What is Satoshi Nakamoto's intention, the stored value, or the application debate?
——Also, Auburn Satoshi is not Satoshi Nakamoto
ZWS(Zhu Weisha), a Famous Chinese Entrepreneur
It is essential to understand this article. Please read it to understand the difference between Bitcoin and the Bitcoin system. Only then can we appreciate that the stored value refers to the function of Bitcoin, and the application relates to the function of the Bitcoin system. Bitcoin is a "product" produced by the Bitcoin system. It is a very fortunate thing that Bitcoin has a stored value. It is a matter of basic fuzzy concepts to put the stored value and application together to argue. This debate arises from differences in understanding of Mises's theory. The interested reader should read Mises' classic work "The Theory of Credit and Money." At least read Padraig Belton's "Analysis of The Theory of Credit and Money." If that's too much trouble, read Mr. xc's posting in the Bitcoin forum on July 27, 2010, "Bitcoin does not violate Mises' s law of regression." The explanation is clear but long so I won't explain it in this article.
8.1 Stored value is the biggest application result exclusive to the Bitcoin system
Will the bitcoin system become an application platform like Ethereum, or will it evolve around enhancing stored value? These are two routes. Auburn Satoshi (Craig Wright) and others believe that expanding applications is what Satoshi Nakamoto intended. However, the question still starts with the ideals of the cypherpunk community.
8.1.1 From the cypherpunks' claims
Beginning with David Chaum's digital cash (e-Cash), cypherpunks "advocating widespread use of strong cryptography and privacy-enhancing technologies as a route to social and political change." (1) Their ideal is to design an independent financial system. This idea of independence from reality is carried forward in the blockchain. The late nineties were the most fruitful time for digital cash discussions in the cypherpunk community, and many vital ideas emerged. Wei Dai's arguments are well represented, as reflected in his paper on B-money. The idea became one of the sources of the concept for Bitcoin. Wei Dai said in 1998 that Tim May's crypto-anarchy "fascinated" him. "Unlike the communities traditionally associated with the word 'anarchy,' in a crypto-anarchy, the government is not temporarily destroyed but permanently forbidden and permanently unnecessary.” (2) An out-of-this-world community, of course, needs its currency and applications. But this kind of thinking is doomed to fail. Satoshi Nakamoto continues Wei Dai's idea but turns Wei Dai's idea of unlimited coin issuance into a fixed issuance. Obviously no longer limiting the currency circulation within the cypherpunk's ecosystem. Satoshi Nakamoto still describes a financial system in his white paper, a peer-to-peer cash system. The feature that this system has nothing to do with the real financial system is also preserved. Bitcoin represents the circulating value of its ecology. It wasn't until Laszlo of pizza guy traded 10,000 bitcoins for two big pies (pizzas) that the connection to the real world opened. In fact, the value of the payment is only a tiny aspect of the value of bitcoin. The idea of "social and political change" and bitcoin's potential value as a monetary alternative is deeply hidden. People who are not cypherpunk baptized will not immediately see the logic. Satoshi Nakamoto never said this, but he knew it. The most direct evidence of this is that he kept himself deeply hidden. One of the truths was broken down by Hal Finney, also a cypherpunk: "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." (3) This idea was published on the third day of Bitcoin's launch and, in any case, had massive appeal to newcomers. It also exposes the cypherpunk's ambition to transform the world. Also, Satoshi Nakamoto's ambition. Starting with David Chaum, by January 2009, nearly 30 years of cypherpunk finally saw the hope of realizing the aspiration. Hal couldn't hold back his excitement to write the above long post of a valuation. After that, he became ill. It is unknown whether the born seedlings are dead or alive. Hal heard in late 2010 that Bitcoin was well, and he knew it had succeeded. Finding his long-sealed bitcoin wallet, he put it in a bank safe as his heirloom. Very coincidentally, Satoshi Nakamoto left the Bitcoin community at the end of the year. Once he was gone, he walked away so confidently. The master's view and practice are the same. They are all long-held views. The master is the master, the newbility(牛)!
8.1.2 The Bitcoin system will not become the world's dominant payment system
Why does the Bitcoin system fall short of the goal of being the "world's dominant payment system"?
1. Bitcoin value is not primarily derived from payments
First, we want to consider how the value of Bitcoin is formed. Its value is brought by computing power. The beginning is just a few cents of electricity consumption. Even if there is no price, there is a cost, which is the root of the Mises price regression. That is, there is a cost first and then a value. The value here refers to the bitcoin as an asset's value. One of its characteristics is that the higher the cost and the harder it is to obtain, the more scarce it is and the more valuable it is. Coin price is a function of computing power, and the massive cost of computing power itself constitutes the world's scarcity and a firm price bottom.
The measure of computing power is the mining difficulty, which started at one and lasted almost a year. On December 30, 2009, Bitcoin's mining difficulty was adjusted for the first time, increasing from 1 to 1.1829, an increase of 18.29%. The following year, 2010, the bitcoin mining difficulty kept growing, going from 1.18 to 14.5K, an increase of 12,245x! By August 4, 2022, the block height was 747,936, and the difficulty 28,174,668,481,289 ≈ 28.17 T. That's an increase of 28 trillion times. And bitcoin rise and computing power are not linearly correlated. We don't deny that the cost per unit of computing power has decreased due to advances in mining machines. In the beginning, bitcoin had no coin price but a cost; the combined cost of electricity and depreciation of machinery and equipment to today is $18,000-$20,000 a bitcoin, up about 2 billion times. The 2022 bitcoin decline is the first time it has not fallen below cost (Note: Due to the fight between Binance and FTX broke below on November 9,2022). The growth in computing power, that is, scarcity, has risen, and from a scarcity analysis, one could argue that bitcoin's valuation is lower now than it was back in the day of the Big Pizza On May 22, 2010. The low valuation is conducive to the rise.
The value formation logic of Bitcoin is: from the rise of computing power to the increase in scarcity, the stored value rises. Therefore, any innovation conducive to the stored value of Bitcoin, including any of the three aspects of system, law, and narrative, will cause a huge increase in Bitcoin, that is, the arrival of an accelerated upward inflection point. However, these three aspects have little to do with payment and little to do with technicians, and they don't take much effort.
2. Payments platform face huge competition from centralization and do not have a unique advantage
When it comes to payments, it's to talk about the Internet's Metcalfe's Law, which says that the value of the network is the square of the number of users. Therefore, it is more realistic to start with expanding application scenarios, and it's easier to reflect the value of the Bitcoin system by the number of users. Note that the system value of Bitcoin is not equal to the value of Bitcoin because the value of Bitcoin does not represent the value of the system. No discussion here. The most straightforward scenario to think about is payments and smart contracts. The value comes up when more people use it. From this perspective, Gavin Andresen and other good early bitcoin developers tended to expand the application, increasing the block size, reducing bitcoin congestion, and increasing the speed of transactions. From this perspective, they believe that the Bitcoin system is on the wrong path and that the Bitcoin Core technical team, the Bitcoin Core development group, is wrong. From an application standpoint, including Auburn Satoshi, they seem to be more in line with what Satoshi Nakamoto expressed early on. In fact, have they seriously studied Satoshi Nakamoto's postings?
The world's primary payment system will face competition from centralized payment. Gold is not a system, nor is it a global payment system. Nevertheless, its value still exists, reaching the current market value of more than ten trillion U.S. dollars. Add up the market value of the global listed payment companies, about 2 trillion. Bitcoin and the Bitcoin system are two different things. Bitcoin corresponds to gold. Is the Bitcoin system a tool for producing Bitcoin or a payment tool? A system with a single function is relatively simple to design, and it is also easy to be reliable.
3. It is not feasible to make payments function on the first layer
The Bitcoin system is the issuance system, and itself called the first layer in the industry. Payment in itself is flawed, attracting a lot of improvement projects. in the early days, Satoshi Nakamoto was asked about smart contracts, and he said that they could be implemented in scripts. But after Ethereum became a big hit because of the innovation of the application, the Bitcoin system did not compete either.
Why doesn't Satoshi Nakamoto make payments? Transferring and clearing money, the Bitcoin system is faster than the Swift system, but it needs a proper payment platform. Is Ethereum the platform? as a payment system, blockchain is inherently flawed and cannot compete with centralized payments; no matter how much it is improved, it is orders of magnitude backward. Therefore, users will not vote in favor. I think Satoshi Nakamoto saw this, and this is the most reasonable explanation for Satoshi Nakamoto did not make a payment function at the first layer.
In the first layer (the public chain itself) to transform the Bitcoin payment function, Satoshi Nakamoto's answer is one word, "Nour," in 2018. Beat directly in the face of Auburn Satoshi. It's even more than the 2014 answer, "I'm not Dorian Nakamoto." Just a denial of people, 2018's answer, denial of his identity and thinking. Auburn Satoshi did not contribute any new technology or ideas, just rubbing Satoshi Nakamoto's halo.
The two goals of value store and payments are contradictory under the blockchain structure. Payments require speed; the competition is Paypal and Alipay, or at least Visa speed. We use gold mining equipment to make payments, which probably no one will do. Likely, the Bitcoin system can complete mining, storage, and transfer. It is already a good "gold production industry chain," and adding "consumption" as a payment tool will increase the difficulty of design. In fact, as "the world's dominant payment system," this goal of the Bitcoin system can not be achieved.
The idea of implementing payment functionality as a two-layer technology is the right one. Being a second layer is not limited to blockchain technology. Many projects can be done with blockchain public chains as the underlying layer, and blockchain public chains as payments will eventually be a slap in the face.
The only way to progress in history is to go beyond existing centralized platforms without losing the idea of cypherpunk. It awaits new structural breakthroughs, not improvements that follow Bitcoin's ass.
8.1.3 Realizing the stored value of Bitcoin is the most suitable application of the Bitcoin system
Auburn Satoshi and others have been proven wrong. History smacked them hard in the face. Their biggest problem was that they weren't cypherpunks and didn't understand punkers "advocating widespread use of strong cryptography and privacy-enhancing technologies as a route to social and political change.” (1) What applications can achieve this? Payments are already plentiful; payment is not the most suitable application of the blockchain public chain. So what is the most suitable application? A technology must have unique advantages and structure, constituting the most suitable application products and unique competitiveness. Due to the limitations of the blockchain structure, it is impossible to surpass the ease of use and speed of centralized payment, so the blockchain public chain payment-related projects are not competitive and are doomed to fail without exception. It is also a prophecy. Only using the Bitcoin system as a tool for stored value is what centralized projects cannot do and is the most suitable application of blockchain technology. It gives Bitcoin an exclusive advantage and becomes a tool for achieving social change.
It is important to note that I am talking about Bitcoin here, not the Bitcoin system. Gold is unique, and there are many development tools for gold. Bitcoin is unique; the Bitcoin system and Bitcoin are one, more closely linked than gold and its development tools. Any system changes may affect the value of Bitcoin. Once produced, the bitcoins have their own value. Take on the role of social change.
Gold without initial exchange is also a piece of metal with no value. Once it has stored value as a commodity exchange is not the primary function. So, do we use gold for trading? Bitcoin is very fortunate to have stored value, so any application should revolve around increasing the stored value of Bitcoin.
This luck is not a coincidence. Satoshi Nakamoto designed it after he studied fiat and gold in-depth and profoundly understood the flaws of the current financial system and the gold standard. I guess he even learned from the Chinese Song Dynasty paper money "Jiaozi," which was issued regularly, too, similar to Bitcoin's 4-year cycle. There are thousands of commodities worldwide, but very few have stored value. The market for stored value is much larger than the sum of the payment markets.
Any functional innovation that goes against the storage of value is undesirable, and I guess this is a core value of the Bitcoin Core Development Group. Likewise, any idea that contradicts the need for security in the store of value is undesirable.
How to make a bigger and stronger Bitcoin store of value? Satoshi Nakamoto is a Marketing school and believes in the natural evolution of the market, and he believes that the market will evolve the power he needs. So he's also waiting for an opportunity. Meet the right person at the right time; Life's and career inflection points are no different.
8.2 Application expansion of various functions is Satoshi Nakamoto's backup
The debate between big and small blocks is mainly for payment, hoping to speed up payment. Unfortunately, at that time, the situation of the entire mining circle seemed to favor the big block faction, and finally, the big block lost. There are many reasons for this, but the main reason is as follows.
8.2.1 Big blocks lead to large storage overhead and a small number of nodes
The BCH is called Bitcoin Cash. It's the fork of bitcoin, and it takes a big block route. One block is 32M, 32 times higher than Bitcoin. Auburn Satoshi's BSV (Bitcoin Satoshi Vision) is a re-fork of BCH. it's even more outrageous, a block of 128M. I've seen reports of 102M for its largest block, I guess his coin trading volume has never been filled with 128M blocks. The most significant disadvantage of large blocks is the need for greater storage, so the cost requirements for the full node is high because the full node does not give volunteers money, which will inevitably lead to no need for volunteers offline. According to the website" Blockchair "data on July 14, 2022, Bitcoin has 7,363 nodes. The number of nodes is 950 for BCH and 22 for Auburn Satoshi's BSV, where nodes refer to full nodes. Full nodes are not necessarily all mining nodes, so there may be fewer mining nodes, and the probability of being attacked by 51% goes up. Binance's smart chain BSC uses 21 fixed validate nodes and POS（Proof of Stake）consensus. From the data, the security of Auburn Satoshi's BSV chain is comparable to BSC. While BSC is 3 seconds out of a block and Auburn Satoshi is 10 minutes out of a block, how can it compete with Binance's smart chain in the Easy to Use? Therefore, all of Auburn Satoshi's application ideas are worthless. Even though BSV is down 87% from its high at August 16, 2020, there is still a billion market cap; it is also due to the halo of Satoshi Nakamoto.
8.2.2 The application was Satoshi's backup from the very beginning
The big block party believes that the original intention of Satoshi Nakamoto is application. Let's start by analyzing Satoshi Nakamoto's earliest articles.
Satoshi Nakamoto has talked about applications on many occasions; the earliest would be an email with Wei Dai on January 10, 2009.
"The system is entirely decentralized, without any server or trusted parties. The network infrastructure can support a full range of escrow transactions and contracts, but for now the focus is on the basics of money and transactions." (4)
Note that Satoshi Nakamoto is taking a two-step approach, with the first step around currency and transactions. The second step has the potential for further expansion. Article (5) nicely expresses that various functions, such as escrow transactions, secured contracts, third-party arbitration, multi-party signatures, etc., can be implemented through scripts in the Bitcoin system. Satoshi Nakamoto also has a sentence in the article, which means to be prepared at the beginning, and whether to achieve it depends on the situation. As applications, Bitcoin has only achieved multi-party signatures. SegWit and lightning network. I don't know to program; I guess these applications need to define a new operating code in the script. Bitcoin's script currently has 75% of the opcode free to handle various applications. So why not expand the applications? Even Ethereum's popularity has not grown in its application. The Bitcoin core development group should see no need for it. Because guaranteeing security to ensure the stored value is the most extensive application, this application is far greater than all payment applications. It's not a good idea to have a new unstable application that affects the stored value more than it's worth. Further expansion of applications is a means of realizing stored value, just like marketing. If the intensity is enough, don't spend advertising money indiscriminately.
If Satoshi Nakamoto wants to add a new application to Bitcoin, he can add functionality following the Bitcoin proposal process, even though he is invisible. It is open to anyone who wants to add new features and functional improvements. There is also room for improvement in Bitcoin's governance structure, but the Core team can identify good features. Because they are the highest quality team on the blockchain, they have proven in practice that they are on the right track.
By the way, decentralization has not removed the development team; they don't touch user data. You don't have to trust third-party transfers, and it cannot remove the trust in the team. The establishment of trust has to undergo the test of time. Time trust is a principle of machine trust.
Satoshi Nakamoto limited the 32M blocks to 1M in the early days but did the closing work when he left. Even such a logically rigorous person did not lift the 1M block limit, so the extension application is for the future. If the first step served its purpose and Bitcoin has evolved naturally beyond expectations, why would he go the extra mile? Designing with ample leeway is the approach of experienced designers.
8.3 Auburn Satoshi has only a superficial understanding of Bitcoin
When it comes to Auburn Satoshi, many articles online make sense from different angles of analysis. I just selected Auburn Satoshi's paper from his speech, which is the idea of direct evidence, showing the evidence solid.
"Although I liked Tim, I knew in the 90s that I needed to find something else. I knew it would be my life goal after reading Wei Dai's juvenile and ill-conceived call for b-money:
‘I am fascinated by Tim May’s crypto-anarchy. Unlike the communities traditionally associated with the word “anarchy”, in a crypto-anarchy the government is not temporarily destroyed but permanently forbidden and permanently unnecessary. It’s a community where the threat of violence is impotent because violence is impossible, and violence is impossible because its participants cannot be linked to their true names or physical locations.’(Note: This paragraph is Wei Dai's words.)
“Bitcoin was designed to scale to create something more than the casino that is finance. It is not the exchange that people called the market that allows growth in the creation of capital but rather the exchange of goods between individuals for consumption. A market is not the casino we call the exchange. Such lies need to end.” (6)
The biggest problem is this sentence: "Wei Dai juvenile and ill-conceived call for b-money," he is using Wei Dai B-money as the target of criticism, unlike Satoshi Nakamoto's email with Wei Dai, in which he said, "I think it achieves nearly all the goals you set out to solve in your b-money paper." (4) In Satoshi Nakamoto's definition of the Wikipedia entry for Bitcoin, he says that Bitcoin is an implementation of Wei Dai's B-money and Nick Bitkin's ideas. (7) Also, in the Bitcoin white paper reference to Wei Dai's B-money as the first citation, the respect is overwhelming. Auburn Satoshi posted the content of the above article in 2019, and he forgot all about what he said back then. Maybe he should have read Satoshi Nakamoto's nearly 80,000-word posting correctly. Perhaps he probably has a problem with forgetfulness; see below.
"I spent 20 years designing Bitcoin. I started in 1998, and went through more iterations than I can ever hope to imagine and remember before finally coming up with something that worked." (6)
Launched the workable bitcoin solution in 2009. Unfortunately, Auburn Satoshi has a lousy brain; it's only 20 years from 1998 to 2018; Bitcoin went live in 2009, a total of 10 years from 1998. Bitcoin is not a product of 2 years; 10 years is the time to be. Twenty years what has happened? Assuming Auburn Satoshi is Satoshi Nakamoto, what would the talented Nakamoto have come up with after Bitcoin came out and he had ten years to research? Would it have made such a dismal debut as Auburn Satoshi did?
Auburn Satoshi did not understand the Mises regression law, so he cut off finance as a casino and commodity exchange. The stored value must begin with the exchange of commodities; no commodity exchange will not produce a medium of exchange; money is a widely recognized medium of exchange; today's prices are determined by yesterday; how can the financial market by a casino? How is a deal a casino? Speculation and gambling are different. It is an insult to all financial practitioners. By the way, fiat currency is not a cost first and then a price, nor is it natural stuff.
"It is not the exchange that people called the market that allows growth in the creation of capital but rather the exchange of goods between individuals for consumption. A market is not the casino we call the exchange. Such lies need to end." (6)
Auburn Satoshi is so bad at finance that he did not at least read Mr. XC's posting on the Bitcoin forum in July 2010. The fact that Satoshi Nakamoto replied to this posting indicates that Auburn Satoshi was not even in the Bitcoin forums during this period. The early bitcoins were not only held by Satoshi Nakamoto, but they were rarely moved, thanks to the early community discussions that showed that the holders agreed with the Mises theory. Satoshi Nakamoto agrees as well. Perhaps Mr.XC is a computer engineer working in the monetary unit, and he contributed significantly to the formation of the bitcoin belief. Anonymity has a lot of secrets, which is an advantage and a disadvantage. Decryption is a lot of fun. You have to be bold and imaginative, and careful in seeking proof. The most daring was Auburn Satoshi. How did he figure out that Satoshi Nakamoto wouldn't come out? Perhaps he saw through the maze of Satoshi Nakamoto's birthday, 40 years of the latent time when Satoshi Nakamoto resurfaced; he was already in his 80s.
Auburn Satoshi resides in the wrong place, does not match the Pacific Ocean's time zone, and does not have the time to post. Nationality is also incorrect, Australian nationality afraid of U.S. law? That means there is no need for anonymity. He is allegedly a cypherpunk, but I can't find him speaking as a cypherpunk when discussing digital currency. He is about the same age as Adam, 51 today, older than Wei Dai, and if so thoughtful, should be well known in the cypherpunk community. It's a shame there is no place for Auburn Satoshi in Wikipedia's Who's Who of cypherpunk entries. Instead, Wei Dai is listed who is younger than him.
Conclusion: Auburn Satoshi is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
8.4 Satoshi Nakamoto will not appear like Auburn Satoshi
Bitcoin has flaws; holders want bitcoin to go up, and some small improvement actions will go up and be more secure. Move the bitcoin decimal point right 5 to 6 digits, and immediately there are as many people as like dogcoins, which survival is all about the high price of bitcoin. Then there's a little money from transaction fees to the Bitcoin Foundation for maintaining the core technical team and market evaluation of new features. Finally, it facilitates the expansion of consensus, which is only as secure as the larger the consensus. The benefits of the above options are discussed in the next section.
Satoshi Nakamoto will not be a nameless rat, and simple identification needs to be more convincing; it needs to combine the research of Bitcoin and the password left by Satoshi Nakamoto. All of these elements fall under the line of inviting out Satoshi Nakamoto. If Satoshi Nakamoto is not given a reason to come out, he won't make an appearance, even if the world recognizes him as Satoshi Nakamoto. For him to come out would mean change, welcoming the new world, to propose solutions, and that is the reason to give him to come out. The following section is another line of content to welcome the new world.
In the scenario I envision, Satoshi Nakamoto's appearance will not be as brainless as Auburn Satoshi's. Satoshi Nakamoto must shine and take up the mission of using "strong cryptography and privacy-enhancing technologies as a social and political change." It is probably the wish of all cypherpunks and the Bitcoin community.
Changes are bound to happen. Now is like the eve of Satoshi Nakamoto's design of Bitcoin. Interesting experiments, innovations, experiences, and lessons of blockchain are inspiring. All conditions are met. The second rescue continues to happen without stopping, and it is a historical necessity to invite Satoshi Nakamoto. His presence predicted the arrival of a new world.
Satoshi Nakamoto: male, then 33-34 years old, prodigy, American, living on the West Coast, is a cypherpunk. No shortage of money. Freelancer. There is no Satoshi Nakamoto among the deceased possible subjects. He had excellent programming and product design skills and an understanding of the community. Good life to have a good moneymaser and schemer. Has a deep understanding of finance. Influenced by the Austrian school of economics.
2. W. Dai, "b-money," http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt, 1998.
3. From: Hal Finney
Bitcoin v0.1 released
January 11, 2009,
4.From: Satoshi Nakamoto
Sent:Saturday,January 10,2009 11:17 AM To: firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject:Re: Citation of your b-money page
I wanted to let you know,I just released the full implementation of the paper I sent you a few months ago, Bitcoin v0.1. Details, download and screenshots are at www.bitcoin.org
I think it achieves nearly all the goals you set out to solve in your b-money paper.
The system is entirely decentralized, without any server or trusted parties. The network infrastructure can support a full range of escrow transactions and contracts, but for now the focus is on the basics of money and transactions.
Re: Transactions and Scripts: DUP HASH160 ... EQUALVERIFY CHECKSIG
6. Satoshi Nakamoto
Apr 6, 2019
Re: They want to delete the Wikipedia article
Bitcoin is an implementation of Wei Dai's b-money proposal http://weidai.com/bmoney.txt on Cypherpunks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypherpunks in 1998 and Nick Szabo's Bitgold proposal http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html