Bitcoin Studies: Finding Nakamoto Satoshi【6】——Is Satoshi Nakamoto passed away or alive and kicking?
ZWS(Zhu Weisha), a Famous Chinese Entrepreneur
Since the early deposit address of Bitcoin has remained untouched for a long time, exceeding the common sense of the general public, there are many rumors in the market that no one can withstand the temptation of the hold the coin unless Satoshi Nakamoto has died. In fact, this rumor is the most untenable. Satoshi Nakamoto had implicitly advised participants in a post that some coins should be left, "What if it goes up?". Satoshi Nakamoto is someone who has long-term plans. He designed bitcoin to compete with fiat currency and eliminate the exploitation of fiat currency inflation to the toiling masses. It's made clear in the Bitcoin whitepaper launch note on the P2P Foundation Forum: "The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that's required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve. We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them not to let identity thieves drain our accounts. Their massive overhead costs make micropayments impossible." (1) Satoshi Nakamoto wants to solve the problem of central and commercial banks and the bubble problem of currency circulation, which is one of the fundamental problems of humanity. Will the competition with fiat money end anytime soon? It is a long process, at least decades. Few people really understand the deep meaning of his above statement. Hal Finney did, and he put the bitcoins he mined in a bank safe as a family heirloom. And many of the early participants were technical people who couldn't understand bitcoin and sold out early on. The people who said he died must not have understood the above words, so they couldn't hold bitcoins either and passed away from wealth.
Satoshi Nakamoto is a person who thinks logically and acts cautiously, which is evident from his handling of the Wikileaks incident. If he is dead, he will deal with the funeral in advance. And the time he spent dealing with his afterlife is implied in the Genesis block, and the timing implied in the Genesis block has yet to arrive, so it is far from time to account for it. But since some outstanding deceased people have been identified as Satoshi Nakamoto, we also need to study them to ensure the quality of research and a complete understanding of Satoshi Nakamoto's characteristics and to make it easier to stand up when giving a portrait of Satoshi Nakamoto for comparison with the existing outstanding people.
6.1 The child prodigy cryptographer Len Sassaman
The possibility that Satoshi Nakamoto is a child prodigy and Len Sassaman is a child prodigy worth investigating.
Len Sassaman is a child prodigy cryptographer born in 1980. He is an American technologist, information privacy advocate, maintainer of the code for the anonymous mail forwarder Mixmaster and operator of the mail forwarder Randseed. He has spent most of his career focused on cryptography and protocol development. He lives in Silicon Valley. He is also a cypherpunk.
“There’s also the tragic, persistent speculation that Satoshi might have been a wunderkind cryptographer named Len who killed himself in 2011 following a long battle with depression. Indeed, two months before Len’s suicide, in one of Satoshi’s final communications, Bitcoin’s inventor sent a cryptic email to another developer saying that he ‘probably won’t be around in the future’. ” （2）This is described in Coinbase's article "Who is Satoshi Nakamoto."
The timing is too coincidental, coinciding with Satoshi Nakamoto's departure and Sassaman's suicide. The quote above, " probably won't be around in the future." is the second half of Satoshi Nakamoto's reply to Martti Malmi and Mike Hearn's email, and the whole sentence is: "I've moved on to other things and probably won't be around in the future." (3) This sentence is not meant to be a definitive statement and combined with Satoshi Nakamoto eager to clear the relationship because of the WikiLeaks incident, the precise interpretation of this sentence is that there may be no future work around Bitcoin. To take this statement as a hint of Sassaman's suicide is a bit of an over-interpretation. Take a look at reference (3) to see what happened.
Sassaman was a cypherpunk with both cryptographic understanding and programming skills and a brilliant expert in encryption and programming. He lives in the Bay Area and was born in 1980, not too far off from the estimated age of Satoshi Nakamoto. So some of Satoshi Nakamoto's characteristics are present. But Len lacks the early discourse on cryptocurrencies to see his understanding of gold, automation, and probability theory.
Sassaman has a lot of program work and projects; another job is stressful, needs to make money to support himself. No income from the start of bitcoin coding until maintenance runs, code maintenance, and customer service at peak times have to be put in full time. Satoshi Nakamoto says he is too busy working and has to prioritize, clearly overloaded. It seems that Satoshi Nakamoto has difficulty having other part-time jobs that take up a lot of time, so how can he live without other income? It is where Len and Satoshi Nakamoto are not like each other. Satoshi Nakamoto is a freelancer. The reason why he can be a freelancer is that he has a big-moneymaster.
The biggest reason for depression suicide is the lack of hope for the future, which is easy to happen when you have high demands on yourself. It is also why people cannot understand the suicide of depressed people. By December 2010, Bitcoin was gaining momentum, the wind was blowing, and there would be no sense of a hopeless future. Satoshi Nakamoto chose to leave for fear of the wind being too strong, the exact opposite of depression leaving. Satoshi Nakamoto was afraid of things and decided to go. Len wasn't scared to die and could choose to commit suicide, so why would he leave Bitcoin? The logic doesn't make sense.
Furthermore, at age 21, Len was an organizer of the protests following the arrest of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklarov. Therefore, he tends to rebel, is not afraid of the government, and should not be so sensitive to the WikiLeaks incident.
Satoshi Nakamoto's departure was sudden, and in the last exchange with Gavin, emotions were normal, and the whole two years of posts did not see the mood swings.
The most unexplainable is the March 7, 2014 email from Satoshi Nakamoto: "I am not Dorian Nakamoto." (4)
That means Satoshi Nakamoto is still alive.
Some say this is someone else who hacked Satoshi Nakamoto's website account. At Satoshi Nakamoto's level, the world can't find him. If a hacker can hack his account, why not hack the private key to his Bitcoin account address? These two password protections should be on the same level. Dan Kaminsky, a security expert known for discovering the Internet's underlying vulnerabilities in 2008, is Len's friend. He conducted his repeated attacks on the Bitcoin program, and they all failed. (5) This shows the power of Satoshi Nakamoto's security protection. Sending emails to Satoshi Nakamoto is PGP encrypted, and it is impossible to intercept the content during the sending process. The length of his email password must be challenging to crack violently, perhaps the same as the Bitcoin private key, which can be replaced after one use. If one were to hack into Satoshi Nakamoto's account at the P2P Foundation, the likelihood of doing so by stealing Satoshi Nakamoto's password would be almost nil. The only way to hack into the server is to do so. Generally, for people with a security fetish, the first thing to look at when choosing a website is the security of the website or at least the fact that the website keeps the user's password in encrypted storage. If Satoshi Nakamoto's password weren't leaked, an attack on the server would leave a trace, and the P2P Foundation would find out that someone had hacked into it. They will report such a big deal. In 2018, Satoshi Auburn was impersonating Satoshi Nakamoto, and the P2P Foundation's account moved again, posting the word "Nour ."Many people were baffled and didn't understand the reasoning, and some said that Satoshi Nakamoto's account had been hacked. Actually, it's not. It is not easy to understand the meaning of the word literally, but from the pronunciation, it can be understood as the sound of "No ah ."It means "no ah" which ethnic group is close to the accent? You can read it yourself.
In the P2P Foundation Forum, Satoshi moved once in 2014 and said, "I'm not Dorian." In 2018, he moved again, and the meaning of Nour was actually more profound than in 2014 when the market debate was over whether to use a big block or a small block of Bitcoin. Nour would negate both Satoshi Auburn's line of development and the person. Satoshi Nakamoto is more subtle, and his mysterious style is more intensified.
Conclusion: Len Sassaman is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
6.2 Dave Kleiman, a computer forensics expert who died without peace after a life of disappointment
Dave has been identified as Satoshi Nakamoto because of the Auburn Satoshi (Craig Wright ) incident. He was endorsed by Jeff Garzik, an early participant in Bitcoin. In the Auburn Satoshi case, Jeff Garzik was subpoenaed to appear in a $10 billion lawsuit for Auburn Satoshi. The rough plot of this $10 billion lawsuit is that a man named Dave, likely Satoshi Nakamoto, and his brother Ira Kleiman sued Auburn Satoshi for illegally appropriating Dave's property, demanding a portion of his $1.1 million in bitcoins back. The court did not uphold the claim, and there was no contested property involving the 1.1 million bitcoins.
The literature on the reasons for saying that Dave is Satoshi Nakamoto is extensive, and literature (6) is representative and more comprehensively written. The process of analyzing this example, read carefully, will show the reasons why the world cannot find Satoshi Nakamoto. The primary basis of the article is:
1. "From the style of code that Satoshi Nakamoto wrote for Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto is not a programmer from a science class, but a self-taught programmer, and from this perspective, Dave fits the profile very well, being self-taught. In addition, Jeff says that although Satoshi Nakamoto's code is not standardized, it is clear that he is brilliant."
The problem is that "From the style of code that Satoshi Nakamoto wrote for Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto is not a programmer from a science class," There is insufficient evidence. Programming is taught in school to make it easy for teams to work together, and there are requirements for specification formats. Satoshi Nakamoto is a one-person developer, so the specifications are omitted. Based on the style is speculation, not evidence. It is impossible to judge whether Satoshi Nakamoto was from a professional school based on the so-called style, and there is no necessary connection between them. Later we will prove that Satoshi Nakamoto graduated from a top 10 computer specialty in the United States.
"Although Dave is a military veteran and a government law enforcement officer by trade, he is a cryptographer who has previously invented encryption techniques used by NASA and other agencies, and his work includes immutable encryption logging systems. (Source: The Strange Life and Death of Dave Kleiman, A Computer Genius Linked to Bitcoin's Origins)."
Note that Satoshi Nakamoto did not invent any cryptography; he was just familiar with it and primarily used the SHA256 cryptographic algorithm and the public-private key system. Each technique has a source; none of these have anything to do with Dave's work above. Although they are all cryptographic specialties, the classifications are very different. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish what kind of cryptographer to be.
"He has also been long active on a number of cryptography mailing lists since 2000, particularly the cryptography mailing list that published the first version of the Bitcoin white paper. So Dave's own resume is very much in line with Satoshi Nakamoto's (www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography)."
Satoshi Nakamoto's white papers are indeed published on the cryptography mailing list, but this is not the Cypherpunk mailing list, which is where Satoshi Nakamoto's ideas were formed, not the cryptography community and mailing list. Unfortunately, the author does not distinguish the difference between the two mailing lists.
2. "From the Bitcointalk statements, Satoshi Nakamoto is a miscellaneous person, familiar with economics, computers, politics, and other fields, and Dave fits the same profile. In addition, Dave is self-taught and started studying cryptography after being paralyzed in a car accident, and he is also a Microsoft MVP (Microsoft Most Valuable Professional)".
The description of Satoshi Nakamoto is not outrageous. Unreliable description of Dave. The Wikipedia entry for Dave lists Dave's writings as all related to forensics. Self-education and breadth of knowledge are not necessarily linked. There must be evidence that Dave taught himself economics and politics.
3. "From the Bitcoin white paper, it appears that the author of the white paper is a ‘folk scientist.' The author of the Bitcoin white paper appears to be someone who has been exposed to academic writing. Still, from the perspective of citation irregularities, it is certainly not academic and is simply ‘folklore.' In contrast, Dave has been exposed to academic writing and is the technical editor of books, including CD and DVD Forensics."
"Although Dave has collaborated with people on papers (not one), he has not received rigorous academic training.
"For more on why Satoshi Nakamoto is a ‘folk scientist’ see: What are the folk sciences that have been adopted by mainstream science?"(6)
Dave's Wikipedia entry has ten publications, and since Dave was an editor, the bibliography is in the standard copyright format, e.g., ISBN 1-932266-52-6. So the evidence does not support the claim that Dave "did not receive rigorous academic training," as compared to the Bitcoin white paper, where the references are in a completely different copyright format. I also disagree with folk scientist claim that there are more articles than just books and that the above author's article I cite here is also in Internet citation style. See (6).
4. "Satoshi Nakamoto is an extremely good at hiding his tracks. Various gods have no way to find the trace of Satoshi Nakamoto according to all the public information, including registered email, birthday and online speech and other information. Everyone agrees that Satoshi Nakamoto is a cryptographic geek who is good at hiding his identity. And Dave happens to be this expert, his job is forensics (Computer Forensics), to put it bluntly, is to find evidence, know how to find evidence of people, is often the most adept at hiding their identity. But most cryptographic geeks are such people".
It is not the uniqueness of Satoshi Nakamoto but the commonality of cryptographic enthusiasts which can only prove that Dave is a cryptographic enthusiast.
The above is the primary evidence. There is also evidence of a relationship with Auburn Satoshi, which is provable. There is a complete chain of evidence. But proving that it is related to Auburn Satoshi has no bearing on proving that Dave is Satoshi Nakamoto, which is interpreted without fundamental understanding. Interested readers can refer to the original article (6). In my article section” preface," I commented on the characteristic of Master Zhang Weiying: deep thinking. It is to carefully compare the differences in facts and look for the inner logic. We cannot reach Mr. Zhang Weiying's level because we look at superficial similarities and jump to conclusions.
It is easier to deny than to affirm.
Dave has no evidence of being a cypherpunk, and Florida, where he lives, is not a Pacific time zone. He was born in 1967 at 42, beyond our estimate of Satoshi Nakamoto's age. We assess that by age 40, he could become an expert in his profession, as he has already written extensively on computer forensics. Instead, he is a professional with a professional orientation far removed from Bitcoin. He became ill in a car accident in 1995 and has since lived in a wheelchair. On July 16, 2010, Satoshi Nakamoto posted 25 posts on the Bitcoin forum, taking 10 hours, including 22 posts between 14:00 to 22:00, which is heavy, time-consuming, and exhausting work for anyone in normal health.
"At the end of 2010, a friend of Dave's was visiting him at his home when friend found him in the shower room and had fallen into the house, completely unable to stand. His friend immediately called 911 and took him to a nearby hospital. In the hospital, he was tested for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection and required a lengthy hospital stay."
"For more than two years after that, Dave would leave the hospital only occasionally, often to assist his friends Conrad and Paige. When it was inconvenient for him to leave the hospital, his friends would often bring their work on disks to the hospital, leaving Dave to work at his bedside. Several times after surgery, Dave would pick up his computer and start working as soon as he could get up". (7)
The reason for Satoshi Nakamoto's departure was because of the WikiLeaks incident. Although the departure time was close to Dave's collapse, the reason was different. Exactly what date was it? There is also doubt here. This time can be accurate to the day. Once you check it, you will know. I guess it does not match the time Satoshi Nakamoto left. The reasons for Nakamoto's departure are logical. Leaving is handled in an orderly manner. It's impossible to fall down and not stand up after finishing work.
Dave's life has been impoverished, and his financial resources do not support his development of Bitcoin. From 2007 to 2010, bitcoin was expensive, and after Dave's hospitalization, Conrad and Page helped him pay the bills, but they were not his moneymaster. (7) Otherwise, it would have come up in a lawsuit for Auburn Satoshi.
Dave died in 2013. Not consistent with Satoshi Nakamoto's final posting on the P2P Foundation forum in 2014: "I am not Dorian Nakamoto" (8).
Cryptocurrency is a very narrow and comprehensive field; more than just knowing cryptography and programming is required. The reason why Jeff and Gavin Andresen, the early and excellent participants in Bitcoin, were wrong in their judgment is that they were only judging from the perspective of their knowledge; from the perspective of technology, they had not immersed themselves in the cypherpunk community and did not understand the deep background behind Bitcoin. In fact, for Dave, the resume could be better than Len Sassaman's, and one look at it tells you otherwise. Most of the research literature on Satoshi Nakamoto is at the level of literature (6), lacking in depth, breadth, and logic, and It's just missing the last kicks. Bitcoin is comprehensive and does not stand up to the same level as Satoshi Nakamoto; It can only be a hole, but not a correct conclusion.
Conclusion: Dave Klayman is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
6.3 Hal Finney, Satoshi Nakamoto's "Watson," one of the great founders of Bitcoin
Born in 1956, Hal Finney lived in the Pacific Time Zone and died in Arizona in August 2014. He was an active cypherpunk whose ideas for reusable proof of work (RPOW) are embodied in Nick Szabo's Bitgold, one of the sources of the concept for Bitcoin. Nick said Bitcoin is a narrow field that "Myself, Wei Dai, and Hal Finney were the only people I know who liked the idea." (9)
If guessing Hal is Satoshi Nakamoto is not outrageous, he is also one step away from Bitcoin.
An early conversation between two masters, Hal and Satoshi Nakamoto, It's not like Hal asking himself and answering himself, is excerpted below for the reader's reference.
After a lengthy discussion on November 9, 2008
Hal asks: (10)
"Sorry about all the questions, but as I said this does seem to be a very promising and original idea, and I am looking forward to seeing how the concept is further developed. It would be helpful to see a more process oriented description of the idea, with concrete details of the data structures for the various objects (coins, blocks, transactions), the data which is included in messages, and algorithmic descriptions of the procedures for handling the various events which would occur in this system. You mentioned that you are working on an implementation, but I think a more formal, text description of the system would be a helpful next step."
Satoshi Nakamoto replies:
“I appreciate your questions. I actually did this kind of backwards. I had to write all the code before I could convince myself that I could solve every problem, then I wrote the paper. I think I will be able to release the code sooner than I could write a detailed spec. You're already right about most of your assumptions where you filled in the blanks.”
Satoshi Nakamoto never wrote detailed specifications. As a result, there is no exact specification for Bitcoin, causing none of the blockchain projects to have one. That's why there is various white papers analysis. Without this analysis if not technical experts do not easily read the white paper. And Hal is slightly older, and detailed specs are a requirement for old-school software engineers. You can see the generation difference between the two. Note this quote from Satoshi Nakamoto: "You're already right about most of your assumptions, "which Hal obviously understands and corroborates the correctness of Nick's words. Here's their conversation in the cryptography community, where the Bitcoin white paper was posted and met with cynicism because not many people know how to do it.
After a lengthy discussion on November 9, 2008
Hal asks: (11)
"The bitcoin system turns out to be socially useful and valuable, so that node operators feel that they are making a beneficial contribution to the world by their efforts (similar to the various ‘@Home’ compute projects where people volunteer their compute resources for good causes).
“In this case it seems to me that simple altruism can suffice to keep the network running properly.”
Satoshi Nakamoto replies:
“It's very attractive to the libertarian viewpoint if we can explain it properly. I'm better with code than with words though.”
Hal's view is that using altruism can make the system work. His failure to understand the role of incentives is also the reason that's why he missed a kick. Satoshi Nakamoto did not retort, responding with "if explained properly." Satoshi did not say Hal was wrong because he was an older generation in cypherpunk, and Satoshi Nakamoto knew him. At this time, had just released Bitcoin, and Hal shouldn't know who Satoshi Nakamoto was. His conversation with Satoshi Nakamoto was very comfortable, so he got the impression that Satoshi Nakamoto was very polite.
This post below shows that Hal's knowledge of finance is much worse than Satoshi Nakamoto's.
Excerpts from Hal Finney's reply: (12)
“As an amusing thought experiment, imagine that Bitcoin is successful and becomes the dominant payment system in use throughout the world. Then the total value of the currency should be equal to the total value of all the wealth in the world."
“Current estimates of total worldwide household wealth that I have found range from $100 trillion to $300 trillion. With 20 million coins, that gives each coin a value of about $10 million."
“So the possibility of generating coins today with a few cents of compute."
“time may be quite a good bet, with a payoff of something like 100 million to 1!"
“Even if the odds of Bitcoin succeeding to this degree are slim, are they really 100 million to one against? Something to think about...”
Hal estimates more than imagined, the extensive logic is correct, and the imaginary trend is right. So he has a bone-deep understanding of bitcoin. It's not something someone outside the Bitcoin community can do by reading a white paper. So he put the bitcoins in a safe to leave to his family. (13) Bull! But Satoshi Nakamoto has never had such an optimistic estimate of Bitcoin. You can tell the two men share the same opinion by the fact that Satoshi Nakamoto doesn't sell bitcoins at all. Hal's points are debatable on the details, such as Bitcoin not being the primary payment system. From the design principle, Satoshi Nakamoto calls bitcoin "cash." Bitcoin corresponds to the M1 of the current concept of money rather than the total value of wealth. It is where Hal falls a little short of Satoshi Nakamoto's understanding. Hal did not think of using economic means to solve problems that technology could not solve. That is, the knowledge of economics, such as incentives and currency, is a little bit worse.
Bitcoin is a fantastic creation of Satoshi Nakamoto. The Hal Bitcoin Conjecture is equally great, and this circle has been studying cryptocurrencies for years and years of inculcation, all with great financial intuition. Don't think Hal's conjecture is a joke; later, we will argue the path of realization and rationality of Hal's conjecture.
The gap between the high achievers is not that big, and the two hearts mirror each other. He would have been the first circle big man to download and run Bitcoin when Satoshi Nakamoto sent the new version to Adam, Wei Dai, and maybe Nick. But only Hal, one of these world-class experts, publicly downloaded Bitcoin and publicly gave Bitcoin a standing ovation. He was also the first person in the world to accept bitcoins, and Satoshi Nakamoto was petty enough to send him only ten. Satoshi Nakamoto knew back then that it was a considerable amount of money.
Hal is a bit on the older side, as Satoshi Nakamoto; he uses the C language, an early version of C++, which is compatible with C. In addition, he fell ill in 2009 and became seriously ill in 2010; he still had a job at PGP and only retired in 2011. it was no longer possible for him to work part-time as a bitcoin customer service in 2010, as his energy did not allow it. His financial resources are not enough. If he has 1 million bitcoins, he can use it completely, and he does not need donations and help from the outside world. In 2018, four years after he passed away, Satoshi Nakamoto posted the word "Nour" again at the P2P Foundation Forum.
During his lifetime, he denied being Satoshi Nakamoto. He was very proud of his legendary experience in Bitcoin, which the Bitcoin community respected as the "Watson" to Satoshi Nakamoto, the second person in the Bitcoin community. The community was right.
In March 2013, he wrote "Bitcoin and me" with great affection under challenging conditions where he typed 50 times slower, which was a moving read. Unfortunately, he passed away a year later. He was a big guy in the community, and the early help and affirmation for Satoshi Nakamoto and the encouragement for the community are invaluable.
Tribute to Hal Finney, one of the great founders of Bitcoin!
To sum up.
From the above analysis of the details of Satoshi Nakamoto's customer service and development process for Bitcoin, it is clear that Satoshi Nakamoto is not short of money, has plenty of time, and should be freelancing. However, his long-term view of Bitcoin differs from that of an average technical person. The closest to Satoshi Nakamoto's view is Hal, which confirms that the source of Satoshi Nakamoto's ideas is cypherpunk, a tiny circle of people who can only implement Bitcoin if this circle has baptized them.
The fact that these few people who passed away are not Satoshi Nakamoto does not prove that Satoshi Nakamoto is still alive. It only means that the probability of being alive is high. To prove that he is alive, one must find out who Satoshi Nakamoto is among the several people alive. Looking for a living person involves academic and technical issues. It is not as easy to understand as the previous chapters, but it is beneficial for understanding Bitcoin and the economic phenomenon it represents. If you don’t understand it, you will not know why Satoshi Nakamoto didn’t sell it. Without the concept of support can not hold Bitcoin and pass by wealth. It is easier to read than to earn. Bitcoin holders who read and accept this article will probably cherish the chips in their hands a hundred times more and will love them as much as Satoshi Nakamoto does. They will understand why Satoshi Nakamoto is so "stingy" and only send ten for Hal. The following section determines whether Satoshi Nakamoto is a single person or a team, revealing first that he is neither a single person nor a group.
Satoshi Nakamoto: male, then 33-34 years old, prodigy, American, lives on the West Coast, is a cypherpunk. No shortage of money. Freelancer. There is no Satoshi Nakamoto among the deceased possible subjects.
1. P2P Foundation
Bitcoin open source implementation of P2P currency
2009-02-11 22:27:00 UTC
2. Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?
“There’s also the tragic, persistent speculation that Satoshi might have been a wunderkind cryptographer named Len Sassaman, who killed himself in 2011 following a long battle with depression. Indeed, two months before Sassaman’s suicide, in one of Satoshi’s final communications, Bitcoin’s inventor sent a cryptic email to another developer saying that he “probably won’t be around in the future.”
3. During the same days, Satoshi Nakamoto had exchanged emails with two of Bitcoin’s early developers: Martti Malmi and Mike Hearn.
In a first email, Mike Hearn asked Satoshi Nakamoto what his intentions were in terms of his involvement in the development of Bitcoin for the coming months:
“Are you planning on rejoining the community at some point (e.g. for code reviews), or is your plan to permanently step back from the limelight?”
Satoshi Nakamoto simply told him that the Bitcoin revolution was in good hands and that he had decided to take care of other things:
“I’ve moved on to other things. It’s in good hands with Gavin and everyone.”
Satoshi Nakamoto exchanged a few more emails with Martti Malmi at the very beginning of May 2011 asking him to take full ownership of the bitcoin.org website.
At the time of this transfer, and just before he disappeared completely, Satoshi Nakamoto sent this email confirming what he had previously told Mike Hearn:
“I’ve moved on to other things and probably won’t be around in the future.”
4. P2P Foundation
Bitcoin open source implementation of P2P currency
I am not Dorian Nakamoto.
5. the crypto-currency
By Joshua Davis October 3, 2011
7. 中本聰往事（四）神秘的 U 盤
8. P2P Foundation
Bitcoin open source implementation of P2P currency
I am not Dorian Nakamoto.
9. Bitcoin, what took ye so long?
So asks gwern in a spectacular display of hindsight.
“While the security technology is very far from trivial, the "why" was by far the biggest stumbling block -- nearly everybody who heard the general idea thought it was a very bad idea. Myself, Wei Dai, and Hal Finney were the only people I know of who liked the idea (or in Dai's case his related idea) enough to pursue it to any significant extent until Nakamoto (assuming Nakamoto is not really Finney or Dai). Only Finney (RPOW) and Nakamoto were motivated enough to actually implement such a scheme.”
10. Cryptography Mailing List
Bitcoin P2P e-cash paper
>Sorry about all the questions, but as I said this does seem to be a
> very promising and original idea, and I am looking forward to seeing
> how the concept is further developed. It would be helpful to see a more
> process oriented description of the idea, with concrete details of the
> data structures for the various objects (coins, blocks, transactions),
> the data which is included in messages, and algorithmic descriptions
> of the procedures for handling the various events which would occur in
> this system. You mentioned that you are working on an implementation,
> but I think a more formal, text description of the system would be a
> helpful next step.
I appreciate your questions. I actually did this kind of backwards. I had to write all the code before I could convince myself that I could solve every problem, then I wrote the paper. I think I will be able to release the code sooner than I could write a detailed spec. You're already right about most of your assumptions where you filled in the blanks.
11. Cryptography Mailing List
Bitcoin P2P e-cash paper
2008-11-14 18:55:35 UTC
The bitcoin system turns out to be socially useful and valuable, so
> that node operators feel that they are making a beneficial contribution
> to the world by their efforts (similar to the various "@Home" compute
> projects where people volunteer their compute resources for good causes).
> In this case it seems to me that simple altruism can suffice to keep the
> network running properly.
It's very attractive to the libertarian viewpoint if we can explain it properly. I'm better with code than with words though.
12. From: Hal Finney
Bitcoin v0.1 released
January 11, 2009,
As an amusing thought experiment, imagine that Bitcoin is successful and
becomes the dominant payment system in use throughout the world. Then the
total value of the currency should be equal to the total value of all
the wealth in the world. Current estimates of total worldwide household
wealth that I have found range from $100 trillion to $300 trillion. With
20 million coins, that gives each coin a value of about $10 million.
So the possibility of generating coins today with a few cents of compute
time may be quite a good bet, with a payoff of something like 100 million
to 1! Even if the odds of Bitcoin succeeding to this degree are slim,
are they really 100 million to one against? Something to think about...
March 19, 2013, 08:40:02 PM