Satoshi Nakamoto White Paper

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

Bitcoin is still on track for the purpose it was created for by Satoshi and has even become more popular in today's world. El Salvador has approved it as a legal tender, so many institutions have invested huge amounts of money in Bitcoin, and some businesses are also accepting Bitcoin as a means of payment. What more can Satoshi want if not the success of Bitcoin? According to Satoshi, Bitcoin was designed to serve as a p2p means of payment between individuals who agreed to accept Bitcoin as payment. Another reason why bitcoin was developed, according to Satoshi, is so that individuals who believe in it will not have to rely on any financial authority for the control of their funds. Bitcoin was created to give individuals privacy over how they manage their funds privately, without their identities being revealed unintentionally. 

So, I still see that all the reasons for creating Bitcoin are still in track, despite the fact that the government is looking for every possible way to make the usability of Bitcoin centralized with the help of those centralized platforms for Bitcoin exchange, and that's the reason why it's advised for investors to stay away from KYC. In order to be more private, some people prefer to use mixers. 

[Eddie Sockittome]

Bitcoin hasn't changed, but we are using it in the wrong way. Bitcoin users are supposed to be anonymous so their money and the user can maintain their privacy. But, the centralized exchanges and other platforms changed everything. We are using centralized exchanges providing our identities.

It's been over a decade now and we are using it in a wrong way. We are binding our bank accounts with the exchanges. We were supposed to be free with our money but...... What is happening now? [/url]

Using the wrong way....according to who?

I would agree that using it as a speculative investment (let's be honest, that is what 95% of all current buyers use it for) is very different from the transaction-oriented, pseudo-anonymous intent of Satoshi. But most of the early miners of Bitcoin were cyberpunks. White males between 30-50 years old, who now are either dead or 45-65 years old. Not exactly a cross-section of society, today. Gen Z (to my surprise) seems to care less about anonymity. They think privacy is dead. They have very different priorities and values than people our age. They will decide for themselves what Bitcoin is useful for. It's not a right way or wrong way... it is just what... is. And we should be stoic about it rather than wishing it is how it was "back in the day," IMHO.

[LeezHamilton]

This  is a very interesting debate.  Many of you have commented according to your own understanding of Bitcoin Network and its incentives Bitcoin as Cryptocurrency or economic asset.  Well, whether anything has changed or not depends on the periocular matter involved.  As far as you can see if there are any major changes and alterations.  As for my own assessment and comments, what I see in the Bitcoin community is war between two groups who are fighting each other to become the in-charged dictum papadom.   What I mean by the two words dictum papadom is taking advantage by over taking others by dictatorial,  unconventional and despotic exercise of power.

You can debate as you like and pinpoint the core changes which have taken place and debate on whether it is good for Bitcoin and its users ?    As you know it is CSW over emphasizing the matter to convince people that BTC is not Bitcoin and BSV what he called 'Satoshi's Vision'  is Bitcoin.  Well, according to the Bitcoin White Paper which was written by the Inventor of Bitcoin that Bitcoin is an electronic cash system which is a decentralized digital financial service using an electronic coin known as Bitcoin.  Bitcoin is a numerical economic value of a financial transaction.  Which is a standard feature and the total amounts are limited   to 21000000 units.  Now the network maintenance and its further developments are respectively managed by the Bitcoin Core team.  If Craig Wright tries to hijack the Bitcoin Core and impose his own unitary rules for Bitcoin, if he wins the case it will be a foggy dream for him. He has forgotten the slogan, 'Vires in Numberis'.

Even though the majority of people do not understand, what is the difference when they speak that Bitcoin is BTC ?
I must elaborate here, that BTC term the inventor used is not B, T and C as appeared in the word written for as Bitcoin but BTC stand for Bitcoin Trans Cash as BTC ,  Craig is not Satoshi neither he is the inventor of Bitcoin and Blockchain nor he is the author of Bitcoin.  As he is boldly claiming and impregnating someone else's pseudonym and trying to hijack the Bitcoin for the second time claiming BSV is the original Bitcoin, and he is the inventor of it is a pathetically motivated intention. BSV is not Bitcoin Satoshi's Vision. BSV means Bitcoin Security Version.   The inventor cloned it from the original Bitcoin Blockchain and he cloned it just after he mined 14 Blocks. Before cloning again and calling it Ethereum. No, Ethereum  was not invented by Vitalik Buterin. He has been hired to work on it by someone else.   So, as some of you think Bitcoin is no longer decentralized as before or Bitcoin is more decentralized now, is your own perception.

When the real Satoshi Nakamoto will return his holiday from Sirius (Σείριoς) he will unveil the mystery of the secret Bitcoin Manifesto known as Bitcoin Magna Charta, that will provide proper understanding of Bitcoin White Paper and its true decentralized nature.

The Bitcoin White Paper only explains the technical aspect of the P2P Blockchain mechanism.

[Faisal2202]

Do you think Bitcoin has gone against Satoshi Nakamoto’s original intentions and embarked on a non-decentralized path?

Before ETFs approval its not but now yes ut is marked on a centralized path, as in the latest statement of Gary he said BTC is not that decentralized (Source So, the point is when these ETFs got approved hell lot of money flows into BTC and that money is causing huge fluctuations in the market. The good thing is these companies are trading OTC, which means under the table, which is not causing that much pressure in the market. Otherwise, the volumes would be F**ed. The point is, that BTC's value can easily be manipulated considering the amount US ETFs are trading now. That's billions of dollars.

I read somewhere that 11 ETF firms have around 111+k BTC in there possession so that's not really big to manipulate the whole market, but it that the sentiments of the whole words are keeping a tight eye on these ETFs, like they matter a lot (which indeed they are, but only for investors), For BTC enthusiast, its a step toward centralization but technically speaking BTC can't be centralized in any time. Check the number of nodes, if you want to contribute then start a node, don't start mining just start validating, that would be a contribution toward the decentralization of BTC.

[Learn Bitcoin]

Using the wrong way....according to who?

If you have an account in a centralized exchange, you are using it incorrectly. Now, ask people or create a pool about how many people have an account in a centralized exchange and see the result. You are asking it like you never heard it. Did Satoshi ask us to use centralized exchanges? No, never. Bitcoin users are supposed to be anonymous. Right?

If you or others are using centralized exchanges providing the KYC, don't you think they are using it in the wrong way? What is your argument against my statement? Would you like to elaborate more about it?

[apogio]

If you or others are using centralized exchanges providing the KYC, don't you think they are using it in the wrong way? What is your argument against my statement? Would you like to elaborate more about it?

I agree in general with your statement. Playing devil's advocate though, since I have been there, when someone first starts learning about bitcoin, they may not be very knowleageable in terms of privacy. So, I 'll speak for myself here, saying that, at first, I knew I had to take my coins off of exchanges, so I did. But, the mistake was made... I bought some coins through CEXs because I wanted to buy bitcoin as soon as I learnt about it. I was fascinated by it. Then, I joined the forum and I started going deep down the privacy rabbit hole. This is where I decided to stop using CEXs. But, I mean, mistakes can happen. The point is, we should fix them.

[franky1]

I read somewhere that 11 ETF firms have around 111+k BTC in there possession

721btc all combined

grayscale had 620k pre-launch when others had none
now grayscale has 456k (164k shuffled to other ETF in OTC backdoor deals) since launch
and now the total of the other 10etf(excluding grayscale) is 265k btc

majority of it is named as "ETF held", .. on paper.. but is physically on keys owned by coinbase
coinbase is still holdng ~633k on behalf of 8 of 10 etf
vaneck and fidelity have the other 87.6k in other places
(numbers as of the 16th feb 2024)

[btc78]

I think that bitcoin still has its fundamental characteristics that makes it what it is. Satoshi created bitcoin as a breakthrough in terms of finance and technology and if you are a man who has pioneered this kind of development I know for sure that you know how developing technologies work better than anyone.

He must have foreseen that the world will take so interest into bitcoin and create things out of it for the sake of development. Bitcoin in itself is still decentralized. The world has just changed enormously that it has now created various ways to acquire bitcoin and it works because it caters to different kinds of people and their personal needs and goals.

[Apocollapse]

What's wrong? that's what a complete freedom is!

Imagine if Satoshi or majority of Bitcoin developers are force people to use decentralized exchange and non custodial wallet, then they will censor every transactions that goes to centralized exchanges, it is a decentralization? nothing different with centralization.

Some people choose non custodial wallet because they don't trust centralization, while some people choose custodial wallet because they trust more in centralization, let people choose their own choices.

[pinggoki]

The moment that we see bitcoin as an investment and not a currency that's used to trade goods and services most of the time is the moment that we've strayed away from what Satoshi wanted bitcoin to be which is a digital money, it's not a bad thing that this happened though because a lot of lives have changed because of bitcoin becoming more valuable, plus these premium value that bitcoin have, it's a good thing because it still sends the message that privacy shouldn't be compromised and that banks are oppressing their very user base with how they're still using the same old system way back to the time of the Templar Knights (the time which banking was allegedly invented), imagine if bitcoin is still worth a cent, people wouldn't be paying attention to what it's try to protest.

[hZti]

Bitcoin is still decentralised but it has failed as a currency because of the decision to not upgrade the block size. This is a pretty easy fix for the future but before it is done bitcoin is crippled and can not be used in the intended manner.

[Natsuu]

Satoshi isn't Bitcoin and he should not dictate what Bitcoin is and what direction should development go. He doesn't have the benefit of hindsight and cannot possibly predict whatever would've happened in the years to come and expect Bitcoin to continue the direction that he wanted. Development of Bitcoin should be fluid and evolving as time goes by.

Whether Bitcoin is decentralized, I would say that it still is. There isn't anything that we have done to break the balance between decentralization and utility.

Bitcoin has a lot to offer and we should always be open to the opportunities that it brings. So the idea is that Bitcoin should roll with the punches and not stick rigidly to Satoshi's original plan. Adapting as things change makes sense and keeping the balance between decentralization and usefulness

[Smack That Ace]

Do you think Bitcoin has gone against Satoshi Nakamoto’s original intentions and embarked on a non-decentralized path?

Governments are gradually imposing regulations on bitcoin, and large institutions and centralized exchanges also hold a lot of bitcoin. But that doesn't mean bitcoin's decentralized nature has been broken, it's still the same bitcoin it was when Satoshi created it. The proof is that if you hold your bitcoins in non-custodial wallet, no one can take your bitcoins, not even the government.

I understand what you mean, but we live in a government-controlled world and what is happening is inevitable, and bitcoin is no exception. We are in a centralized world and there is nothing we can do to change or keep bitcoin completely away from governments and centralized institutions. We are in a centralized world and there is nothing we can do to change or keep bitcoin completely away from governments and centralized institutions.

[Learn Bitcoin]

I agree in general with your statement. Playing devil's advocate though, since I have been there, when someone first starts learning about bitcoin, they may not be very knowleageable in terms of privacy. So, I 'll speak for myself here, saying that, at first, I knew I had to take my coins off of exchanges, so I did. But, the mistake was made... I bought some coins through CEXs because I wanted to buy bitcoin as soon as I learnt about it. I was fascinated by it. Then, I joined the forum and I started going deep down the privacy rabbit hole. This is where I decided to stop using CEXs. But, I mean, mistakes can happen. The point is, we should fix them.

Not only you, but most of us made the same mistakes. I can speak for myself. I have used Coinbase as my first Bitcoin wallet. In some countries, most people still learn about Bitcoin from the exchange groups or trading groups. They do not see Bitcoin as one of the privacy enhancement tools. They use Bitcoin and other crypto to learn to trade on those centralized exchanges.

Once we do the KYC, we cannot undo that. My identities are already online and I never know if their 3rd party provider going to sell my KYC info on the darknet or not. I don't know if you are aware or not, but a well-known exchange accepts the claim that their 3rd party partner (who does the KYC process) sells the user information on the internet.

[apogio]

Once we do the KYC, we cannot undo that. My identities are already online and I never know if their 3rd party provider going to sell my KYC info on the darknet or not. I don't know if you are aware or not, but a well-known exchange accepts the claim that their 3rd party partner (who does the KYC process) sells the user information on the internet.

I am not aware, but to be honest, I am also not surprised. I am not sure why the info is worth selling/buying. I mean, I can totally understand that governments may want to surveil bitcoin and, in this effort, they will need to ask KYC exchanges for clients' info. But, who else would be interested in buying them and why? Marketing companies? Or anything more shady?

[lixer]

Do you think Bitcoin has gone against Satoshi Nakamoto’s original intentions and embarked on a non-decentralized path?

Not necessarily gone but with some intervention from other sector people who wanted to control bitcoin, somehow they wanna manage it or regulate it. However since no one can stop this, the big answer is still no. Yes on trading there are some who are buying and selling it as investment purposes but the users can able to use bitcoin freely within decentralized space as long as they want. I doubt this will be centralized or handle even in years as Satoshi makes sure of that.

Yeah, everything that is created by humans tends to evolve, and cryptocurrency projects are no exception. So it's true that Bitcoin has changed and it isn't how it was when it was created or launched by Satoshi, however, I don't think that we can question its decentralized nature because no matter what, Bitcoin is still completely decentralized and I see no way for it to become non-decentralized or centralized as to say.

Satoshi said himself that a decade from now, when he launched Bitcoin, there will either be no transaction or a lot of transactions, and by this, he meant that it will either become too famous or abandoned by everyone, and his prediction became true, people adopted Bitcoin and it has evolved to become what it is now.

[Negotiation]

Do you think Bitcoin has gone against Satoshi Nakamoto’s original intentions and embarked on a non-decentralized path?

I don't think bitcoin goes against the original intention of Satoshi Nakamoto bitcoin is decentralized everyone knows you mentioned centralized. It cannot be bought unless centralized exchange sites support it increasing its popularity in crypto. No one can control the crypto market and there is no guarantee to go against Satoshi Nakamoto's real identity is unknown. Bitcoin's work as a decentralized currency will be complete.

[Troytech]

Satoshi envisioned bitcoin for p2p transactions but I Don see the reality of that happening now gas fees are still outrageous and I won't like to pay such amount for my daily transactions, and not every one can run a node to use lightning network, bitcoin is mainly uses as an asset that would yeild high income, satoshi did good job in building the framework for the world's greatest asset making it so scare, I won't say this is the reality he wanted but at least his dream got to stay alive and I am still enjoying decentralization out of it.

[Learn Bitcoin]

I am not aware, but to be honest, I am also not surprised. I am not sure why the info is worth selling/buying. I mean, I can totally understand that governments may want to surveil bitcoin and, in this effort, they will need to ask KYC exchanges for clients' info. But, who else would be interested in buying them and why? Marketing companies? Or anything more shady?

Not everyone on the internet does legal things, right? There are always some bad people. You never know if your identity was used by a hacker or a bad person. You should consider reading What happens when your identity is stolen -- real story || Avoid CEXs!. The identity of that guy was stolen somehow and he was in massive trouble for that.

You can also read Coinbase Admits Its Former Data Provider Sold Client Data. We don't know what are they doing with those user's data. But, whenever you search for a user profile on the internet, you will find some full profiles of some citizens. How do you think those data were collected? I know some survey worker pretend to be USA citizen and use those data to make their profile.

[EluguHcman]

Satoshi isn't Bitcoin and he should not dictate what Bitcoin is and what direction should development go. He doesn't have the benefit of hindsight and cannot possibly predict whatever would've happened in the years to come and expect Bitcoin to continue the direction that he wanted. Development of Bitcoin should be fluid and evolving as time goes by.

Whether Bitcoin is decentralized, I would say that it still is. There isn't anything that we have done to break the balance between decentralization and utility.

Satoshi Nakamoto sighted the morals and how the technology would attend to economical preferences to decongest inflations in a global range.
The potential capacities Bitcoin runs today is the program development initiated by him Satoshi Nakamoto that is mainly concerned about the benefits of its initiatives for source of payment and the investment motives. However, the volatile potentials that determines the value of the digital technology is determined by the number of supplies and demands which is where it is not controlled by a centralized  authorities while the transactions is leaned on a P2P.
Therein, Satoshi Nakamoto is situated with limitations towards the developments and directives in the digital currency of a decentralized system