More evidence that Bitcoin was created by the US government

[DiMarxist]

At this point I think that, the world should concern themselves less with who created Bitcoin as a technology but focus more on the impact of Bitcoin to the world. I feel that we should have gone pass this stage because, Bitcoin as a technology has come to stay so why still give attention to how it originated instead of positioning ourselves for it's potential benefits to us as a people.

Look what we should know is that, at different points in times different researchers has made effort, in a bid to creating an electronic payment system that will be Untraceable. Different researchers has different papars that they have published so we can't use this paper as evidence that the United States government created Bitcoin.

[vapourminer]

If Satoshi lost his keys, unless he is a complete asshole, he would tell the world the Bitcoin is lost forever and therefore the total number of Bitcoin can be officially reduced. As of now, Satoshi's bitcoin hangs over the market like a specter.

satoshi was all about "dont trust, verify." so who would believe him even if he insisted?

[nullius]

If Satoshi lost his keys, unless he is a complete asshole, he would tell the world the Bitcoin is lost forever and therefore the total number of Bitcoin can be officially reduced. As of now, Satoshi's bitcoin hangs over the market like a specter.

satoshi was all about "dont trust, verify." so who would believe him even if he insisted?

Gavin Andresen, but only with fake verification.


So...  Let’s all talk about how OP legiteum misattributed the [Law, Sabett, and Solinas, 1996] paper to another person, lied to cover up that lie, and has spun from that a fantastic Satoshi conspiracy theory.

Cross-reference to Reputation: legiteum (u=3597964) and Haypenny.net

I never said that Okamoto wrote the paper, I said he was referenced in the paper, which he was.

[...] Of course, after that falsehood about the OP (all one has to do is actually read the OP to see it's a falsehood for chrissakes),

https://web.archive.org/web/20261025042804/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5597690.0

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).

HOW TO MAKE A MINT: THE CRYPTOGRAPHY OF ANONYMOUS ELECTRONIC CASH

Laurie Law, Susan Sabett, Jerry Solinas

National Security Agency Office of Information Security Research and Technology

Cryptology Division

18 June 1996

[legiteum]

If Satoshi lost his keys, unless he is a complete asshole, he would tell the world the Bitcoin is lost forever and therefore the total number of Bitcoin can be officially reduced. As of now, Satoshi's bitcoin hangs over the market like a specter.

satoshi was all about "dont trust, verify." so who would believe him even if he insisted?

Good point. The response would be for the core team to simply invalidate the UTXOs in the Patoshi pattern--which in this particular circumstance (i.e. Satoshi saying this is okay)--then I think it would be done.

Remember that we're talking about something Satoshi would have done before he stopped posting here...

[BlackHatCoiner]

Good point. The response would be for the core team to simply invalidate the UTXOs in the Patoshi pattern--which in this particular circumstance (i.e. Satoshi saying this is okay)--then I think it would be done.

You do understand the Patoshi pattern is just one theory a random person posted on his blog one day, right? In fact there are disagreements on which blocks exactly are Patoshi's. It is a completely statistical fingerprint, and we have absolutely no evidence this belongs to Satoshi. There is just a pattern that appears on some blocks, but it could very well mean that some other blocks (that are mined by someone else) fall into this set, purely from coincidence. (IIRC, some coins from Patoshi pattern have been spent.)

[nullius]

vapourminer, your casual observation of a Bitcoin 101 elementary lesson somehow evoked new levels of bullshit.  You wanna deal with this time sink? 

If Satoshi lost his keys, unless he is a complete asshole, he would tell the world the Bitcoin is lost forever and therefore the total number of Bitcoin can be officially reduced. As of now, Satoshi's bitcoin hangs over the market like a specter.

satoshi was all about "dont trust, verify." so who would believe him even if he insisted?

Good point. The response would be for the core team to simply invalidate the UTXOs in the Patoshi pattern--which in this particular circumstance (i.e. Satoshi saying this is okay)--then I think it would be done.

Remember that we're talking about something Satoshi would have done before he stopped posting here...

Facts not in evidence.

⚠︎ Cross-reference to Reputation: legiteum (u=3597964) and Haypenny.net

[legiteum]

Good point. The response would be for the core team to simply invalidate the UTXOs in the Patoshi pattern--which in this particular circumstance (i.e. Satoshi saying this is okay)--then I think it would be done.

You do understand the Patoshi pattern is just one theory a random person posted on his blog one day, right? In fact there are disagreements on which blocks exactly are Patoshi's. It is a completely statistical fingerprint, and we have absolutely no evidence this belongs to Satoshi. There is just a pattern that appears on some blocks, but it could very well mean that some other blocks (that are mined by someone else) fall into this set, purely from coincidence. (IIRC, some coins from Patoshi pattern have been spent.)

Yeah, it actually just confused things for me to bring up the Patoshi pattern since we're talking about a time when Satoshi was actually actively here and posting.

What we were really talking about above is Satoshi telling everybody, using his bitcointalk account, that he lost his keys and that the core team should go ahead and invalidate the UXTOs in the next distro (and miners should accept this because he said so).

Of course a simple statement from Satoshi would also do the trick. While that wouldn't be absolute assurance (as noted above), but would give everybody a "99% assurance" that Satoshi's bitcoin would never be spent. (And if they were spent then Satoshi could be prosecuted for fraud [and moving this much Bitcoin around couldn't be done, practically speaking, anonymously).

Anyhow, it's getting pretty theoretical in here.

Besides, the US government most likely controls Satoshi's keys, and his Bitcoin could be dumped into the market at any time per an act of Congress.

I suspect investors have this risk priced in already...

[nullius]

Besides, the US government most likely controls Satoshi's keys, and his Bitcoin could be dumped into the market at any time per an act of Congress.

I suspect investors have this risk priced in already...

Check post history.  Chock full of spectacular investment advice.

⚠︎ Cross-reference to Reputation: legiteum (u=3597964) and Haypenny.net

[BlackHatCoiner]

⚠︎ Cross-reference to Reputation: legiteum (u=3597964) and Haypenny.net

No! Do not ruin the clown show. This guy has been wasting his time trying to pump his project up for like three years already, and there's nothing that feels better than bullying no-coiners and seeing them trying to come up with moronic coping for why they didn't get involved into Bitcoin sooner in their lives.

Don't ruin it. Satoshi is definitely the CIA, and is waiting for no-good reason for 18+ years to dump them on the market, because apparently it makes sense now (?). The CIA is also operated by just ordinary people with ordinary government jobs, and the Federal Reserve was not founded by and for the interest of the banking cartel, but for the good of the people!

[legiteum]

The CIA is also operated by just ordinary people with ordinary government jobs, and the Federal Reserve was not founded by and for the interest of the banking cartel, but for the good of the people!

Exactly! And the US government is a single hive mind wherein all two million of its workers all operate on a particular view of Bitcoin's effect on the US government that only Illuminati followers share.   

And workers at the CIA have never ever EVER done anything in contradiction to the stated policies of the United States or gone outside of the chain of command! . (<-- That's my favorite!)

And the construction of Bitcoin would have been a major undertaking of the US government on the scale of placing a man on the moon. We're talking tens of thousands of workers and billions of dollars over the course of decade or more. There's no way Congress would have approved such a thing (especially since they are all controlled by a secret cabal of jews who secretly control the world's financial markets). Any project (unless its ridiculously puny by US government standards, say under $10 million per year), is going to get on the radar of the bureaucracy, and clearly the creation of Bitcoin would be way bigger than that!

[Ambatman]

What we were really talking about above is Satoshi telling everybody, using his bitcointalk account, that he lost his keys and that the core team should go ahead and invalidate the UXTOs in the next distro (and miners should accept this because he said so).

Well not possible since Satoshi account was disabled following the breach few years ago
Where some accounts passwords were compromise.

but would give everybody a "99% assurance" that Satoshi's bitcoin would never be spent.

That's harsh
Assuming majority of people don't use their brain.
Don't trust verify isn't there for show neither is satoshi above it.

the US government most likely controls Satoshi's keys, and his Bitcoin could be dumped into the market at any time per an act of Congress.

Yeah I have thought same too
The same way they created planet earth and control it through plants.

[legiteum]

What we were really talking about above is Satoshi telling everybody, using his bitcointalk account, that he lost his keys and that the core team should go ahead and invalidate the UXTOs in the next distro (and miners should accept this because he said so).

Well not possible since Satoshi account was disabled following the breach few years ago

We weren't talking about now, we were talking about him telling everybody this before he left the scene back in 2011. (And yeah, we're way way WAY out on a tangent here! ).

[electronicash]

Quoting fixed:

“Not your keys, not your coins.”  So, don’t use CEX.  I don’t.

yeah those who used hardwallets are still exposed still. it doesn't matter if you have the keys or not.

This is misinformation.  It does matter if you have the keys.  Also, it is not only “hardwallets”:  In any wallet where you control your own private keys, you control your own bitcoins with zero government ability to interfere.

and hardwallet developers are also being pressured by governments. they are about to be considered brokers which they are mandated to also collect KYC.

This is bullshit from start to finish.  Also, again, I am not only talking about “hardwallets”.

I’m a programmer.  I can write my own Bitcoin wallet from scratch.  Nobody will make me KYC myself.

You have no idea how Bitcoin works (nor even how to make quotes in a forum post)...

Name:	electronicash
Posts:	11779
Activity:	3402
Merit:	1058
Position:	Legendary
Date Registered:	November 08, 2015, 02:26:35 AM
Website:	5c4f452fbccb937b20421b243c5df9b0
Bitcoin address:	bc1qnj4zm8saxzljguzhhyzu6736hcg7q4wl23r8n3

...which is kind of weird for an 11-year-old account.

@eddie13, do you suppose perhaps that we’re about to have an argument about account sales?  What do you think?

don't take it too personal.

we are just talking here. have you not read the news about hardware wallets being treated as brokers as a bill in congress?

didn't they just want to give crypto exchanges a license to be a bank?

[nullius]

have you not read the news about hardware wallets being treated as brokers as a bill in congress?

Link, please?  I haven’t heard of such a thing, and forum searches and web searches find nothing directly relevant (but do find that the U.S. state of Kentucky wanted to mandate a hardware wallet backdoor, wtf).  I did find this, with which I (mostly) agree:

nothing is for free really. when the crypto president came, it was all celebration. only the cautious suspects this is a facade but seem fine after all the president pull the price up to 126k. people started registering and trusting companies asking KYC and submitting documents online.

those who doesn't understand nor care will not ever get out of the trap. and government can do more damage to them than they realize. one by one countries today are blocking crypto exchanges because their governments now prefers to make its citizen use the local exchanges than the international exchanges. this shows they are seeking more data locally because the government can enforce law on local exchanges.

but not when you are in p2p. as long as the platform can be trusted and no kyc.

From that, it looks like you understand better than I’d inferred.  If so, perhaps I may apologize for being so sharp with you.  But if so, why do you argue with me when I said:

its to monitor the finance of the people. as of now, they can freeze your Bitcoin through the CEX by suspending your account.

“Not your keys, not your coins.”  So, don’t use CEX.  I don’t.

Against that, to bring up any proposed hardware wallet regulations sounds like the informal fallacy of “moving the goalposts”.  Bitcoin is not dependent on hardware wallets produced by centralized companies.  (I myself don’t use hardware wallets—and if I did, I’d build my own with non-Bitcoin-specific hardware.)


legiteum versus “your keys”

Apropos this thread, my searches about hardware wallets somehow led me by happenstance to stumble upon this:

Self-custody is a niche product in the same way that people using a personal home safe is to hold large amounts of physical cash. Sure, some people like to keep their life savings physically within a few feet of them, but 99% of people just use a bank etc.

But I completely disagree. Self-custody is not a niche product and I dont think that most holders nowadays use a broker to hold their bitcoins. [...]

With self-custody, you are the only one who has control over your funds. This is the basic idea behind the entire Bitcoin and blockchain technology. Not a niche product.

Whether it's a niche product or not doesn't depend on what you want or what Satoshi designed Bitcoin to do originally, it depends on the actual market numbers as of right now. I think there's strong evidence that most Bitcoin, in terms of volume, is held by professionals, not individuals. And of course there's the ETF.

Most people view Bitcoin as a simple investment, not a political cause.

LOL.

⚠︎ Cross-reference to Reputation: legiteum (u=3597964) and Haypenny.net

No! Do not ruin the clown show.

You’re right.  legiteum is a barrel of laughs.

nully is too serious.  nully needs to have more fun.  nully needs to ignore the fact that after a few years of smooth-talking this forum, legiteum is only 8 merits away from Sr. Member rank—which is meaningful to, and only to clueless newbies who, by no great coincidence, are vulnerable to authoritative-sounding persuasion.

nully needs to learn to be amused—and then to say later, “I told you so!”

the US government most likely controls Satoshi's keys, and his Bitcoin could be dumped into the market at any time per an act of Congress.

Yeah I have thought same too
The same way they created planet earth and control it through plants.

Cool theory.  But how do they make sure the plants don’t accidentally walk off the edge?  Ambatman, learn from notbatman:  You need to bring evidence.

You guys are fucking retards.

⚠︎ Cross-reference to Reputation: legiteum (u=3597964) and Haypenny.net

[legiteum]

[...]
don't take it too personal.
[...]

I find it fascinating that, while I've brought up many topics here on bitcointalk, and many of them have been controversial, it was this subject that caused somebody to absolutely lose their shit to the point where they launched a multi-day flooding campaign in order to "attack" my handle here.

Makes ya wonder... 

[BlackHatCoiner]

I find it fascinating that, while I've brought up many topics here on bitcointalk, and many of them have been controversial

Your topics aren't controversial at all. Neither of them. You're just another guy who believes paper money is real, politics is not a theater, Bitcoin is defined by whoever is in office, Trump & Elon control the globe, red meat causes heart diseases & cancer, people buy bitcoin just to gamble, deflation is bad, central banking is better than free enterprise banking, shitcoins will flip Bitcoin, Proof-of-Work is "slow technology".

You're literally the average denier of reality, lol.

[nullius]

[...]
don't take it too personal.
[...]

I find it fascinating that, while I've brought up many topics here on bitcointalk, and many of them have been controversial, it was this subject that caused somebody to absolutely lose their shit to the point where they launched a multi-day flooding campaign in order to "attack" my handle here.

Makes ya wonder... 

This is a bog standard conspiracy theorist diversion.  When people “lose their shit” over moon landing hoax theorists, anti-vaxxers, and Sandy Hook “crisis actor” allegations, a stereotypical response is, “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire; why do people oppose my theory?  Makes ya wonder...  ”

Protip:  You flat-out lied in OP.  Some of us dislike liars.

⚠︎ Cross-reference to Reputation: legiteum (u=3597964) and Haypenny.net