13 ms·

HBO documentary suggests Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto is Peter Todd

62 points by pat2man 2y ago

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
gnabgib 2y ago
Discussions (49 points, 5 days ago, 48 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41732985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41732985 (52 points, 4 days ago, 62 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41749352 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41749352
sigmar 2y ago
Peter Todd is downplaying the accusation on Twitter by retweeting and discussing this tweet: https://x.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1843788557925921052 https://x.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1843788557925921052 To my reading, the bitcointalk reply only makes sense as a snarky comment (ie Todd isn't Satoshi). and the fact it was 1.5 hours after the Satoshi post also suggests it wasn't the same person making a quick correction.
- runjake 2y ago
  If it was Satoshi making a correction, he could’ve just edited his original post because bitcointalk allowed for post edits even back then.
  - nullc 2y ago
    Also, at the time petertodd's account was named 'retep' and didn't have any immediately obvious connection to his identity. If there had been a slipup he could have just abandoned the account and certainly not later had it renamed to his legal name!
    - alchemist1e9 2y ago
      That’s actually a really good point if true. In my mind all anyone has to do to prove they aren’t Satoshi is prove what they were doing on 2009-01-10 and had no possibility of using an IP from somewhere around Van Nuys California. https://whoissatoshi.wordpress.com/2016/02/20/satoshi-in-california/ https://whoissatoshi.wordpress.com/2016/02/20/satoshi-in-cal...
      - alchemist1e9 2y ago
        It turns out one can view this as actually incriminating not exculpatory as petertodd and nullc are promoting. https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/bluesky/2001-03/msg00063.html https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/bluesky/2001-03/msg00063... Hal Finney and others interacted with Peter Todd as “retep” for more than a decade before the bitcointalk account and post. They would have immediately recognized him.
    - petertodd 2y ago
      Excellent point!
    - amai 2y ago
      'retep' for peter backwards? That is kind a lame.
      - nullc 2y ago
        hey now, it took me most of a decade to figure out that retep was peter backwards! but also, it's not particularly identifying as there are a lot of peter's in and around bitcoin.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
IncreasePosts 2y ago
I'm honestly surprised that all of the alleged satoshis haven't been kid napped by armed gangs trying to get the billions locked up in the first mined blocks.
- nomilk 2y ago
  Ditto. Even if the probability is 1/100, assuming they have at least $1bn net worth, that's a $10m expected payoff.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    Expected value doesn't really work for rare events. A 1% chance of $50M and a 1% chance of $2B are barely different to a person.
    - im3w1l 2y ago
      For a person it doesn't matter. But the context here is gangs, and for organizations it could make a difference. $2B can be split many-ways and still have significant money for everyone.
- adastra22 2y ago
  How do you know they haven't?
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    "Alleged Satoshis" are generally public, almost by definition. We would notice if they disappeared. We would also notice if the well-known Satoshi-associated wallets had any activity, which would be an unavoidable signal if any such kidnapping succeeded in finding the real one. Not everything is a deep mystery.
    - adastra22 2y ago
      A lot of old timers in this space have been subject to kidnapping and ransom attacks, some real and some merely threatened, as well as more mundane phone porting and SWAT'ing. These don't make the news. Then there are the other crypto people who have met grisly ends: Bob Lee and Li Chiming, as well as the suspicious deaths of John Forsyth, Tiantian Kullander, Vyacheslav Taran, and Park Mo. Not candidates for Satoshi, but it goes to show that "outing" potential Satoshis is not a safe thing to do.
mastazi 2y ago
I was thinking about possible motives for Satoshi to be out of the limelight and now I have a question for those of us who have significant security/signint/encryption experience: Given the info we have, what are the chances that state actors, such as intelligence agencies, are aware beyond doubt of Satoshi Nakamoto's true identity?
- The28thDuck 2y ago
  What kind of edge does such intel give? Their work (bitcoin) spawned thousands and thousands of people who have taken the foundational technology and made many improvements to it. It seems like trying to figure out who they are incentivizes hobbyists to figure it out rather than state sponsors.
  - mastazi 2y ago
    Yeah good point, they probably don't care.
sciencesama 2y ago
Its super easy to prove !! Show the sha
adastra22 2y ago
Absolutely insane. (1) It's not Peter Todd. Anyone who knows Peter Todd and/or was around in the early days, can clearly tell Satoshi and Peter are not the same person. (2) No good comes from speculation over the identity of Satoshi. When someone living is named, their life becomes absolute hell and the security risk imposed on them is very real. When someone dead is proposed, that hellish experience is passed to their family and heirs. (3) It's not Peter Todd.
- Mistletoe 2y ago
  >HBO’s theory relies on a message from Peter Todd claiming to be the ‘world’s leading expert on how to sacrifice your bitcoins’ I just can't imagine the real Satoshi saying something this stupid.
  - adastra22 2y ago
    Also they didn't bother to ask Peter the story behind this? There is a story regarding an entirely different pot of coins.
    - r721 2y ago
      From CNN story: >In a statement to CNN, Todd denied that the post was supposed to be written by Satoshi, calling it “a coincidence.” >“I was simply pointing out a minor correction to what Satoshi wrote,” Todd told CNN in a statement. “Note that the bitcointalk forum has the ability to edit posts, so it doesn’t even make that much sense that Satoshi would follow up with another message rather than just editing the original to correct the mistake.” https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/08/investing/satoshi-nakamoto-identity/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/08/investing/satoshi-nakamot...
      - adastra22 2y ago
        I was talking about the "expert on how to sacrifice your bitcoins" thing.
ryandvm 2y ago
The obvious answer is Satoshi Nakamoto is functionally dead. His wallet would be worth around $70 billion dollars today and he hasn't touched it in over a decade. Either he is A) dead, B) lost the wallet and wishes he were dead, or C) has achieved such spiritual enlightenment that has no interest in the personal or societal impact that $70 billion dollars could have. He is not coming back folks, and even if we figure out who he was, that $70 billion is gone.
- astrange 2y ago
  > lost the wallet and wishes he were dead At least it's a good tax write-off. (Well… $3000 a year for life in the US iirc.)
  - shepherdjerred 2y ago
    What’s stopping me from claiming I had this (or any other) wallet and getting the write off?
    - astrange 2y ago
      Audits, same as anything else.
      - shepherdjerred 2y ago
        What I mean is how would I prove that I once possessed the key to a wallet?
        lurn_mor 2y ago
        Why, are you taking notes on how to perform a criminal conspiracy?
- fny 2y ago
  The $70 billion is not gone. He would need to sell his Bitcoin to others to amass $70 billion. Whatever impact $70B dollars could have is already happening: the difference is that it’s not his impact.
astrange 2y ago
I still think it's Paul Le Roux, on the basis that this would be the funniest outcome.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- paulgb 2y ago
  It would also be pretty funny if it was actually Craig Wright but he lost his private key.
  - nullc 2y ago
    only possible if he had a never disclosed frontal lobotomy. the guy is a technical idiot.
yboris 2y ago
Headline: ‘I am not Satoshi Nakamoto’: Subject of HBO documentary denies he invented bitcoin https://lite.cnn.com/2024/10/08/investing/satoshi-nakamoto-identity/index.html https://lite.cnn.com/2024/10/08/investing/satoshi-nakamoto-i...
- startupsfail 2y ago
  Is there anything positive at all in the Crypto industry? CO2 emissions, fraud, attacking democracy is on the negative side. What’s on the positive? Why is it still legal? It feels like Crypto at the systemic level is an open vulnerability not an asset. It’d be nice to have this vulnerability to get fixed.
  - mlyle 2y ago
    Simplified movement of value across international borders, avoiding excessive exchange fees. Mind you, I don't think in its present form it is worth it (POW is intrinsically power-intensive; a lot of things about the banking system that seem like bugs are actually features; etc). But I think A) value stored in tokens, and B) decentralized ledgers and nonrepudiation are things that are may want to have as core financial services in the future.
  - throw161024 2y ago
    For me, it's the ability to send money to or receive money from anyone, anywhere, without the government's or bank approval.
  - cypherpunks01 2y ago
    I think the most positive benefits are people using it to protect themselves in countries under authoritarian rule and/or economic collapse. Low-fee remittances are a lesser but still very positive use-case. There are genuine large benefits to people in these situations. See also: Why I'm less than infinitely hostile to crypto https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/why-im-less-than-infinitely-hostile https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/why-im-less-than-infinitely...
  - tucnak 2y ago
ErikAugust 2y ago
A mockumentary on crypto would be much more interesting at this point.
- ethbr1 2y ago
  Cryptocracy
- esafak 2y ago
  This coin goes up to 11.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
yieldcrv 2y ago
Oof polymarket betters rekt
par 2y ago
Pretty sure the guy who goes around saying "I am Satoshi" is not, in fact, Satoshi.
- hprotagonist 2y ago
  I said to him, ‘What disguise will hide me from the world? What can I find more respectable than bishops and majors?’ He looked at me with his large but indecipherable face. ‘You want a safe disguise, do you? You want a dress which will guarantee you harmless; a dress in which no one would ever look for a bomb?’ I nodded. He suddenly lifted his lion’s voice. ‘Why, then, dress up as an anarchist, you fool!’ he roared so that the room shook. ‘Nobody will ever expect you to do anything dangerous then.’ And he turned his broad back on me without another word. I took his advice, and have never regretted it. I preached blood and murder to those women day and night, and—by God!—they would let me wheel their perambulators.”
dools 2y ago
I reckon it's James Simon (now deceased) from Rennaisance, heading up a team.
jeanlucas 2y ago
I hope this do not hurt Peter.
whimsicalism 2y ago
imo it's pretty obvious that he was Hal Finney, potentially with collaborators, and no amount of scripted emails, etc. disproves it for me
- WalterBright 2y ago
  My money is on Hal, too. He was in the dorm room next to mine. I've never met an actual genius before or since. Bitcoin is just the thing he would invent. He was interviewed when he could no longer speak. He was asked if he was Satoshi. He just smiled. It's just the kind of joke Hal would play.
  - nullc 2y ago
    Hey, it would be a kindness to Hal's family to not promote this theory. They've been subject to threats and extortion over it. To the extent that someone could argue that there is some public interest angle, I think that's only arguable in the case of certainty. Speculation is a dime a dozen. Even if there is a public interest angle in identifying Satoshi, I don't think that extends to idle speculation. Hal was an amazing guy and I feel privileged for the bit of interaction I had with him, refraining from a fun game of public speculation is a small cost. I'm sure if he's cryonically revived in the far future he'll appreciate the consideration. :) In general speculation like this risks creating a lot of harm for the targets, especially since brutal cryptocurrency related kidnapping and torture appears to be on the rise. It's unclear what bitcoin Satoshi might have had access too, but people who aren't Satoshi certainly don't have access to it... and the cost of security against criminal gangs hoping for a billion dollar windfall are unreasonable large even for a wealthy person and are unimaginable for someone of more ordinary means.
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      I didn't think of that. I just thought that he deserved credit. It never occurred to me this might bring trouble to his family. I'll take your advice. It's also nice to know another of Hal's friends.
- 2y ago
broknbottle 2y ago
Nah it's not Peter Todd. It's actually Red Herring. https://scoobydoo.fandom.com/wiki/Red_Herring https://scoobydoo.fandom.com/wiki/Red_Herring
neilv 2y ago
If an HBO show suggested that I was the Bitcoin creator, I would be wealthy... from owning HBO, after my team of lawyers (who accepted the suit on contingency) was done with them. Then there's Google editorializing a headline at the top of search hits: > Top stories > Bitcoin creator's identity revealed in new HBO documentary Yet none of the headlines they show makes that claim: > POLITICO.eu - Bitcoin creator is Peter Todd, HBO film says > Bloomberg - HBO Documentary Suggests Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Is Peter Todd > The New York Times - A New Bitcoin Documentary Reopens the Search for Satoshi Nakamoto > The Crypto Times - Peter Todd Denies He is Satoshi Nakamoto as claimed by HBO... > The New Yorker - Has Bitcoin's Elusive Creator Finally Been Unmasked? In general (not just in this case), there should also soon be some huge lawsuits for robo-slander, robo-libel, robo-defamation, robo-reckless-endangerment, etc. Government is getting a lot more tech-savvy, and "everything's legal, if you claim an AI/algorithm/computer/dog did it" isn't flying anymore.
jawiggins 2y ago
Just finished watching the doc on HBO. The key piece of evidence seems to be this comment from Peter Todd: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2181.msg28739#msg28739 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2181.msg28739#msg287... It stands out to the producers because: 1) Peter makes it just after joining the form, so he is unlikely to have detailed knowledge of bitcoin. 2) He seems to be finishing Satoshi's thought, as though he returned to an earlier post forgetting which account he was signed into. 3) The post happens just before Satoshi disappears and Peter leaves for a few years. The doc also features many scenes with Peter and Adam Back where their eyes kind of shift around and they laugh awkwardly when asked about certain things. Since the doc it seems that Peter has taken to twitter to say he was mislead about the purpose of the interviews. I've always kind of thought that Satoshi was probably one person who built it all in isolation, and I never played much attention to theories that Satoshi was actually multiple people. After watching the doc it does seem like Adam and Peter know a good deal more than they are letting on, even if they aren't behind it all, it seems likely that they have some idea who it was.
- nullc 2y ago
  The forum is/was public, so there is no reason to create an account until you're planning to post something or send a private message. Why is this my first post on bitcoin-dev: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2011-July/000083.html https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2011... ? I'm sure you've heard the adage, "It is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt of it." But online when you're silent you're not thought of as a fool-- you just don't even exist at all. Many of us whose contribution to world is primarily our knowledge and insight often prefer to self-educate to an advanced level on a subject before commenting on it at all. My first bitcoin-dev post wasn't actually my first public comments on Bitcoin, but I'd read the entire bitcoin code base before ever saying anything about it... It's not surprising to see Bitcoin developer people emerge from nowhere somewhat well informed, even back then (though to be fair fairly few people really understood txn internals). I've known Peter and Adam for a very long time. Both have resting smirkface. Petertodd grins like he ate the canary any time he says something even the slightest bit clever. Adam too, now that I say it, though the clever threshold is a bit higher. That combined with talented editing can probably make either of them look guilty of whatever you want, or at least anything that they enjoy talking about.
jawiggins 2y ago
Just finished watching the doc on HBO. The key piece of evidence seems to be this comment from Peter Todd: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2181.msg28739#msg287 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2181.msg28739#msg287... It stands out to the producers because: 1) Peter makes it just after joining the form, so he is unlikely to have detailed knowledge of bitcoin. 2) He seems to be finishing Satoshi's thought, as though he returned to an earlier post forgetting which account he was signed into. 3) The post happens just before Satoshi disappears and Peter leaves for a few years. The doc also features many scenes with Peter and Adam Back where their eyes kind of shift around and they laugh awkwardly when asked about certain things. Since the doc it seems that Peter has taken to twitter to say he was mislead about the purpose of the interviews. I've always kind of thought that Satoshi was probably one person who built it all in isolation, and I never played much attention to theories that Satoshi was actually multiple people. After watching the doc it does seem like Adam and Peter know a good deal more than they are letting on, even if it wasn't them specifically, it seems likely that they have some idea who it was.
- petertodd 2y ago
  > Peter makes it just after joining the form, so he is unlikely to have detailed knowledge of bitcoin. The fact that the inputs, outputs, and fee of a transaction must add up isn't exactly "detailed knowledge" :) I don't think it took me all that long to figure that out when I first tried understanding how Bitcoin worked. And frankly, the core of Bitcoin really isn't all that complex! You can have a very good understanding of all the parts after just a few days carefully studying it. Which is exactly what I did: I sat down with the Bitcoin Core codebase and figured out what all the code did. Especially at the time, it really wasn't that big of a codebase. > After watching the doc it does seem like Adam and Peter know a good deal more than they are letting on, even if it wasn't them specifically, it seems likely that they have some idea who it was. I can't speak for Adam. But I have no idea who Satoshi is. If anything, I think it could be literally hundreds or even thousands of potential people. Bitcoin is something so simple that you didn't need to be a super-genius to come up with it. You just needed to understand some relatively high-level, basic, cryptography and have a brilliant flash of inspiration. Satoshi was a very competent C++ programmer (it's a myth that his code was bad). But there's lots and lots of very competent C++ programmers out there.
kyledrake 2y ago
I spent quite a bit of time with Peter Todd in the very early Bitcoin days. I really enjoyed our conversations back then, I have no idea what he is up to now. My gut feeling is that he is probably not Satoshi Nakamoto. Adam Back is a far more likely suspect, particularly for his British english, which Satoshi wrote in.
- bbunix 2y ago
  Canadian English isn't that far off, especially in a lot of the spelling...
- philsquared_ 2y ago
  +1 to Adam Back. Who is more likely to build ontop of some obscure code base called "Hash Cash"? Some random people that trolled the same forums or the original creator of it? Imo this "secret" is known by many people as I have seen so many censorship and misdirection campaigns throughout the years if people mention Adam being the one. Him being Satoshi also makes bitcoin core seem more legitimate. He can guide his creation without being formally known as satoshi. It is obvious. Especially if you have ever been a solo dev for an extended period of time (like adam was) There is a ton more evidence but seems like no one really wants to dig into Adam. Adam literally stopped updating hash cash and a year later Bitcoin is released... check his website on archive.org. Its ok. I like that there is still conversation as to who it is. It gives protection to him since there likely wont be anything concrete (if hopefully he was slick enough)
  - kyledrake 2y ago
    Indeed there's really nothing positive to be had from coming out as Satoshi at this point regardless of who it is. Criminals and governments will be falling over each other to try to get their take.
    - kyledrake 2y ago
      One addendum here: If I was personally Satoshi, I would come back and try to convince everyone to switch to proof of stake instead of proof of work and then subsequently disappear again. If you need a non-politicized reason why (something other than climate change), just go with my joke one of solving one of the outcomes of Fermi's Paradox (distant civilizations don't send signals because all energy is used to mine cryptocurrencies).
trog 2y ago
It veers quickly into conspiracy theory territory but I have long thought a nation state is a likely candidate for creator. You can kinda pick from several, all equally free from and evidence, and come up with narratives around why they might have done such a thing.
philsquared_ 2y ago
It is Adam Back. Who is more likely to build ontop of some obscure code base called "Hash Cash"? Some random people that trolled the same forums or the original creator of it? Imo this "secret" is known by many people as I have seen so many censorship and misdirection campaigns throughout the years if people mention Adam being the one. Him being Satoshi also makes bitcoin core seem more legitimate. He can guide his creation without being formally known as satoshi. It is obvious. Especially if you have ever been a solo dev for an extended period of time (like adam was) There is a ton more evidence but seems like no one really wants to dig into Adam. Adam literally stopped updating hash cash and a year later Bitcoin is released... check his website on archive.org. Its ok. I like that there is still conversation as to who it is. It gives protection to him since there likely wont be anything concrete (if hopefully he was slick enough)
- olalonde 2y ago
  Clearly not him. He initially dismissed Bitcoin and jumped on the bandwagon when it started making headlines due to its fast rising price. Plus, Adam Back seeks fame, he would happily claim to be Satoshi if it was really him. He was even criticized early on for seeming to take too much credit for Bitcoin[0]. My guess is that it's someone who was not particularly well-known prior to Bitcoin. [0] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225463.0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225463.0
olalonde 2y ago
For more serious research on who Satoshi might be: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.10257 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.10257
- Bengalilol 2y ago
  Wow. That was an interesting read. The approach was uplifting. Thanks for sharing!
xOSBERTx 2y ago
I've been in crypto since March of 2013 and Satoshi is not known. The so called DOC was a money grab.
xOSBERTx 2y ago
Satoshi Nakamoto is defined as: Any DEV that participated in Bitcoins 1st year of development. Leave it at that.
commafun 2y ago
why people are finding satoshi ?
commafun 2y ago
Why people want to find satoshi ?
- Bengalilol 2y ago
  Because he wrote everyone he wasn't important and asked everyone to focus on the main objective which was his creation. Seriously: IDK I am all puzzled. Looks like a start of a religion (^^).
amai 2y ago
"The Father: Adam Back The Son: Peter Todd The Holy Ghost: Greg Maxwell" https://x.com/CullenHoback/status/1843884010013102314 https://x.com/CullenHoback/status/1843884010013102314
- midmagico 2y ago
  man that guy is an idiot
joeyagreco 2y ago
> Todd reportedly denied he was the bitcoin creator: "Of course I'm not Satoshi," he said.
- kyledrake 2y ago
  The genesis block has a message from a relatively obscure British newspaper in it (The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks). Not something I would expect a frontier Canadian in their 20s to be sourcing from. That and various other evidence (coding style, british-english spelling) has suggested to me for a long time that it's an older gentleman from the UK, likely with an academic background in economics or related distributed systems. I don't know either way, but it seems borderline libel to suggest without much more substantial evidence that it's Peter Todd.
  - nullc 2y ago
    The Times is not an obscure paper, but if you'd like some fodder: the headline Satoshi used is from the print edition rather than the online edition which was different. That said, Satoshi was clearly extremely diligent in concealing their identity, and so they may well have purposefully decided to use a headline that they wouldn't have had ordinary access too-- when someone is trying to conceal themselves it creates an environment which is hostile to logical reasoning. Any point which could point one direction might instead point the opposite or in a random direction.
    - costco 2y ago
      Satoshi connected to IRC from a residential IP address in Los Angeles in 2009. So there was a point in time where all it would have taken was a subpoena to find him. Now those records probably don't exist. Unless that was a Tor exit or one of those socks5 proxy type services. I remember there was an archive of the Tor consensus files going back really far that I can no longer find, so it'd be possible to check if it was.
      - nullc 2y ago
seanbruce 2y ago
[flagged]
marliesheitmann 2y ago
[dead]

62 points by pat2man 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Discussions (49 points, 5 days ago, 48 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41732985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41732985 (52 points, 4 days ago, 62 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41749352 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41749352

sigmar 2y ago

Peter Todd is downplaying the accusation on Twitter by retweeting and discussing this tweet: https://x.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1843788557925921052 https://x.com/BitMEXResearch/status/1843788557925921052 To my reading, the bitcointalk reply only makes sense as a snarky comment (ie Todd isn't Satoshi). and the fact it was 1.5 hours after the Satoshi post also suggests it wasn't the same person making a quick correction.

runjake 2y ago
If it was Satoshi making a correction, he could’ve just edited his original post because bitcointalk allowed for post edits even back then.
- nullc 2y ago
  Also, at the time petertodd's account was named 'retep' and didn't have any immediately obvious connection to his identity. If there had been a slipup he could have just abandoned the account and certainly not later had it renamed to his legal name!
  - alchemist1e9 2y ago
    That’s actually a really good point if true. In my mind all anyone has to do to prove they aren’t Satoshi is prove what they were doing on 2009-01-10 and had no possibility of using an IP from somewhere around Van Nuys California. https://whoissatoshi.wordpress.com/2016/02/20/satoshi-in-california/ https://whoissatoshi.wordpress.com/2016/02/20/satoshi-in-cal...
    - alchemist1e9 2y ago
      It turns out one can view this as actually incriminating not exculpatory as petertodd and nullc are promoting. https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/bluesky/2001-03/msg00063.html https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/bluesky/2001-03/msg00063... Hal Finney and others interacted with Peter Todd as “retep” for more than a decade before the bitcointalk account and post. They would have immediately recognized him.
  - petertodd 2y ago
    Excellent point!
  - amai 2y ago
    'retep' for peter backwards? That is kind a lame.
    - nullc 2y ago
      hey now, it took me most of a decade to figure out that retep was peter backwards! but also, it's not particularly identifying as there are a lot of peter's in and around bitcoin.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

IncreasePosts 2y ago

I'm honestly surprised that all of the alleged satoshis haven't been kid napped by armed gangs trying to get the billions locked up in the first mined blocks.

nomilk 2y ago
Ditto. Even if the probability is 1/100, assuming they have at least $1bn net worth, that's a $10m expected payoff.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  Expected value doesn't really work for rare events. A 1% chance of $50M and a 1% chance of $2B are barely different to a person.
  - im3w1l 2y ago
    For a person it doesn't matter. But the context here is gangs, and for organizations it could make a difference. $2B can be split many-ways and still have significant money for everyone.
adastra22 2y ago
How do you know they haven't?
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  "Alleged Satoshis" are generally public, almost by definition. We would notice if they disappeared. We would also notice if the well-known Satoshi-associated wallets had any activity, which would be an unavoidable signal if any such kidnapping succeeded in finding the real one. Not everything is a deep mystery.
  - adastra22 2y ago
    A lot of old timers in this space have been subject to kidnapping and ransom attacks, some real and some merely threatened, as well as more mundane phone porting and SWAT'ing. These don't make the news. Then there are the other crypto people who have met grisly ends: Bob Lee and Li Chiming, as well as the suspicious deaths of John Forsyth, Tiantian Kullander, Vyacheslav Taran, and Park Mo. Not candidates for Satoshi, but it goes to show that "outing" potential Satoshis is not a safe thing to do.

mastazi 2y ago

I was thinking about possible motives for Satoshi to be out of the limelight and now I have a question for those of us who have significant security/signint/encryption experience: Given the info we have, what are the chances that state actors, such as intelligence agencies, are aware beyond doubt of Satoshi Nakamoto's true identity?

The28thDuck 2y ago
What kind of edge does such intel give? Their work (bitcoin) spawned thousands and thousands of people who have taken the foundational technology and made many improvements to it. It seems like trying to figure out who they are incentivizes hobbyists to figure it out rather than state sponsors.
- mastazi 2y ago
  Yeah good point, they probably don't care.

sciencesama 2y ago

Its super easy to prove !! Show the sha

adastra22 2y ago

Absolutely insane. (1) It's not Peter Todd. Anyone who knows Peter Todd and/or was around in the early days, can clearly tell Satoshi and Peter are not the same person. (2) No good comes from speculation over the identity of Satoshi. When someone living is named, their life becomes absolute hell and the security risk imposed on them is very real. When someone dead is proposed, that hellish experience is passed to their family and heirs. (3) It's not Peter Todd.

Mistletoe 2y ago
>HBO’s theory relies on a message from Peter Todd claiming to be the ‘world’s leading expert on how to sacrifice your bitcoins’ I just can't imagine the real Satoshi saying something this stupid.
- adastra22 2y ago
  Also they didn't bother to ask Peter the story behind this? There is a story regarding an entirely different pot of coins.
  - r721 2y ago
    From CNN story: >In a statement to CNN, Todd denied that the post was supposed to be written by Satoshi, calling it “a coincidence.” >“I was simply pointing out a minor correction to what Satoshi wrote,” Todd told CNN in a statement. “Note that the bitcointalk forum has the ability to edit posts, so it doesn’t even make that much sense that Satoshi would follow up with another message rather than just editing the original to correct the mistake.” https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/08/investing/satoshi-nakamoto-identity/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/08/investing/satoshi-nakamot...
    - adastra22 2y ago
      I was talking about the "expert on how to sacrifice your bitcoins" thing.

ryandvm 2y ago

The obvious answer is Satoshi Nakamoto is functionally dead. His wallet would be worth around $70 billion dollars today and he hasn't touched it in over a decade. Either he is A) dead, B) lost the wallet and wishes he were dead, or C) has achieved such spiritual enlightenment that has no interest in the personal or societal impact that $70 billion dollars could have. He is not coming back folks, and even if we figure out who he was, that $70 billion is gone.

astrange 2y ago
> lost the wallet and wishes he were dead At least it's a good tax write-off. (Well… $3000 a year for life in the US iirc.)
- shepherdjerred 2y ago
  What’s stopping me from claiming I had this (or any other) wallet and getting the write off?
  - astrange 2y ago
    Audits, same as anything else.
    - shepherdjerred 2y ago
      What I mean is how would I prove that I once possessed the key to a wallet?
      - lurn_mor 2y ago
        Why, are you taking notes on how to perform a criminal conspiracy?
fny 2y ago
The $70 billion is not gone. He would need to sell his Bitcoin to others to amass $70 billion. Whatever impact $70B dollars could have is already happening: the difference is that it’s not his impact.

astrange 2y ago

I still think it's Paul Le Roux, on the basis that this would be the funniest outcome.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
paulgb 2y ago
It would also be pretty funny if it was actually Craig Wright but he lost his private key.
- nullc 2y ago
  only possible if he had a never disclosed frontal lobotomy. the guy is a technical idiot.

yboris 2y ago

Headline: ‘I am not Satoshi Nakamoto’: Subject of HBO documentary denies he invented bitcoin https://lite.cnn.com/2024/10/08/investing/satoshi-nakamoto-identity/index.html https://lite.cnn.com/2024/10/08/investing/satoshi-nakamoto-i...

startupsfail 2y ago
Is there anything positive at all in the Crypto industry? CO2 emissions, fraud, attacking democracy is on the negative side. What’s on the positive? Why is it still legal? It feels like Crypto at the systemic level is an open vulnerability not an asset. It’d be nice to have this vulnerability to get fixed.
- mlyle 2y ago
  Simplified movement of value across international borders, avoiding excessive exchange fees. Mind you, I don't think in its present form it is worth it (POW is intrinsically power-intensive; a lot of things about the banking system that seem like bugs are actually features; etc). But I think A) value stored in tokens, and B) decentralized ledgers and nonrepudiation are things that are may want to have as core financial services in the future.
- throw161024 2y ago
  For me, it's the ability to send money to or receive money from anyone, anywhere, without the government's or bank approval.
- cypherpunks01 2y ago
  I think the most positive benefits are people using it to protect themselves in countries under authoritarian rule and/or economic collapse. Low-fee remittances are a lesser but still very positive use-case. There are genuine large benefits to people in these situations. See also: Why I'm less than infinitely hostile to crypto https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/why-im-less-than-infinitely-hostile https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/why-im-less-than-infinitely...
- tucnak 2y ago

ErikAugust 2y ago

A mockumentary on crypto would be much more interesting at this point.

ethbr1 2y ago
Cryptocracy
esafak 2y ago
This coin goes up to 11.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

yieldcrv 2y ago

Oof polymarket betters rekt

par 2y ago

Pretty sure the guy who goes around saying "I am Satoshi" is not, in fact, Satoshi.

hprotagonist 2y ago
I said to him, ‘What disguise will hide me from the world? What can I find more respectable than bishops and majors?’ He looked at me with his large but indecipherable face. ‘You want a safe disguise, do you? You want a dress which will guarantee you harmless; a dress in which no one would ever look for a bomb?’ I nodded. He suddenly lifted his lion’s voice. ‘Why, then, dress up as an anarchist, you fool!’ he roared so that the room shook. ‘Nobody will ever expect you to do anything dangerous then.’ And he turned his broad back on me without another word. I took his advice, and have never regretted it. I preached blood and murder to those women day and night, and—by God!—they would let me wheel their perambulators.”

dools 2y ago

I reckon it's James Simon (now deceased) from Rennaisance, heading up a team.

jeanlucas 2y ago

I hope this do not hurt Peter.

whimsicalism 2y ago

imo it's pretty obvious that he was Hal Finney, potentially with collaborators, and no amount of scripted emails, etc. disproves it for me

WalterBright 2y ago
My money is on Hal, too. He was in the dorm room next to mine. I've never met an actual genius before or since. Bitcoin is just the thing he would invent. He was interviewed when he could no longer speak. He was asked if he was Satoshi. He just smiled. It's just the kind of joke Hal would play.
- nullc 2y ago
  Hey, it would be a kindness to Hal's family to not promote this theory. They've been subject to threats and extortion over it. To the extent that someone could argue that there is some public interest angle, I think that's only arguable in the case of certainty. Speculation is a dime a dozen. Even if there is a public interest angle in identifying Satoshi, I don't think that extends to idle speculation. Hal was an amazing guy and I feel privileged for the bit of interaction I had with him, refraining from a fun game of public speculation is a small cost. I'm sure if he's cryonically revived in the far future he'll appreciate the consideration. :) In general speculation like this risks creating a lot of harm for the targets, especially since brutal cryptocurrency related kidnapping and torture appears to be on the rise. It's unclear what bitcoin Satoshi might have had access too, but people who aren't Satoshi certainly don't have access to it... and the cost of security against criminal gangs hoping for a billion dollar windfall are unreasonable large even for a wealthy person and are unimaginable for someone of more ordinary means.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    I didn't think of that. I just thought that he deserved credit. It never occurred to me this might bring trouble to his family. I'll take your advice. It's also nice to know another of Hal's friends.
2y ago

broknbottle 2y ago

Nah it's not Peter Todd. It's actually Red Herring. https://scoobydoo.fandom.com/wiki/Red_Herring https://scoobydoo.fandom.com/wiki/Red_Herring

neilv 2y ago

If an HBO show suggested that I was the Bitcoin creator, I would be wealthy... from owning HBO, after my team of lawyers (who accepted the suit on contingency) was done with them. Then there's Google editorializing a headline at the top of search hits: > Top stories > Bitcoin creator's identity revealed in new HBO documentary Yet none of the headlines they show makes that claim: > POLITICO.eu - Bitcoin creator is Peter Todd, HBO film says > Bloomberg - HBO Documentary Suggests Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Is Peter Todd > The New York Times - A New Bitcoin Documentary Reopens the Search for Satoshi Nakamoto > The Crypto Times - Peter Todd Denies He is Satoshi Nakamoto as claimed by HBO... > The New Yorker - Has Bitcoin's Elusive Creator Finally Been Unmasked? In general (not just in this case), there should also soon be some huge lawsuits for robo-slander, robo-libel, robo-defamation, robo-reckless-endangerment, etc. Government is getting a lot more tech-savvy, and "everything's legal, if you claim an AI/algorithm/computer/dog did it" isn't flying anymore.

jawiggins 2y ago

Just finished watching the doc on HBO. The key piece of evidence seems to be this comment from Peter Todd: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2181.msg28739#msg28739 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2181.msg28739#msg287... It stands out to the producers because: 1) Peter makes it just after joining the form, so he is unlikely to have detailed knowledge of bitcoin. 2) He seems to be finishing Satoshi's thought, as though he returned to an earlier post forgetting which account he was signed into. 3) The post happens just before Satoshi disappears and Peter leaves for a few years. The doc also features many scenes with Peter and Adam Back where their eyes kind of shift around and they laugh awkwardly when asked about certain things. Since the doc it seems that Peter has taken to twitter to say he was mislead about the purpose of the interviews. I've always kind of thought that Satoshi was probably one person who built it all in isolation, and I never played much attention to theories that Satoshi was actually multiple people. After watching the doc it does seem like Adam and Peter know a good deal more than they are letting on, even if they aren't behind it all, it seems likely that they have some idea who it was.

nullc 2y ago
The forum is/was public, so there is no reason to create an account until you're planning to post something or send a private message. Why is this my first post on bitcoin-dev: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2011-July/000083.html https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2011... ? I'm sure you've heard the adage, "It is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt of it." But online when you're silent you're not thought of as a fool-- you just don't even exist at all. Many of us whose contribution to world is primarily our knowledge and insight often prefer to self-educate to an advanced level on a subject before commenting on it at all. My first bitcoin-dev post wasn't actually my first public comments on Bitcoin, but I'd read the entire bitcoin code base before ever saying anything about it... It's not surprising to see Bitcoin developer people emerge from nowhere somewhat well informed, even back then (though to be fair fairly few people really understood txn internals). I've known Peter and Adam for a very long time. Both have resting smirkface. Petertodd grins like he ate the canary any time he says something even the slightest bit clever. Adam too, now that I say it, though the clever threshold is a bit higher. That combined with talented editing can probably make either of them look guilty of whatever you want, or at least anything that they enjoy talking about.

jawiggins 2y ago

Just finished watching the doc on HBO. The key piece of evidence seems to be this comment from Peter Todd: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2181.msg28739#msg287 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2181.msg28739#msg287... It stands out to the producers because: 1) Peter makes it just after joining the form, so he is unlikely to have detailed knowledge of bitcoin. 2) He seems to be finishing Satoshi's thought, as though he returned to an earlier post forgetting which account he was signed into. 3) The post happens just before Satoshi disappears and Peter leaves for a few years. The doc also features many scenes with Peter and Adam Back where their eyes kind of shift around and they laugh awkwardly when asked about certain things. Since the doc it seems that Peter has taken to twitter to say he was mislead about the purpose of the interviews. I've always kind of thought that Satoshi was probably one person who built it all in isolation, and I never played much attention to theories that Satoshi was actually multiple people. After watching the doc it does seem like Adam and Peter know a good deal more than they are letting on, even if it wasn't them specifically, it seems likely that they have some idea who it was.

petertodd 2y ago
> Peter makes it just after joining the form, so he is unlikely to have detailed knowledge of bitcoin. The fact that the inputs, outputs, and fee of a transaction must add up isn't exactly "detailed knowledge" :) I don't think it took me all that long to figure that out when I first tried understanding how Bitcoin worked. And frankly, the core of Bitcoin really isn't all that complex! You can have a very good understanding of all the parts after just a few days carefully studying it. Which is exactly what I did: I sat down with the Bitcoin Core codebase and figured out what all the code did. Especially at the time, it really wasn't that big of a codebase. > After watching the doc it does seem like Adam and Peter know a good deal more than they are letting on, even if it wasn't them specifically, it seems likely that they have some idea who it was. I can't speak for Adam. But I have no idea who Satoshi is. If anything, I think it could be literally hundreds or even thousands of potential people. Bitcoin is something so simple that you didn't need to be a super-genius to come up with it. You just needed to understand some relatively high-level, basic, cryptography and have a brilliant flash of inspiration. Satoshi was a very competent C++ programmer (it's a myth that his code was bad). But there's lots and lots of very competent C++ programmers out there.

kyledrake 2y ago

I spent quite a bit of time with Peter Todd in the very early Bitcoin days. I really enjoyed our conversations back then, I have no idea what he is up to now. My gut feeling is that he is probably not Satoshi Nakamoto. Adam Back is a far more likely suspect, particularly for his British english, which Satoshi wrote in.

bbunix 2y ago
Canadian English isn't that far off, especially in a lot of the spelling...
philsquared_ 2y ago
+1 to Adam Back. Who is more likely to build ontop of some obscure code base called "Hash Cash"? Some random people that trolled the same forums or the original creator of it? Imo this "secret" is known by many people as I have seen so many censorship and misdirection campaigns throughout the years if people mention Adam being the one. Him being Satoshi also makes bitcoin core seem more legitimate. He can guide his creation without being formally known as satoshi. It is obvious. Especially if you have ever been a solo dev for an extended period of time (like adam was) There is a ton more evidence but seems like no one really wants to dig into Adam. Adam literally stopped updating hash cash and a year later Bitcoin is released... check his website on archive.org. Its ok. I like that there is still conversation as to who it is. It gives protection to him since there likely wont be anything concrete (if hopefully he was slick enough)
- kyledrake 2y ago
  Indeed there's really nothing positive to be had from coming out as Satoshi at this point regardless of who it is. Criminals and governments will be falling over each other to try to get their take.
  - kyledrake 2y ago
    One addendum here: If I was personally Satoshi, I would come back and try to convince everyone to switch to proof of stake instead of proof of work and then subsequently disappear again. If you need a non-politicized reason why (something other than climate change), just go with my joke one of solving one of the outcomes of Fermi's Paradox (distant civilizations don't send signals because all energy is used to mine cryptocurrencies).

trog 2y ago

It veers quickly into conspiracy theory territory but I have long thought a nation state is a likely candidate for creator. You can kinda pick from several, all equally free from and evidence, and come up with narratives around why they might have done such a thing.

philsquared_ 2y ago

It is Adam Back. Who is more likely to build ontop of some obscure code base called "Hash Cash"? Some random people that trolled the same forums or the original creator of it? Imo this "secret" is known by many people as I have seen so many censorship and misdirection campaigns throughout the years if people mention Adam being the one. Him being Satoshi also makes bitcoin core seem more legitimate. He can guide his creation without being formally known as satoshi. It is obvious. Especially if you have ever been a solo dev for an extended period of time (like adam was) There is a ton more evidence but seems like no one really wants to dig into Adam. Adam literally stopped updating hash cash and a year later Bitcoin is released... check his website on archive.org. Its ok. I like that there is still conversation as to who it is. It gives protection to him since there likely wont be anything concrete (if hopefully he was slick enough)

olalonde 2y ago
Clearly not him. He initially dismissed Bitcoin and jumped on the bandwagon when it started making headlines due to its fast rising price. Plus, Adam Back seeks fame, he would happily claim to be Satoshi if it was really him. He was even criticized early on for seeming to take too much credit for Bitcoin[0]. My guess is that it's someone who was not particularly well-known prior to Bitcoin. [0] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225463.0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225463.0

olalonde 2y ago

For more serious research on who Satoshi might be: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.10257 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.10257

Bengalilol 2y ago
Wow. That was an interesting read. The approach was uplifting. Thanks for sharing!

xOSBERTx 2y ago

I've been in crypto since March of 2013 and Satoshi is not known. The so called DOC was a money grab.

xOSBERTx 2y ago

Satoshi Nakamoto is defined as: Any DEV that participated in Bitcoins 1st year of development. Leave it at that.

commafun 2y ago

why people are finding satoshi ?

commafun 2y ago

Why people want to find satoshi ?

Bengalilol 2y ago
Because he wrote everyone he wasn't important and asked everyone to focus on the main objective which was his creation. Seriously: IDK I am all puzzled. Looks like a start of a religion (^^).

amai 2y ago

"The Father: Adam Back The Son: Peter Todd The Holy Ghost: Greg Maxwell" https://x.com/CullenHoback/status/1843884010013102314 https://x.com/CullenHoback/status/1843884010013102314

midmagico 2y ago
man that guy is an idiot

joeyagreco 2y ago

> Todd reportedly denied he was the bitcoin creator: "Of course I'm not Satoshi," he said.

kyledrake 2y ago
The genesis block has a message from a relatively obscure British newspaper in it (The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks). Not something I would expect a frontier Canadian in their 20s to be sourcing from. That and various other evidence (coding style, british-english spelling) has suggested to me for a long time that it's an older gentleman from the UK, likely with an academic background in economics or related distributed systems. I don't know either way, but it seems borderline libel to suggest without much more substantial evidence that it's Peter Todd.
- nullc 2y ago
  The Times is not an obscure paper, but if you'd like some fodder: the headline Satoshi used is from the print edition rather than the online edition which was different. That said, Satoshi was clearly extremely diligent in concealing their identity, and so they may well have purposefully decided to use a headline that they wouldn't have had ordinary access too-- when someone is trying to conceal themselves it creates an environment which is hostile to logical reasoning. Any point which could point one direction might instead point the opposite or in a random direction.
  - costco 2y ago
    Satoshi connected to IRC from a residential IP address in Los Angeles in 2009. So there was a point in time where all it would have taken was a subpoena to find him. Now those records probably don't exist. Unless that was a Tor exit or one of those socks5 proxy type services. I remember there was an archive of the Tor consensus files going back really far that I can no longer find, so it'd be possible to check if it was.
    - nullc 2y ago

seanbruce 2y ago

[flagged]

marliesheitmann 2y ago

[dead]