satoshin@gmx.com is compromised

[slaveforanunnak1]

I've seen that picture before and again I ask

1.  Where does it come from?
2.  How do we know for sure that it's Nick Szabo?

I don't know. All I know is it was linked from this page: http://dave.liberty.me/2014/05/02/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto/ with this statement regarding it: "**edit – 6/7/2014 – a picture of Nick Szabo at a 1997 conference has since surfaced (via Adrian Chen)". Don't shoot the messenger  

with all my searching that is all the reference I could find.  Although I'm not too good at this kind of thing.  Funny to think about the power of the community in this regard, although not for uncovering szabo or satoshi, since the most powerful probably wouldn't do it.

It would be an incredible story if it were Nash or if he were a significant player.  

But that man in that picture looks like a BOSS!  Looks like he could dismantle a government with 10 lines of code.  It would also be quite interesting if he was Szabo, reminds me of an irl Bruce Banner.

It would be quite surprising to me, and I would be just as happy to know it were Szabo, some random dude no one otherwise knows in the general public sphere.  However I cannot comprehend the coincidences between Szabo, Satoshi, and Nash's works.   There are very few people in the history of man that have a such a wholistic view to produce such knowledge.  Szabo's blog seems like random posts about random subjects, but if you really read it wholistically and understand the different directions in points to, the person behind them has an extensive understanding of the history of man up until present day and future technologies and social systems.

I can't help but think the information presented and alluded to in the szabo blog would take a lifetime to accumulate.  

Szabo also backhandedly (not sure if correct word) solved many previously known but unsolved "problems" that really needed bitcoin to solidify them as proofs.  He sort of "metaphorically" slid in solutions without presenting them in an academic form.  And this is why I understand bitcoin to be a unifying solution, once the person had the concept of "bitcoin" all of a sudden they could privately run around "solving" all sorts of problems previously thought not solvable.  Law, programming, economics, cryptology, quantum physics, quantum computing, history, archeology, and who knows what else.  

My understanding is "someone" has pretty much won every academic award out there...

I seems really clear to me if someone has read the majority of Szabo's blog, it is a past/present/future account of everything that has to do with bitcoin and it was started in 1995.  

I don't understand why most people dismiss the Shinichi Mochizuki connection so easily?

1. He is Japanese
2. He speaks perfect English since he moved to the US at age five and managed to graduate from fucking Princeton with a PhD at age 23 or 25 or whatever it was!
3. He likes to just leave brilliant paper on the internet and does not like going through proper channels (his abc conjecture papers)
4. He is so fucking brilliant that he has created his own mathematical framework in order to explain something that can't be understood using the existing tools.
5. Almost all of his papers found on his site uses the term "we" (just like the bitcoin paper)   even though no one else really understand what the fuck he is talking about, but him !
6. The bulk of his work seem to revolve around.. you guess it, Elliptic curves!
7. He is not a computer programer, hence why the code was written fairly poorly. (but hey.. it worked!)


To me he seems like a prime candidate for Satoshi! To me, he seems so smart,  that it's like he thought of the Blockchain while taking a shit and decided to spend a bit of time getting it going before he went back to his real love which is Mathematics and number theory. If anyone knew that secp256r1 was compromised, it would be that dude!

[1715198653]

1715198653

[1715198653]

1715198653

[traincarswreck]

I don't understand why most people dismiss the Shinichi Mochizuki connection so easily?

1. He is Japanese
2. He speaks perfect English since he moved to the US at age five and managed to graduate from fucking Princeton with a PhD at age 23 or 25 or whatever it was!
3. He likes to just leave brilliant paper on the internet and does not like going through proper channels (his abc conjecture papers)
4. He is so fucking brilliant that he has created his own mathematical framework in order to explain something that can't be understood using the existing tools.
5. Almost all of his papers found on his site start with  "Abstract" and he uses the term "we" (just like the bitcoin paper)   even though no one else really understand what the fuck he is talking about, but him !
6. The bulk of his work seem to revolve around.. you guess it, Elliptic curves!
7. He is not a computer programer, hence why the code was written fairly poorly. (but hey.. it worked!)


To me he seems like a prime candidate for Satoshi! To me, he seems so smart,  that it's like he thought of the Blockchain while taking a shit and decided to spend a bit of time getting it going before he went back to his real love which is Mathematics and number theory. If anyone knew that secp256r1 was compromised, it would be that dude!

I've looked into them, not much on them but definitely seems real ha.  Interesting tho another student from princeton, and I think they attended at age 16 so possibly wouldn't have gone unnoticed to faculty.  I have zero concept of how big a university like that is though.  

However I don't think the math is the same style as the bitcoin pdf.  Bitcoin's solution is more of an elegant realization rather than a complex type of new math requiring years of verification.  It would be fun to have some technical people respond, but isn't bitcoin, simply put, a product of raising the security bar in relation to the level of attacker?  This is the whole equality that holds the structure together and creates this new technology isn't it?  Once you organize computing in such a "highly parallel fashion" and put a perfectly impenetrable security scheme the resulting changes are just a natural result.

This is the exact mechanism described in letters Nash sent to the NSA:

The significance of this general conjecture, assuming its truth, is easy to see. It means that it is quite feasible to design ciphers that are effectively unbreakable.

And then we might consider that he tried to ascertain there knowledge on the subject, but the NSA likely knew he was "sniffing" and so effectively it was just a brag:

Also we should try to keep track of the progress of foreign nations towards unbreakable types of ciphers.

They wrote back and told him they already knew these things.  I bet higher level peoples at NSA looked at each other and were like "He's good"

Watchin Ted Nelson's video naming Satoshi made me think he either knows he is wrong or hes not giving the full truth, I don't know if i am the only one with that feeling.  My limited understanding of project xanadu is (if we haven't already implemented some or all of it) we should or are heading towards the visionary idea.  So I would believe all are involved.  But I am inclined to believe that one could have conceived this idea 50 years ago.  Milton Friedman and Hayek both described a decentralized monetary system ran by computers.  Nash was pointed towards Hayek by a collegue at princeton, Szabo references and praises Hayek a ton.  Bitcoin is simply Austrian economics.

What's also interesting is that bitcoin.pdf was not so much the creation of bitcoin, but the "lighting" of a beacon that called all like minded peoples through anonymous chat group links on dai's website.  So since 2009 (and obviously well before) like minded people have been flocking to an anonymous conversation orchestrated by whomever is (or multiple people) Satoshi.  I wonder if we all agree then that most or all intelligence agencies were involved.  And so in an intelligence battle with (at that time) someone they hadn't identified yet were eventually incredibly interested in.  Keep in mind this was crucial to be secret but seemingly only until it took hold in society.

But it means that it is very possible "satoshi" or "szabo" was able to use "intelligence" as "assets" by using the internet in a sideways fashion. All of the confusion you see, is because its the only way around the barriers. And what's probably amazing is it was probably ALL perfectly LEGAL.  But its all incredibly interesting, I don't tend to enjoy "conspiracy" theories and stories, but for all I can understand this is all truth and reality

Think about what you would do if you have the bitcoin whitepaper in 2009, 2000, 1995, 1960, 1950 (obviously at this point only the rough concept would be presentable).  Think about how much people who don't understand bitcoin naturally dislike it.  How many people say its a scam and don't understand real money is a scam.  We didn't truly know this until "Satoshi" yet one man said 20 years ago:

"Keynesian" economists, have sold to the public a "quasi-doctrine" which teaches, in effect, that "less is more" or that (in other words) "bad money is better than good money".

Those words were gibberish to everyone back then but they ring perfectly clear now.  We now know about good money and bad money, and understand the importance of stable printing schedules and we are talking about what we expect out of "money"

You can't just walk into society and present bitcoin because they will chase you with torches and pitchforks.  We ALL had SEE bitcoin and use it WELL before we could ever talk about what it actually is.  And I hope we are interested in this conversation because what it is, is something far beyond a change in our financial system and something to bring wealth to the world.  There is so much more, I'm afraid I don't present it in an agreeable fashion though, but I also believe we are conditioned not to accept such drastic change.

[little tiger]

did he do or say anything bad or good  to damage your image?

[Kluge]

Doxxing seems excessive... he didn't actually hitman theymos. ETA: Idunno. Kid seems like kind of a dick, though. *shrug*

[traincarswreck]

Doxxing seems excessive... he didn't actually hitman theymos. ETA: Idunno. Kid seems like kind of a dick, though. *shrug*

There seems to be a great argument about moving towards a more ideal society.  Many believe we are too expect a slow 10-40 year technological shift towards bitcoin and things like ethereum, which will bring about a more fair and just society.  Some people are quite annoyed by the derailing of the topic of some hacker exposing satoshi but I don't mind taking attention away from such a negative subject. If we eventually as a society learn to respect all people's we should consider this person a failure we all share.  Furthermore since its not very believable Satoshi is in fact "bartering" with this person it seems its really the journalism that carried this so far and the journalist probably knew it anyways.

We should seek to have no bitcoin causalities.   Mt Gox is a great example of putting to much wealth and power in the grasp of peoples that cannot possibly resist their temptation.  Can we ourselves be assured we would not make excuses in the face of such temptations?

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/gibran/prophet/prophet.htm On Crime & Punishment

And when one of you falls down he falls for those behind him, a caution against the stumbling stone.
      Ay, and he falls for those ahead of him, who though faster and surer of foot, yet removed not the stumbling stone.

It's ALL our fault I think.

I'd suggest (I'm being partially silly) a "Satoshi proclamation", where as those that successfully exploit the system are rewarded with the bounty they exploit.  Since they ultimately serve to strengthen it.  Would this lead to more malicious attackers, or a more civilized bitcoin community? Bitcoins were a silly fun thing until they become something people would kill over, doesn't seem like thats what the creator intended.  

The satoshi proclamation probably isn't either, but I think maybe we could spend our energy better elsewhere.  And I really think that no one is really looking for satoshi in the frantic dorian nakamoto fashion.  It seems to me that it was all fake media and bitcoin media hype, which at the small expense of a man's privacy he was taken care of and rewarded, not planned, but used.  I tend to feel that there is not some frantic search for the creator but rather a collective need to realize what exactly has been "bestowed" unto our global society.  

[Und3rd0g]

The doxing of the kid is unfortunate.  Let's give the authorities an opportunity to investigate rather than post the dox on this troubled teenager and his family.

I am sure the whole Bitcoin idea was stolen from the Winklevoss twins!

[Kluge]

Doxxing seems excessive... he didn't actually hitman theymos. ETA: Idunno. Kid seems like kind of a dick, though. *shrug*

There seems to be a great argument about moving towards a more ideal society.  Many believe we are too expect a slow 10-40 year technological shift towards bitcoin and things like ethereum, which will bring about a more fair and just society.  Some people are quite annoyed by the derailing of the topic of some hacker exposing satoshi but I don't mind taking attention away from such a negative subject. If we eventually as a society learn to respect all people's we should consider this person a failure we all share.  Furthermore since its not very believe Satoshi is in fact "bartering" with this person it seems its really the journalism that carried this so far and the journalist probably knew it anyways.

We should seek to have no bitcoin causalities.   Mt Gox is a great example of putting to much wealth and power in the grasp of peoples that cannot possibly resist their temptation.  Can we ourselves be assured we would not make excuses in the face of such temptations?

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/gibran/prophet/prophet.htm On Crime & Punishment

And when one of you falls down he falls for those behind him, a caution against the stumbling stone.
      Ay, and he falls for those ahead of him, who though faster and surer of foot, yet removed not the stumbling stone.

It's ALL our fault I think.

I'd suggest (I'm being partially silly) a "Satoshi proclamation", where as those that successfully exploit the system are rewarded with the bounty they exploit.  Since they ultimately serve to strengthen it.  Would this lead to more malicious attackers, or a more civilized bitcoin community? Bitcoins were a silly fun thing until they become something people would kill over, doesn't seem like thats what the creator intended. 

The satoshi proclamation probably isn't either, but I think maybe we could spend our energy better elsewhere.  And I really think that no one is really looking for satoshi in the frantic dorian nakamoto fashion.  It seems to me that it was all fake media and bitcoin media hype, which at the small expense of a man's privacy he was taken care of an rewarded, not planned, but used.  It tend to feel that there is not some frantic search for the creator but rather a collective need to realize what exactly has been "bestowed" unto our global society. 

If you would take the position of preventative "un-failing," then would you suggest so-called blackhat attacks on MtGox before their misdeeds were exposed to be just, simply because wealth was concentrated? Or do you make a judgment on Karpeles & associates before attacking (or, ehh... defending)?

Seems a bit circular. You disrespect some entity now (who was maybe already disrespectful or at high risk of being disrespectful) so future people are more cautious and unable to be disrespected, but I'm not sure how that would make people more respectful -- they'd just be more limited in what they're able to do because people are more distrustful and focused on security. Who is supposed to disrespect those who disrespect the disrespectful? -Or is this more of an "aggression" argument -- it's not "aggression" to punch someone who punches someone else without convincing cause?

[traincarswreck]

If you would take the position of preventative "un-failing," then would you suggest so-called blackhat attacks on MtGox before their misdeeds were exposed to be just, simply because wealth was concentrated? Or do you make a judgment on Karpeles & associates before attacking (or, ehh... defending)?

Seems a bit circular. You disrespect some entity now (who was maybe already disrespectful or at high risk of being disrespectful) so future people are more cautious and unable to be disrespected, but I'm not sure how that would make people more respectful -- they'd just be more limited in what they're able to do because people are more distrustful and focused on security. Who is supposed to disrespect those who disrespect the disrespectful? -Or is this more of an "aggression" argument -- it's not "aggression" to punch someone who punches someone else without convincing cause?

I think I follow your question.

The people that become respectful are instantly the community that acts in a more forgiving manner.  We leave in a terrible constructed society, and these "defective" people are products of OUR society.  I don't completely disagree with the counter view, that people need to be punished in order to bring about a perfect society.  But sometimes I think we miss the obvious easier and quicker step of just acting "justly" to those who probably wouldn't have acted so maliciously if they had been fully accepted and taught good morals in the first place.

[Kluge]

If you would take the position of preventative "un-failing," then would you suggest so-called blackhat attacks on MtGox before their misdeeds were exposed to be just, simply because wealth was concentrated? Or do you make a judgment on Karpeles & associates before attacking (or, ehh... defending)?

Seems a bit circular. You disrespect some entity now (who was maybe already disrespectful or at high risk of being disrespectful) so future people are more cautious and unable to be disrespected, but I'm not sure how that would make people more respectful -- they'd just be more limited in what they're able to do because people are more distrustful and focused on security. Who is supposed to disrespect those who disrespect the disrespectful? -Or is this more of an "aggression" argument -- it's not "aggression" to punch someone who punches someone else without convincing cause?

I think I follow your question.

The people that become respectful are instantly the community that acts in a more forgiving manner.  We leave in a terrible constructed society, and these "defective" people are products of OUR society.  I don't completely disagree with the counter view, that people need to be punished in order to bring about a perfect society.  But sometimes I think we miss the obvious easier and quicker step of just acting "justly" to those who probably wouldn't have acted so maliciously if they had been fully accepted and taught good morals in the first place.

Ah. Okay - I misinterpreted what you said. I've got you, now. Thanks for managing to follow what I said, anyway.

[charlieSeen]

Question is... how does a kid who is in high school, get doxed and continue screaming about his accomplishments... hack Satoshi.. *sips coffee*

The "forgot your password" security question on Satoshi's gmx email is "what day are you born". With no lockout mechanism for brute force attempts, 36500 possible answers for anyone alive, and given a bot that can guess even 5% of the captchas shown, it's no surprise that it was compromised by anyone determined.

Unless there is a second factor authentication on the account..

I don't think there is on gmx accounts.

Either way the birthday question is what it is now. There is nothing to say that the hacker didn't chance the password question after he got into the account.

[traincarswreck]

Ah. Okay - I misinterpreted what you said. I've got you, now. Thanks for managing to follow what I said, anyway.

Nice, yes this is the society we are heading towards and we can "choose" to do it now or 40 years from now.  But it seems to me that if we have any experience or knowledge with bitcoin (and certainly many here have more than me) we can all agree the power of it is not "individual" wealth but rather "global" wealth for the whole of the planet.  The efficiency it brings breeds more of it for everyone.  If we follow the economic teachings of Adam smith, Hayek, Nash, and "Szabo" we can understand that bitcoin completes a higher level "kula ring", and so the power of it is that it bridges "economic" gaps.  

The wealth and power is in the cooperative change it brings to society.  We shouldn't get hung up on some punk hacker.  And we shouldn't get hung up on stolen wealth, it just becomes another severed economic route.  It's not "mine" but rather "ours".

Perhaps its easy to say because I didn't lose any, but I see that we have so much more to gain, if we can shed the old way of thinking about the "power" of gold or individual wealth.  Again mt gox seems like that the bitcoin elites used to their advantage for both public safety and publicity (any publicity is good right?).  And I do recall reading it was a "good guy" hacker by the anonymous name of "nanashi" that came in to start telling people in the mt. gox chat they have been compromised. Another coincidence perhaps...

[iTRADEbtc]

Doxxing seems excessive... he didn't actually hitman theymos. ETA: Idunno. Kid seems like kind of a dick, though. *shrug*

I think the kid, if it was in fact him that was behind the hack is pretty immature.

I agree, he didn't "hitman" theymos nor did he do any real damage, so there is no real reason to do anything to him.

[GrandmaJean]

^ kid did it. Found and Doxed. Greaterninga found hacker and put info out.
18 hour start to finish. Also had BCT member copy hackers ransom link and add his own address but got caught.

http://pastebin.de/125559

http://pastebin.ru/201cAY9S

But the question remains: did he get access to SN's real email account,
and did he discover his real identity? Is that known?

He got access to satoshin@gmx.com. I would think that satoshi did not have anything related to his identity on that email account.

[rapport]

Anyone know a picture of Wei Dai?

[Buge]

the ironic thing is that he posted this link along with "that's a little overboard" on his facebook http://nationalreport.net/15-year-old-swatted-domestic-terrorism/

he's got to be wondering "shit, if this kid swatted someone and got 25 years, what the fuck will i get?"

also, i've been checking out profiles of his friends (they are hilariously like him.. skinny kids who listen to hip hop, watch southpark/jackass and wear baseball caps).

Did he take it down? I can't see it.

...

The "forgot your password" security question on Satoshi's gmx email is "what day are you born". With no lockout mechanism for brute force attempts, 36500 possible answers for anyone alive, and given a bot that can guess even 5% of the captchas shown, it's no surprise that it was compromised by anyone determined.

There is no information in the site's TOS or documentation about unused accounts expiring, so this is the likely mechanism.

...

Actually there is:

13.3. You agree that in the event that GMX determines, in its sole discretion, that you have not logged in for more than six months, GMX may without any liability to you, and in addition to any other remedies, erase such materials from GMX's Equipment without prior notice to you.

[traincarswreck]

Anyone know a picture of Wei Dai?

It might be just as interesting to look at "who" wei dai is.

bitcoin.pdf's first citation is wei dai which links to a very small homepage http://www.weidai.com/

We can look at the facts and they themselves seem like theory because they are quite `coincidental

Dai is certainly a screen name as the page links to (semi) anonomous discussion groups:

   My posts on Less Wrong, "a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality".

other places I used to hang out:

    cypherpunks
    extropians (my mirror of 1996-2003 extropians archive)
    SL4
    everything-list

But we can also understand, whether dai is satoshi or not, that this means that the bitcoin pdf perfectly served as a beacon to like minded peoples-without actually directly sending out an invitation these people were drawn to it.

Among other links that seem to serve to just give credibility to the citation, there are two examples of game theory:

   Why good memory could be bad for you: game theoretic analysis of a monopolist with memory.
    Why cleverness could be bad for you: a game where the smarter players lose.

This might be significant since game theory is generally based on a solution called "the nash equilibrium" and it also shows up in Szabo's work "shelling out" called the nash equilibrium but with no citation although there are 20-30 other citations throughout the paper.

There is also an interesting reference to black holes:

If it's true that the only efficient way to cool material down to near
absolute zero is with black holes, we should expect all sufficiently
advanced civilizations to live near them. However this prediction
may be difficult to test since they would have virtually no radiation
signatures.

This person "dai" is suggesting that we might have life not observable to us within our vicinity, and if this person is satoshi, I would suggest that this is not a whim, but an allusion to an understand through technological advance they can foresee.

As I understand it this seemingly random reference actually has many extended explanations on other community sites under certain screen names.  It might be that those that could forsee the coming of bitcoin as a technology would notice the push for dealing with intense heating costs.

http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt

b-money is the cited piece, it seems that it could be that `bitcoin`was broken into parts and presented to the public in a way it could not fully put them together until they were crystalized,  in this way spread between 4 or so "identities" with at least one of them not very related to bitcoin at all, would make it near impossible to put together before things really took off (which they have).

[Bill Bisco]

I've seen that picture before and again I ask

1.  Where does it come from?
2.  How do we know for sure that it's Nick Szabo?

I don't know. All I know is it was linked from this page: http://dave.liberty.me/2014/05/02/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto/ with this statement regarding it: "**edit – 6/7/2014 – a picture of Nick Szabo at a 1997 conference has since surfaced (via Adrian Chen)". Don't shoot the messenger 

with all my searching that is all the reference I could find.  Although I'm not too good at this kind of thing.  Funny to think about the power of the community in this regard, although not for uncovering szabo or satoshi, since the most powerful probably wouldn't do it.

It would be an incredible story if it were Nash or if he were a significant player. 

But that man in that picture looks like a BOSS!  Looks like he could dismantle a government with 10 lines of code.  It would also be quite interesting if he was Szabo, reminds me of an irl Bruce Banner.

It would be quite surprising to me, and I would be just as happy to know it were Szabo, some random dude no one otherwise knows in the general public sphere.  However I cannot comprehend the coincidences between Szabo, Satoshi, and Nash's works.   There are very few people in the history of man that have a such a wholistic view to produce such knowledge.  Szabo's blog seems like random posts about random subjects, but if you really read it wholistically and understand the different directions in points to, the person behind them has an extensive understanding of the history of man up until present day and future technologies and social systems.

I can't help but think the information presented and alluded to in the szabo blog would take a lifetime to accumulate. 

Szabo also backhandedly (not sure if correct word) solved many previously known but unsolved "problems" that really needed bitcoin to solidify them as proofs.  He sort of "metaphorically" slid in solutions without presenting them in an academic form.  And this is why I understand bitcoin to be a unifying solution, once the person had the concept of "bitcoin" all of a sudden they could privately run around "solving" all sorts of problems previously thought not solvable.  Law, programming, economics, cryptology, quantum physics, quantum computing, history, archeology, and who knows what else. 

My understanding is "someone" has pretty much won every academic award out there...

I seems really clear to me if someone has read the majority of Szabo's blog, it is a past/present/future account of everything that has to do with bitcoin and it was started in 1995. 

Yeup and I contacted Adrian Chen and he has never responded to the questions of:

1. How he obtained the picture
2.  How he knoes the pic is from a 1997 lecture
3.  What lecture is being given
4. How do we know that specific person is Nick Szabo

Seriously,  we need some more investigation into this.

[williamj2543]

I think that we should just leave satoshi alone. He doesn't need to be unmasked

[Maurizio]

I think that we should just leave satoshi alone. He doesn't need to be unmasked

Bravo

[rickraw]

Mind blown - http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt