All of us are more important to Bitcoin than Satoshi!

[Darker45]

More often than not, the government reacts in an exaggerated manner. Being unreasonable isn't surprising as to how they conduct themselves. In the relatively short history of crypto, we've already seen a number of arrests. Somebody who made a free marketplace was arrested.

I can envision authoritarian regimes behaving irrationally against him.  His attacks on their financial system might possibly result in the death sentence being applied to him.  Just one more defense of his obscurity.

You don't have to envision or imagine of an authoritarian regime for unreasonable actions to be committed by the government itself. Ross Ulbricht, Arthur Hayes, Alexey Pertsev, for example, were arrested in the US and the Netherlands, countries that are in the top as far as the quality of democracy is concerned. These are countries where freedom is supposed to be enjoyed, promoted, and protected. But look what they do to innovators.

So I don't dismiss the possibility that Satoshi would have also been arrested if identified. Or, as governments often impose death sentence to anybody outside the courts of law, it is also a possibility, albeit remote, that Satoshi has already been identified and punished accordingly.

[1715206388]

1715206388

[1715206388]

1715206388

[1715206388]

1715206388

[1715206388]

1715206388

[kryptqnick]

I've missed the news that the ruling on whether Craig Wright is Satoshi was already made, so I thank op for bringing that to attention. Of course, I never believed that Wright was Satoshi, but the burden of proof was on COPA's side this time, so I was a bit worried about them.
I agree with the op that Satoshi deserves anonymity, and it's great that Craig won't be able to hinder Bitcoin development in the future by claiming that it's his creation, and he's the one who gets a get where it should be going.

[Easteregg69]

Ï think. If you don't die. You can always come back and spend your bitcoins.

Fact I am around tells a lot. Next big think is you reposition on the stand of the meaning of "immutable".

Cheers.

[beerlover]

It's a normal occurrence when have seen around the world with people trying to claim identify for great innovations such as this probably to get credits and fame aswell so all these around the main identity of statoshi isn't new especially with the fact that he's been anonymous, it will further be a reason why they would want to claim his identity and going to court to justify that actually looks extreme to me because what if the actual person comes up and proves beyond reasonable doubt he's identity, the impostor will definitely have to face a jail term.

The price of Bitcoin so far has been thriving so we'll regardless of the identity of the creator been made known or not but of at all it's going to be affected it will be that there's a different approach he would have wanted that hasn't been effected, that way bringing such to the knowledge of other users nd the rest will definitely help probably add to the value or usability of Bitcoin.

I feel like the most important thing is that satoshi realized that his existence is not helping and actually hurting us, and that is why he removed himself from the calculation right away when he realized it was going higher. I think it was 2014 or something last we heard of him, when he said he wasn't a person the people thought he was, just said "I am not him" or something like that, and that's it, that's all he did.

I think it is quite important to remember that since he left, we took it higher and higher, he never touched a dime he had. This allowed bitcoin to be a lot bigger and we should be considering this as one of the most helpful things he could have done. Imagine if he existed, that would have been a lot worse.

[Medusah]

That's right. Satoshi won the lottery here. I bet he had some other bitcoin than the ones we all know about and if alive isn't poor or troubled by the existence of the genesis block coins.

There are thousands of bitcoins from 2009 and 2010 which may well be his.  We don't know which are his, let alone which aren't.  Satoshi having 1M coins is just one big speculation.

Ross Ulbricht, Arthur Hayes, Alexey Pertsev, for example, were arrested in the US and the Netherlands, countries that are in the top as far as the quality of democracy is concerned.

I am not aware of Arthur and Alexey, but Ross Ulbricht was running Silk Road, an online drug store.  That is just illegal.  Where is the problem?

[Darker45]

Ross Ulbricht, Arthur Hayes, Alexey Pertsev, for example, were arrested in the US and the Netherlands, countries that are in the top as far as the quality of democracy is concerned.

I am not aware of Arthur and Alexey, but Ross Ulbricht was running Silk Road, an online drug store.  That is just illegal.  Where is the problem?

Silk Road is not an online drug store. It is a free marketplace. As in free. And because it's a free marketplace, anything could be sold and bought. That may include illegal drugs.

Bitcoin is a free money as well. And because it is a free money, nobody can control how you use it. You could use it to buy legal and illegal goods and services. Surely, it shouldn't be stopped simply because some crooks are using it for the wrong reasons, just as fiat isn't stopped because it is used in all kinds of evil things.

[Medusah]

Silk Road is not an online drug store. It is a free marketplace. As in free. And because it's a free marketplace, anything could be sold and bought. That may include illegal drugs.

And the pirate bay isn't  an illegal site of pirated movies, games and music.  It is "an online index of digital content of entertainment media and software".  And anything may be indexed, including pirated movies, games and music.  Be that as it may, that does not cruel it is lawfully not related with pirated content, since it permits it. 

I agree that access to such sites should not be prohibited, but there is indeed a reason their operators are arrested.  Their operation is illegal.

[Vincom]

I've missed the news that the ruling on whether Craig Wright is Satoshi was already made, so I thank op for bringing that to attention. Of course, I never believed that Wright was Satoshi, but the burden of proof was on COPA's side this time, so I was a bit worried about them.
I agree with the op that Satoshi deserves anonymity, and it's great that Craig won't be able to hinder Bitcoin development in the future by claiming that it's his creation, and he's the one who gets a get where it should be going.

I believe that even if Craig Wright is declared to be Satoshi, the Bitcoin community will not believe it is true until he has sufficient evidence related to the Bitcoin WhitePaper or ownership of the Genesis address. In other words, Craig Wright does not have enough credibility to make the community believe his claims. If he is capable enough, he should contribute to the development of Bitcoin instead of engaging in lawsuits that have no benefit to BTC. BSV is a joke of this market, I am surprised that it still exists and people are still trading BSV.

Anyway, we are still using Bitcoin every day, we are contributing to maintaining the liquidity and value of BTC in the financial revolution that Satoshi started, which is more important than all the lawsuits related to Satoshi's identity.