieve the coins. That's just unconceivable for me. That's like a Formula 1 racer not noticing he forgot the steering wheel. That's just 99.9999% unlikely. Someone who is able to put the code for Bitcoin together doesn't lose the keys to the biggest wallet out there.

All the other scenarios could be true. I didn't know there have been exchanges before Mt. Gox, so I wouldn't rule out the possibility that he had a finger in the pie with any of the marketplaces before Mt. Gox. Yes he wouldn't have set up a company or anything like that, but it just is hard to believe that he did nothing but publish the code and disappear. If he really did that, he has my deepest respect, deeper than the respect he already has from me. Imagine how much control you have to have over yourself not to get sloppy and make mistakes or fall victim to your own greed when your BTC hit $60 billion...

Absolutely insane story, definitely one that we will only have once in a lifetime and definitely one that we are soon going to see in cinemas around the world.

[Silberman]

Is it really that important? It doesn't matter WHO Satoshi is, what matters is what he did.

Yes it is that important, we know that his identity and whether bitcoin was made by a group of people will not change what bitcoin is and what it will become but we are talking about a technology that will change the world and we have no idea who created it, now this is not that weird as we do not have an idea of who developed the wheel the first time, but that was thousands of years ago and the fact that we are not going to know this on the XXI century is incredible and the identity of satoshi will most likely become one of the greatest mysteries of this century.

[songchunlai]

Dave said to Satoshi Nakamoto, you never know how much we paid for you, including Thames. Satoshi Nakamoto said you don't tell anyone my information, and neither can your family members. And Satoshi Nakamoto doesn't even know whether the private key is 64 words or 52 words. Also asked Dave if you gave me 8 words less.

[songchunlai]

Craig came to the village where Satoshi Nakamoto was, but did not find the house number stated in the message. He was going crazy in order to get those bitcoins. He scolded Satoshi Nakamoto frantically and desperately asked what the password was. What password did Satoshi Nakamoto say? What password?

[kaggie]

Dave said to Satoshi Nakamoto, you never know how much we paid for you, including Thames. Satoshi Nakamoto said you don't tell anyone my information, and neither can your family members. And Satoshi Nakamoto doesn't even know whether the private key is 64 words or 52 words. Also asked Dave if you gave me 8 words less.

Craig came to the village where Satoshi Nakamoto was, but did not find the house number stated in the message. He was going crazy in order to get those bitcoins. He scolded Satoshi Nakamoto frantically and desperately asked what the password was. What password did Satoshi Nakamoto say? What password?

Satoshi Nakamoto's password was "freedom".

The people surrounding stood up and cheered, tossing coins in our direction.

I was there? Remember?  I was the fat balding guy in the back with the long moustache. I was eating noodles and rice at the time, while solving Goldbach's conjecture.

       One of the things I use remote web desktop is a kind of website that can open the free virtual desktop of foreign servers in the browser. You can select server sites from different countries in the world. In my hometown of Henan, I chose the Netherlands. When choosing a city, all European cities can be selected. I was in Xinjiang, so I chose Helsinki.

....
        Thanks to every country and everyone for join and support to the Bitcoin!
        
         You who like me can give me a little coin for buy some food and new computer. I will work hard for our plan.

                                                                      Satoshi Nakamoto
                                                                        (2021-06-17)

Oh, nevermind. What I said here can't be correct.

I lost the plot of this post.

[oktana]

IMO, Satoshi is a person. Yes, he can't do it all by himself but this Bitcoin, it was throttled by one person. I understand that the different English is suspicious. But based on the kind of person I am, it isn't a point. I actually write both British and American. Which ever that comes into my head. Having read my writing sometimes, I cannot fully agree to use it as a point that Satoshi was more than one person. Just my opinion.

[carlfebz2]

I'm not saying anything for sure merely curious why Satoshi would use international English and GB British English.

It can be that Satoshi was/is more than one person.
It can be that he was trying to confuse the followers. (I don't think so).

For a person/s who went to great lengths to maintain its identity unknown, using different types of English grammar as well as posting during different times without a particular pattern for all we know could all be intention.

For sure, Satoshi has planned this very carefully and meticulously so any of this would be irrelevant to work out. Satoshi did come up with a novel idea, so having his/their identity exposed could be a life threatening so absolutely he/they will go to extreme lengths to keep it all under wraps.

Agree on this one which it could really be intentional and as you do mention where he would really be doing all sorts of things that would really be just continuing to hide of himself to the public.

This isnt only talking about on being a popular but also talking about security because as a creator of a decentralized thing then for sure there would be lots of things will really be threatening your life.

Its just normal that he would really be mindful on leaving no trace nor patterns nor hints that would really be revealing himself. This man wont really be that making easy for him to be traced.

[BitcoinADAB]

Who knows why he left the mined coins from 2009/2010 untouched? It can only be speculation, but remember his motivation -- to create a peer to peer currency. He had to make it look like the new currency was being used, but also not look like an individual couldn't join. He couldn't look like he would hold the majority forever or no one would want to join. He could even have sent those coin off to the void to create the mystery, and drum interest. Perhaps he hid coin behind different riddles and tests to test the resilience of the network. Him mining made it look like there were more users than there were, before the extra nonce tagging him was discovered.

Not only the ExtraNonce. One can say he marked these mined coins intentionally.
https://bitslog.com/2019/04/16/the-return-of-the-deniers-and-the-revenge-of-patoshi/

[hazenyc]

IMO, Satoshi is a person. Yes, he can't do it all by himself but this Bitcoin, it was throttled by one person. I understand that the different English is suspicious. But based on the kind of person I am, it isn't a point. I actually write both British and American. Which ever that comes into my head. Having read my writing sometimes, I cannot fully agree to use it as a point that Satoshi was more than one person. Just my opinion.

All this speculation reminds me of the good old times in school when you had literature lessons and were analyzing poems. The poets who had world class reputation could actually write down whatever they wanted and the whole world started to come up with interpretations as to what the poet probably means with a certain verse.
I was always thinking that the poet might definitely be awesome, but he can't have had as many thoughts as the 100,000 pupils analyzing and interpreting his poem.

We see something similar here: the different English version - intention! Satoshi is smart! This this and that - intention! Because Satoshi is fucking smart. We may overthink it here and there while we might fail to see the truth at other places. Whatever he did or did not intend, he definitely succeeded in setting free an unbelievable and most likely unsolvable mystery. That is hard enough to pull off, seriously.

[jqprez]

The more that I read about Satoshi, the more I feel as though he/she was more than one individual.

My own problem with this presumption is that this relies on all of those individuals having perfect OPsec.

Pulling the concepts together took a clever individual, but the basics were already there with hashcash.
Programming for a skilled person isn't so difficult. Here's a tutorial that you might be able to do at home: https://levelup.gitconnected.com/creating-a-blockchain-from-scratch-9a7b123e1f3e
 

If it was one person, he likely had the most bizarre sleep schedule of all time. His posting hours were never consistent.

For sleep schedule, it wasn't so inconsistent with any internet denizen. This is where his opsec failed.

This is very interesting. Given the times, it is certainly someone or perhaps an Asian group. I would exclude that the creator is American otherwise they would have called him in a more pompous way, like Ramboshi or terminoshi. For the opposite reasons I would say that he cannot be Russian otherwise they would have called him sputnik or something like that. Another important indication on the group that created btc comes from those who own more of them, that is Binance. Clearly, these are all assumptions

[kaggie]

This is very interesting. Given the times, it is certainly someone or perhaps an Asian group. I would exclude that the creator is American otherwise they would have called him in a more pompous way, like Ramboshi or terminoshi. For the opposite reasons I would say that he cannot be Russian otherwise they would have called him sputnik or something like that. Another important indication on the group that created btc comes from those who own more of them, that is Binance. Clearly, these are all assumptions
Feedback
Ricerche correlate

Asian?
9 UTC is the minimum, which would be 2 am in say Arizona.

Nearly every human is asleep at 2am when averaged over a long period of time.
This type of sleep fingerprint locates internet users within a few timezones.
The sleep schedule would place him between Pacific and Midwest America.

[arabspaceship123]

back then privkeys, had no value.
they were not important.
satoshi;s philosophy was if people lost their keys it made the coins left in circulation more scarce

he showed no desire, excitement or effort in hoarding. no mention of wanting/needing to accumulate. he preferred sharing coins for others to use for bug testing

as did others back then. making faucets to give coins away

hoarding/accumulating coin mindsets only begun in 2011

If it's the case why did Satoshi hoard over 1 million bitcoin? Those were mined before 2011.

This is one that was missed by the OP. The GB spelling is FAVOUR and the American version is FAVOR

It might be worth considering that Satoshi wasn't American or British, but something in-between e.g. Canadian?!

I favour the plan to monitor if the frequency of blocks received drops too slow.  That covers a large range of possibilities.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=691.msg8922#msg8922

Thanks. When I made the thread I didn't show every GB British English and international English because it would've taken a long time.

It's negligent if the team didn't find ways to move the bitcoin years after Satoshi's absence.

Negligent?

You're looking at it from 2021 eyes, not from 2009 eyes where bitcoin was practically valueless.

Until those addresses become available or identities proven, if ever, ascribing morality to why those are locked away is
impossible and not respective of what the individual(s) may have believed.

No one knows the reality and it's still a myth that the person called "Satoshi Nakamoto" is real, Japanese, etc. until now, all those stories are spreading on the internet but the reality is still hidden.

What you're saying is correct it's better keeping open minds. Limiting ourselves to stubborn thinking's wrong because Satoshi could've been a pseudonym for one person or a team.

[BitcoinADAB]

back then privkeys, had no value.
they were not important.
satoshi;s philosophy was if people lost their keys it made the coins left in circulation more scarce

he showed no desire, excitement or effort in hoarding. no mention of wanting/needing to accumulate. he preferred sharing coins for others to use for bug testing

as did others back then. making faucets to give coins away

hoarding/accumulating coin mindsets only begun in 2011

If it's the case why did Satoshi hoard over 1 million bitcoin? Those were mined before 2011.

He did not hoard these coins. He had to mine them to let the network run. Without mining these, we wouldn't have Bitcoin today. If more people connected to the network and made the hashrate up, we wouldn't have these coins. How can we know this? He marked these coins so that we can separate them and analyze them.
https://bitslog.com/2019/04/16/the-return-of-the-deniers-and-the-revenge-of-patoshi/
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=507458.0

That does not mean, that Satoshi isn't owning other coins than these marked.