satoshin@gmx.com is compromised

[marcus_of_augustus]

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2eff0b/bitcoin_swift_and_the_brics/

What you guys think..... "snagain"

S.N. again perhaps ... nice clean macro (geopolitical) level game theoretic argument basis too.

Use a comparatively small sovereign outlay to elevate BTC pricing, in a short time, to a level sufficient such that the bitcoin network can compete with the SWIFT network, and hence neutralise the threat posed to BRICS countries by the USA monopoly of international payments

In a Mexican standoff, sometimes it is enough to merely point out the new, improved gun on the table to get the shooting started.

[traincarswreck]

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2eff0b/bitcoin_swift_and_the_brics/

What you guys think..... "snagain"

S.N. again perhaps.

That is a VERY interesting post

  The cliffs are that 250 million could be used to take bitcoin to a level where it could be used by a coalition of countries as a payment system that would combat the US's ability to wage economic war on the world through the "SWIFT" telecommunications network.  This person is calmly pointing out that this could effectively be done in an instant.  And finishes by suggesting that even a few whales could make it happen.

I'm using intuition: I don't think this should be taken as lightly as it was written.  They have explained something about global finance I have been searching for since knowing about ideal money/bitcoin.

I could be wrong it is too soon to tell, but from a quick skim, this has much of the MO and style of satoshi.  Perhaps we have all inherited his style from excessive study but their are a ton of szabo and satoshi key words in that writting.  Who signs something like that SN.  It's not just a punk...that reddit post is significant and informative.

But it also has the exact same presentation as Nash letter to the NSA.  That reddit post is a brag almost, if its correct, that person seems to KNOW its correct.

Its a game theoretical solution.

The person is calmly suggesting, after first doing the math (and including 30 trillion I could never realize existed), that a giant shift in the economics of the world could be achieved over night with a VERY insignificant amount of money, and in one single blow take a giant amount of power over those that are control the global economy.

They didn't ask if its correct, they said:

So I wonder who will be first to move.

This person is seeing and describing a war that most people cannot fathom exists, and just spelled out creation of the atom bomb that could put a stop to it.

[traincarswreck]

S.N. again perhaps ... nice clean macro (geopolitical) level game theoretic argument basis too.

Then its true, i'm not the only one that noticed that...

[jabo38]

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-satoshi-nakamoto-email-hacker-says-hes-negotiating-with-the-bitcoin-founder

Very interesting article. 

[jabo38]

^Nick actually changed the date and post dated that BitGold article to make it look like it was posted in 2008 a couple of months after the white paper. The url still says 2005 as you can see in the link you posted. This is also confirmed in emails from Hal Finney.

To me, that's not very good evidence. Why would he post-date it solely to throw people off if you can see the real date in the URL?

He explains why he post dates it in another blog.  He basically makes the "Bitgold part 2" blog in December of 2008 and feels like it needs part 1 next to it so that they can be read together.  He goes on to explain about miners, miners having to solve problems, and stamping.  The blog is called Bit gold markets.  http://unenumerated.blogspot.kr/2008_12_01_archive.html

This post is a month after the white paper was released.  One might assume Nick read the white paper and maybe updated this blog to reflect the ideas.  More likely in my opinion, Nick wrote the Bitcoin white paper under the "Nakamoto" alias and released it to see what others would think, but it wasn't gaining enough traction. So he then wrote about it in more detail on his blog which was getting a lot more hits and attention.  At the time it seemed okay because he didn't really know how big this deal would become.  

Also, Nick is qouted as having aliases at the time, and it is quite possible that the name "Nick Szabo" is an alias itself.    

Seems like to me he came up with the idea in 2005, started coding in 2007, and released it in late 2008. 

[itod]

So what would be the impact of satoshi being revealed?
I understand there could be personal reprocussions for the man himself, and that there is a great human interest story here, but bitcoin will not be affected.

Bitcoin could be affected a lot. With anonymous author it has a certain aura, purity, like some larger than human creature created it. If it's replaced with some flash & blood human being one can stick some dirt on the author, and on the bitcoin, which would make some people very happy. Every imperfection, god forbid some bad thing from his past could be connected to the bitcoin.

[traincarswreck]

So what would be the impact of satoshi being revealed?
I understand there could be personal reprocussions for the man himself, and that there is a great human interest story here, but bitcoin will not be affected.

Bitcoin could be affected a lot. With anonymous author it has a certain aura, purity, like some larger than human creature created it. If it's replaced with some flash & blood human being one can stick some dirt on the author, and on the bitcoin, which would make some people very happy. Every imperfection, god forbid some bad thing from his past could be connected to the bitcoin.

Except if it were John Nash.  The discovery would instantly solidify the works in academia, and people already have a great affinity for this man.  And it becomes a story in which he walked into society and suggested we could live in a way free from our own control, we confined outcast-ed and essentially tortured him, and he rose up anyways and enacted his "prediction". Isn't it so much better than some "anonymous" person that no one knows could be some random hacker?

[jackjack]

So what would be the impact of satoshi being revealed?
I understand there could be personal reprocussions for the man himself, and that there is a great human interest story here, but bitcoin will not be affected.

Bitcoin could be affected a lot. With anonymous author it has a certain aura, purity, like some larger than human creature created it. If it's replaced with some flash & blood human being one can stick some dirt on the author, and on the bitcoin, which would make some people very happy. Every imperfection, god forbid some bad thing from his past could be connected to the bitcoin.

Except if it were John Nash.  The discovery would instantly solidify the works in academia, and people already have a great affinity for this man.  And it becomes a story in which he walked into society and suggested we could live in a way free from our own control, we confined outcast-ed and essentially tortured him, and he rose up anyways and enacted his "prediction". Isn't it so much better than some "anonymous" person that no one knows could be some random hacker?

Would you let your money be handled by someone with schizophrenia?
Trust sane specialists.
Trust MasterCard.

[itod]

So what would be the impact of satoshi being revealed?
I understand there could be personal reprocussions for the man himself, and that there is a great human interest story here, but bitcoin will not be affected.

Bitcoin could be affected a lot. With anonymous author it has a certain aura, purity, like some larger than human creature created it. If it's replaced with some flash & blood human being one can stick some dirt on the author, and on the bitcoin, which would make some people very happy. Every imperfection, god forbid some bad thing from his past could be connected to the bitcoin.

Except if it were John Nash.  The discovery would instantly solidify the works in academia, and people already have a great affinity for this man.  And it becomes a story in which he walked into society and suggested we could live in a way free from our own control, we confined outcast-ed and essentially tortured him, and he rose up anyways and enacted his "prediction". Isn't it so much better than some "anonymous" person that no one knows could be some random hacker?

I don't agree. Dirt can be thrown in the face in so many ways. If there is no public face you can not throw anything on it. Rest assured that Satoshi is not some random hacker, the knowledge needed to code everything is mind blowing. I've read on the #bitcoin-wizards IRC logs that some of the core developers claim even Satoshi doesn't understand every aspect of the bitcoin to the single detail, it's that complex.

[jabo38]

So what would be the impact of satoshi being revealed?
I understand there could be personal reprocussions for the man himself, and that there is a great human interest story here, but bitcoin will not be affected.

Bitcoin could be affected a lot. With anonymous author it has a certain aura, purity, like some larger than human creature created it. If it's replaced with some flash & blood human being one can stick some dirt on the author, and on the bitcoin, which would make some people very happy. Every imperfection, god forbid some bad thing from his past could be connected to the bitcoin.

Except if it were John Nash.  The discovery would instantly solidify the works in academia, and people already have a great affinity for this man.  And it becomes a story in which he walked into society and suggested we could live in a way free from our own control, we confined outcast-ed and essentially tortured him, and he rose up anyways and enacted his "prediction". Isn't it so much better than some "anonymous" person that no one knows could be some random hacker?

Would you let your money be handled by someone with schizophrenia?
Trust sane specialists.
Trust MasterCard.

If it is Nash, that is definitely one of the better scenarios for bitcoin.

[turvarya]

i agree somebody had SUPERB economics knowledge + superb coding language + superb.. computers/electronics one.
id say it had to be one guy because if there were few - we would already know who satoshi is + the project wouldnt actually be that flawless. peopel fight have different opinions even when they have same plan [im just releasing a coin, im feeling that on my own back].

also the main rule is - the only way for person to keep a secret is to be the only person that knows it.

lol, that again
SN was not a superb coder. Gavin stated that more than once. Recently I heard this podcast http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/mmm-s02e12-penultimatum, there was a description from Hal Finney(may he rest in peace) about the first days of the bitcoin client and how poorly written it was.
From what I gathered together, SN was a genius on the theoretical site, but not that much on the practical.

[jackjack]

So what would be the impact of satoshi being revealed?
I understand there could be personal reprocussions for the man himself, and that there is a great human interest story here, but bitcoin will not be affected.

Bitcoin could be affected a lot. With anonymous author it has a certain aura, purity, like some larger than human creature created it. If it's replaced with some flash & blood human being one can stick some dirt on the author, and on the bitcoin, which would make some people very happy. Every imperfection, god forbid some bad thing from his past could be connected to the bitcoin.

Except if it were John Nash.  The discovery would instantly solidify the works in academia, and people already have a great affinity for this man.  And it becomes a story in which he walked into society and suggested we could live in a way free from our own control, we confined outcast-ed and essentially tortured him, and he rose up anyways and enacted his "prediction". Isn't it so much better than some "anonymous" person that no one knows could be some random hacker?

Would you let your money be handled by someone with schizophrenia?
Trust sane specialists.
Trust MasterCard.

If it is Nash, that is definitely one of the better scenarios for bitcoin.

"They" would still find suspicious behaviors, criminal records, crazy pictures, death threats or whatever. Real or not.
The best scenario is him staying anonymous.

[greenlion]

Satoshi doesn't necessarily need to actually be anybody famous or prominent that's on the radar of any of the relevant academic disciplines.

There are a lot of intelligent people out there with backgrounds in technical areas such as engineering, the basic sciences, applied mathematics, etc. who are likely to have an understanding of coding on a non-professional level, and have the general aptitude to be able to understand enough about cryptography and the work of people like Szabo, Back, etc. on a hobbyist basis without professionally or academically appearing anywhere whatsoever in anything relevant to Bitcoin.

[justusranvier]

"They" would still find suspicious behaviors, criminal records, crazy pictures, death threats or whatever. Real or not.

Whoever Satoshi is, he's human with all the quirks and flaws that implies.

It means he has good days and bad days, good ideas and bad ones.

He wouldn't live up to the mythology that's grown around his identity over the last few years.

[OmegaStarScream]

Why Satoshi didn't connect to warn us then 

[deeplink]

Would you let your money be handled by someone with schizophrenia?

No I certainly prefer it to be handled by the political sociopaths at the ECB, FED, IMF, etc.

[jackjack]

"They" would still find suspicious behaviors, criminal records, crazy pictures, death threats or whatever. Real or not.

Whoever Satoshi is, he's human with all the quirks and flaws that implies.

It means he has good days and bad days, good ideas and bad ones.

He wouldn't live up to the mythology that's grown around his identity over the last few years.

The thing is that at least they can't target anybody

Would you let your money be handled by someone with schizophrenia?

No I certainly prefer it to be handled by the political sociopaths at the ECB, FED, IMF, etc.

It's obviously not my vision, but I think we will hear that kind of things

[NewLiberty]

So what would be the impact of satoshi being revealed?
I understand there could be personal reprocussions for the man himself, and that there is a great human interest story here, but bitcoin will not be affected. The world may be disappointed when we find out satoshi is a programmer and leads a life typical of one (he's boring)

If we take any lesson from all the other times, the result would be that Bitcoin would become personified and every foible and human flaw would be deconstructed.  
Each of these would be used to impute nefarious motivation and failings would be magnified.  The narrative would become the human interest story, the story of the chase, the pursuit, the capture, and all the merits of Bitcoin the work, would be brushed aside.

With the entire globe blanketed by fiat pumpty dumpter central banks, there aren't really safe places for him to stand.  Choosing anonymity was both very wise and supremely generous, it does more for Bitcoin than for Satoshi.

[NewLiberty]

not many people 10 or 20 years ago were talking as if there was a different option for "source" of money I would think.

Not many perhaps by percentage, but a lot more people than you are thinking about.  It was not rare.

[Gnarrrly]

It was clear this was a fraud since day 1.