More evidence that Bitcoin was created by the US government

[Marykeller]

To your assumption, Bitcoin was created by US government and its past government wasn't in full support of it. They fight to make it look irrelevant, for people to turn away from it as investment they can make.

Thanks goodness the US government didn't succeed in that and they will never succeed in any president they will have because all I know is that the fight against Bitcoin by the US hasn't stopped. Privacy and no middle man Bitcoin offers still threaten the US government

[Churchillvv]

They is always a whistle blower who always fail with the whistle blowing because they lack evidence to back their thesis up but most of the time they sound so convincing but end up not going any where because their is absolutely no one that will be convinced or some may be convince can still agree with that!

Of course everyone of us can't lie that this doesn't make any sense, except they have chosen to be blind towards it. however OP not everyone will disagree with you but for someone to be truly convince you have to go miles to try to prove to us that truly Satoshi Nakamoto might just be one of those US experiments that came through or works as planned.

"They is only one thing that keeps me wanting to hear more from you, that is the fact that; I have always believed that Satoshi as an individual if he was, was an INSIDER in the world system to succeed with this project. shortly after the financial crisis broke out in 2007/08 (THE GREAT RECESSION) then he most be an insider to be able to fight the financial system and let alone it becoming successful without a successful sabotage."

Will be here reading more so make more findings  (i am interested)

[Davidvictorson]

I don't know about the US government involvement or whether Satoshi was an agent working with the government, but I've always speculated that Satoshi may have either

1. Been found by the government but his identity is top secret
2. lost access to his wallet
3. Made up as a cover story as a form of distraction from the truth

You raised very good point my own thinking of satoshi is that he’s not just a person but a group of people who are now living with us but have sworn a secrecy oath to keep their identity hidden. It is also possible that the US government has discovered their identities, but would not divulge such information because it’s going to affect both the crypto and the regular economy.

[jossiel]

Why would US government create Bitcoin? What is the motivation behind it?

Been reading that theory even before that it was the CIA.

But there's no proof that it's the actual government who did it. And with this thread, there's no evidence in it but another theory of who satoshi really is.

There's more to it I think and the mystery that satoshi has left made people to create tons of theories which we will never find out if they're true.

[Tamaperdana]

Snip

Satoshi Nakamoto remains a mystery that remains unsolved. But I believe that's the way it should be. If Satoshi had surfaced, I'm sure things wouldn't be as smooth as they are now. Bitcoin is trusted by many people because of its decentralized nature. That's why many people buy it and believe in it, even though its creator is no longer active. Speaking of Satoshi, I don't know for sure. But if he's from the US, that's possible. Because, basically, people who work in the US government are obviously very intelligent.

But I wouldn't blindly believe your assumption. It's just an assumption, and it hasn't been proven yet. Nevertheless, your assumption is clearly quite sound. Nevertheless, I believe that, whether Satoshi is American or anyone else, he's clearly a very kind person and cares deeply about all of us. Because he created Bitcoin to make people aware that we shouldn't continue to be fooled by the current monetary system. So, yes, I'm personally very grateful to Satohsi.

[Rgram]

There is hardly any evidence you would provide that wouldn’t be superficial. It’s always going to be unbelievable and rejected even before you present it. I for one is one of those that would never accept this narrative given how Bitcoin has always being Anti-Bitcoin before the Trump Administration. Government would not want to create what would destroy or make difficult their ability to consolidate pewer.
If you, the OP is really interested in unmasking Satoshi Nakamoto, you really need to do better and I’ll still doubt it.

[X-ray]

Doubt it and not because it's outside of the possibilities, but early Bitcoin phase, it was literally shitted on by many top officials calling it as thin air, tool for criminals, outright scam, etc.

Remember this? US Treasury: Yellen warns of 'explosion' of cybercrime risk

It's obvious that many top official consider it as a sham initially and only later on once Bitcoin able to prove its worth, they finally embraced it.

But that is exactly what makes the growth of Bitcoin organic, like a genuine thing coming out of cypherpunk community.

[fullfitlarry]

It's because you don't need a evidence, you just need to used your God given coconut to think that Bitcoin is not created by the US government.

Because Bitcoin contradicts the old and traditional way on how the US government built their wealth, by being a capitalist and centralized to only few and wealthy oligarchs.

With Bitcoin, it's the total opposite, everyone can built our generational wealth without any help from this individuals and the government itself.

[Abiky]

There is lots of circumstantial evidence--although no direct evidence--that "Satoshi" was a person or team working within the US government.

Today I came across this paper, which was created in 1996 by employees at the NSA including Satoshi Nakamoto Tatsuaki Okamoto:

How To Make A Mint: The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash

(While I don't think Mr. Okamoto himself was Satoshi, I think it would be a fitting tribute name to give the "author" of Bitcoin a name that recalled his).

My circumstantial evidence of "Satoshi" being a person or team within a US agency is as follows:

1. The US government has thousands of employees who do research and have the time and opportunity to do a project like Bitcoin.

2. Various US government agencies i.e. the NSA, CIA and DARPA, have the expertise to pull off the necessary tradecraft to hide the identity of Satoshi. It's doubtful that a mere amateur individual could pull stay anonymous under such intense scrutiny as Satoshi has undergone.

3. US government employees, especially ones working for spy agencies like the CIA and the NSA, and especially those whom are not field agents are not ideological. Moreover, they don't all operate as part of a coordinated strategic plan. The idea that "the US would never create Bitcoin because it hates Bitcoin" is utterly ignorant. The two million employees of the US government don't operate that way, and the CIA/NSA definitely doesn't operate that way.

4. Satoshi never spent a single sat. This fact is simply impossible to overlook, and there is only one reasonable explanation for it: that he/she/they couldn't spend their Bitcoin--even a dollar's worth to try it out--because to do so would create a massive paperwork shit storm within the US government. Then as Bitcoin got bigger, the problem got bigger. (And only the US government is big enough to ignore $hundreds of billions just to keep a state secret).

I continue to solicit comments that will disprove this theory. So far I have heard nothing even remotely compelling. All I have gotten so far is:

1. Satoshi was just a nice guy who didn't want any money. Besides being against everything we know about human nature going back thousands of years, it also doesn't explain how "some guy" could maintain the tradecraft necessary to keep himself hidden like this.

2. Satoshi died before he could spend anything. This doesn't explain why he didn't spend even a single sat, and doesn't explain why he formally said goodbye before he stopped posting, which goes against the idea that he died suddenly.

This could make sense, given that Satoshi was never found by the authorities. Even the most sophisticated hacker can't completely hide his trail from the web. For a person to remain fully anonymous and suddenly disappear, it must mean one thing. That such person works for the government or he's the government himself. Come to think of it, I've always wondered why Bitcoin's "B" insignia resembles the US Dollar ($) sign. The name of Tatsuaki Okamoto you've mentioned, is very similar to "Satoshi Nakamoto".

Nonetheless, I'm afraid the real identity of Bitcoin's creator might never be revealed to the public. Assuming your theory is true. At this point, I've already given up trying to figure out who Satoshi is (or ever was). I'd just keep focusing on Bitcoin's achievements for the greater good. I mean, isn't this what's most important?

[DPHOR]

To be honest I do not think that Bitcoin was created by the US government because, if they do there wouldn't be a day were they could be fighting against Bitcoin. As I know the US government has tried all they could do just to Make sure they brought Bitcoin down but their efforts was to no avail.
Moved down to why Satoshi didn't spend any of his bitcon till date, well to me I am still having this doubt that Satoshi could likely other wallet that he stored Bitcoin back then and didn't post it publicly for people to know about the funds over there. I could be wrong because most people often say that Satoshi has never touched any of his Bitcoin. But let us also reason out of the box, don't you think that Satoshi could have other profile that he is using to monitor everything around the space including this forum as well?

[Saltysugar99]

There are various theories about Satoshi, but none of them are proven to be true. Until now, the creator of bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, has remained a mystery. And perhaps Satoshi has kept his identity a secret to prove that bitcoin is a real cryptocurrency and that it has no central controller, no regulatory body. And if the US government created bitcoin, then they are the ones who are likely to suffer the most from bitcoin. Now, if bitcoin starts to be used as an alternative to the dollar, then the US government may suffer the most. And even if Satoshi's identity is found, the specific rules and characteristics of bitcoin will not automatically change. And this belief is what sets bitcoin apart from all other digital assets.

[davis196]

The idea that "the US would never create Bitcoin because it hates Bitcoin" is utterly ignorant.

I can agree with this one. The US government could've commissioned the creation of such electronic peer-to-peer currency, but we don't know the exact purpose of this project. The CIA having "secret crypto funds" to fund their secret operations? The CIA and NSA to use this cryptocurrency as a way to attract criminals and keep them under control? These are the theories, that came up to my mind right now. Nothing can be proven, unless someone leaks the CIA secret archives.

Satoshi never spent a single sat. This fact is simply impossible to overlook, and there is only one reasonable explanation for it: that he/she/they couldn't spend their Bitcoin--even a dollar's worth to try it out--because to do so would create a massive paperwork shit storm within the US government. Then as Bitcoin got bigger, the problem got bigger. (And only the US government is big enough to ignore $hundreds of billions just to keep a state secret).

That's a pretty interesting idea. Why wouldn't Satoshi spend even a fraction of his BTC? However, I find it hard to believe, because I'm sure that other early BTC developers have spent a part of their BTC and nobody had stopped them to do so. I guess that this didn't create a "massive paperwork shit storm".

[legiteum]

The idea that "the US would never create Bitcoin because it hates Bitcoin" is utterly ignorant.

I can agree with this one. The US government could've commissioned the creation of such electronic peer-to-peer currency, but we don't know the exact purpose of this project. The CIA having "secret crypto funds" to fund their secret operations? The CIA and NSA to use this cryptocurrency as a way to attract criminals and keep them under control? These are the theories, that came up to my mind right now. Nothing can be proven, unless someone leaks the CIA secret archives.

This would be a US state secret at the very highest level. Even presidents are kept from this kind of information unless they specifically ask for it. I seriously doubt this would leak anymore than the list of our secret agents would leak.

And yes, those could be reasons, but I still think it might give he/she/they too much credit. The CIA, NSA, and DARPA employ thousands of workers who are paid to do not much more than sit around and come up with projects--and they don't often have to justify them that much (just create some vague justification for the project etc.). Maybe somebody did it just for the hell of it.

That's a pretty interesting idea. Why wouldn't Satoshi spend even a fraction of his BTC? However, I find it hard to believe, because I'm sure that other early BTC developers have spent a part of their BTC and nobody had stopped them to do so. I guess that this didn't create a "massive paperwork shit storm".

First of all, by "spend" I mean convert to USD or something tangibly valuable.

And if Satoshi did this and he/she/they were working within a US government agency, that money wouldn't belong to them, it would belong to the US government. And because of that, they would need to report it to the accounting department, who would ultimately report it to Congress, which would essentially reveal the secret--and probably also subject the person or team to enormous scrutiny. And they'd need to figure out what to do with the rest of the BTC, when to sell it, whether to sell it, and so on. And Congress would need to be involved in all of this.

In other words, yeah, a shitstorm.

[aoluain]

There is lots of circumstantial evidence--although no direct evidence--that "Satoshi" was a person or team working within the US government.

Today I came across this paper, which was created in 1996 by employees at the NSA including Satoshi Nakamoto Tatsuaki Okamoto:

How To Make A Mint: The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash

(While I don't think Mr. Okamoto himself was Satoshi, I think it would be a fitting tribute name to give the "author" of Bitcoin a name that recalled his).

My circumstantial evidence of "Satoshi" being a person or team within a US agency is as follows:

1. The US government has thousands of employees who do research and have the time and opportunity to do a project like Bitcoin.

2. Various US government agencies i.e. the NSA, CIA and DARPA, have the expertise to pull off the necessary tradecraft to hide the identity of Satoshi. It's doubtful that a mere amateur individual could pull stay anonymous under such intense scrutiny as Satoshi has undergone.

3. US government employees, especially ones working for spy agencies like the CIA and the NSA, and especially those whom are not field agents are not ideological. Moreover, they don't all operate as part of a coordinated strategic plan. The idea that "the US would never create Bitcoin because it hates Bitcoin" is utterly ignorant. The two million employees of the US government don't operate that way, and the CIA/NSA definitely doesn't operate that way.

4. Satoshi never spent a single sat. This fact is simply impossible to overlook, and there is only one reasonable explanation for it: that he/she/they couldn't spend their Bitcoin--even a dollar's worth to try it out--because to do so would create a massive paperwork shit storm within the US government. Then as Bitcoin got bigger, the problem got bigger. (And only the US government is big enough to ignore $hundreds of billions just to keep a state secret).

I continue to solicit comments that will disprove this theory. So far I have heard nothing even remotely compelling. All I have gotten so far is:

1. Satoshi was just a nice guy who didn't want any money. Besides being against everything we know about human nature going back thousands of years, it also doesn't explain how "some guy" could maintain the tradecraft necessary to keep himself hidden like this.

2. Satoshi died before he could spend anything. This doesn't explain why he didn't spend even a single sat, and doesn't explain why he formally said goodbye before he stopped posting, which goes against the idea that he died suddenly.

Excellent, great research...

Maybe it was a group inside a US government agency who wanted to act against the
corruption, manipulation and lies and decided to do something for the people? We can
creat endless assumptions and speculations.

And now, what can anyone do with any sort of information like this?

It really doesnt matter who Satoshi was/is or who created the entity.

Bitcoin is what matters now, not the identity of the creator(s) was/is/are. The genie is out
of the bottle and there is no putting it back in - thankfully.

Can we move on please?

[Asuspawer09]

It's an interesting theory, but still of the reasons was just a theory at any argument, there are still a lot of questions that can break these points anyway, so it doesn't prove anything, mostly just a theory.

US might have the time and opportunity but so as other countries and one individual as well. I doubt that Satoshi couldn't be anonymous from the government, there are a lot of ways to do it. Satoshi might be dead, or he never intended for this project to be like this when he created it, that is probably why he never able to spent a single sat on his wallet. I don't understand why being dead doesn't explain anything why he never spend a single sat.

At this point, most of these arguments don't matter anymore since Bitcoin has already built a huge foundation, and there will be nothing that can easily break that, as long as it continue to be what it is today as a investment and a digital currency, then most of the investors is not going to complain about anything, because it is doing its own job, even though it wasn't maybe made for it in the first place.

[Comeacross]

And now, what can anyone do with any sort of information like this?

It really doesnt matter who Satoshi was/is or who created the entity.

Bitcoin is what matters now, not the identity of the creator(s) was/is/are. The genie is out
of the bottle and there is no putting it back in - thankfully.

Can we move on please?

It's the same thought that came to my mind too when I read the op. I mean does it really matter who's behind Bitcoin? What will it really change?

Even if we find out who Satoshi is, I don't think it would change anything. It's open and decentralized already so finding him won't change that. All this theory about who's behind it doesn't change anything or how bitcoin works. I admire op effort too but it's channeling it the wrong way.

We have move on. 

[YellowSwap]

I've never been this curious about the creator of Bitcoin before, the hardest I went was the possibility that Satoshi Nakamoto is likely an American, yes I have always believe this is case.

But believing that Bitcoin is build by the US government is not confusing enough, because I have never heard about any Bitcoin conspiracy from other countries accusing US government for building Bitcoin.

You think that this can be under the radar without a country knowing about it? At this point I don't even care if Epstein ceated Bitcoin or if it's a maniac that's responsible for it, all I know is I will still thank him for creatimg something that's a step ahead of the centralised world.

[suzanne5223]

2. Various US government agencies i.e. the NSA, CIA and DARPA, have the expertise to pull off the necessary tradecraft to hide the identity of Satoshi. It's doubtful that a mere amateur individual could pull stay anonymous under such intense scrutiny as Satoshi has undergone.

Satoshi is not an amateur individual, and he works with experienced people (Theymos, Sirius, Hal Finney, Gavin Andresen, etc.) on Bitcoin. Aside that, someone with the core knowledge of OpSec can stay anonymous.

Not like this they can't. There have literally been millions of people who have looked for Satoshi, and millions of dollars have been spent doing so. People stay anonymous because they take the usual precautions AND nobody seriously bothers to look for them. Satoshi is clearly on an entirely different level.

I will believe you said this based on what you are also willing to know, but who are the jobless people who spent millions searching for Satoshi when they should have spent that money helping people who actually need it?
Someone created something that benefits humanity instead of people appreciating it; they're doing unnecessary research about who he was when that's not what's important.
You, Satoshi, anonymity is entirely different; why won't it be different when he work with people that genuinely support him.

[Bluedrem]

I don't think so, but the possibility cannot be completely ruled out. If the US government really created Bitcoin and it is still under their control, then this is bad news for every investor. The main issue here is how true this is and even if it is true, whether the US government has been able to control Bitcoin so far. However, I would hope that as we currently know about the creation of Bitcoin by an invisible person or group, the matter is limited to this and that its originator never returns, at least for the sake of the Bitcoin that the originator created.

[legiteum]

It's an interesting theory, but still of the reasons was just a theory at any argument, there are still a lot of questions that can break these points anyway, so it doesn't prove anything, mostly just a theory.

US might have the time and opportunity but so as other countries and one individual as well.

I get that, but I would argue that only the US government is big enough to ignore $80 billion. For any other government, except perhaps China, it would simply be too much money to withhold from the people.

I doubt that Satoshi couldn't be anonymous from the government, there are a lot of ways to do it. Satoshi might be dead, or he never intended for this project to be like this when he created it, that is probably why he never able to spent a single sat on his wallet. I don't understand why being dead doesn't explain anything why he never spend a single sat.

Being dead is an explanation, but the counter evidence here is that he explicitly said goodbye before he left the scene. That would detract from the theory that he died suddenly before he was able to spend his sats.

At this point, most of these arguments don't matter anymore since Bitcoin has already built a huge foundation, and there will be nothing that can easily break that, as long as it continue to be what it is today as a investment and a digital currency, then most of the investors is not going to complain about anything, because it is doing its own job, even though it wasn't maybe made for it in the first place.

I agree that the US government being the inventor of Bitcoin doesn't fundamentally change Bitcoin. There is the issue of the disposition of Satoshi's 1M coins, which, if this were to come out publicly, would make their sale a political issue, and thus affect the price of BTC.

However, one thing you can see just by reading this thread is that many people believe a lot of false things about Bitcoin and have a rather ridiculous notion about how the US government works--but they believe that stuff because it creates a mystique around Bitcoin that drives them to purchase more of it. Finding out that Bitcoin was just another skunkworks project within the US government will kill that illusion once and for all. And those disillusioned people might be a significant part of the BTC buying pool and those that would weigh negatively on the price.

So I don't agree that it would make "no difference". You can debate the exact amount though (and it's hard to predict).

I will believe you said this based on what you are also willing to know, but who are the jobless people who spent millions searching for Satoshi when they should have spent that money helping people who actually need it?

There have been many journalists, and they even made a movie out of the question. I don't think those people are... jobless. Quite the contrary, they have made a good living trying to find Satoshi, which is based on very significant demand for this question to be answered.

Trillions of dollars are spent each year on things that are more trivial than this. Humans love their entertainment after all.

[...]
If the US government really created Bitcoin and it is still under their control, then this is bad news for every investor.
[...]

Satoshi being a person or group within the US government would not change the control of today's Bitcoin in any way.

I have argued elsewhere that the US government can, if it wanted to, deeply affect the market price of Bitcoin, which is all most people care about with Bitcoin. And because of that, the US government could, if it wanted to, completely change Bitcoin's architecture (say centralized) by holding the price hostage.

And the US government already exerts enormous control over Bitcoin because of the control of the on/off-ramps, securities laws around exchanges and brokers, and direct control of the Bitcoin ETFs traded on its stock exchanges.

But "Satoshi" does not control Bitcoin, so it doesn't matter who/what he is.