
Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius? - mkuhn
http://www.wired.com/2015/12/bitcoins-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-this-unknown-australian-genius/
======
Analemma_
So far there have been multiple Satoshi Nakamoto reveals which, of course,
never panned out. To their credit Wired is hedging their bets, saying Wright
could be a determined hoaxer and even providing some countervailing evidence
to their own theory. Good journalism, that.

Having said that, I looked over the article and this seems to be the most
convincing Satoshi Nakamoto theory thus far. There's no need to jump to any
firm conclusions yet though: I'm certain the Internet will conclusively prove
or disprove this over the next few days.

~~~
emgoldstein
I think a very small amount of stylometric analysis would cast a lot of doubt
on this theory.

Satoshi's grammar is always perfect. His sentences are tight. He's clear and
to the point. Wright rambles; his grammar is terrible; he seems to have no
idea what a comma is for. Scanning his blog for a minute, he comes across as
the kind of slightly dotty kook who would try to convince people he's Satoshi
with this kind of "leak."

I'll stick with the current mainstream theory, thanks...

~~~
mike_hearn
Not only grammar, but Wright's writings are full of typos and spelling errors,
which occur at a remarkable rate, to the extent that he can't spell Silicon
Valley! (he spelled it as "silicone valley"). I never once saw Satoshi make a
spelling error.

That said, the rest of the evidence is pretty compelling, isn't it?

Satoshi did once say he wasn't all that good with words, despite evidence to
the contrary. Perhaps this mysterious collaboration with his dead friend
involved the other guy writing the messages.

~~~
maaarghk
I think that's plausible particularly because he emailed someone asking them
to leak his message about not being Dorian, and that person heavily edited /
redacted it; it's quite possible that is a recurring theme.

Also in the Gawker article we are told Wright emailed Kleiman asking for "help
editing a paper", "I need your help and I need a version of me to make this
work that is better than me."

~~~
kijin
Notice that most of Wright's retroactive editing to make himself look like
Satoshi took place in 2013-2014, shortly after Kleiman died.

Perhaps Kleiman was the one who really wanted to keep Satoshi's identity a
secret, but Wright had different ambitions and now he doesn't have his friend
to rein him in anymore.

~~~
o_nate
Or Kleiman & Wright formed the Satoshi identity as a collaboration, and after
Kleiman died, Wright decided to edit the historical record to take more of the
credit for himself.

------
cba9
Apparently Gizmodo has been investigating this for even longer (!) and has a
lot of other evidence for Wright=Satoshi too: [http://gizmodo.com/this-
australian-says-he-and-his-dead-frie...](http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-
says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692)

~~~
nickpsecurity
That's mostly evidence for my theory: he's an egomaniac trying to sell a
story. Almost all of this goes back to him or the leaker as a matter of faith.
It all appears way after Bitcoin appears. Everything about how he presents
himself comes off as playing to a mystique to draw people in.

I'd buy the leaks if the hacker posted a message as Satoshi using stolen
credential and linked to this article. Meanwhile, the "hacker" is probably
Wright with nothing to do with Satoshi other than make money on his name.

~~~
alfiedotwtf
> he's an egomaniac trying to sell a story

Awesome guerrilla marketing.

Journalists want the scoop of the century - outing the real Satoshi. By back
filling history, they gave exactly what they wanted, and they took it hook,
line and sinker.

~~~
daveguy
Except is that really the scoop of the century? Do people really care that
much? If the media would just leave the real guy alone we could have the added
benefit of preventing false self-marketing too. How about we just ignore all
these "the real satoshi!" articles?

~~~
nickpsecurity
It's already in Wired, has 212 points on Hacker News, and who knows what value
to people assessing him in academia or business sectors. Altogether, enough
people care for it to matter to a tech egomaniac. Not "scoop of the century"
or anything, though.

~~~
alfiedotwtf
Sorry, when I said journalists, I meant tech journalists.

~~~
nickpsecurity
All good. I agreed with rest of it.

------
dvydra
Aaaaand the Australian police just raided his house:
[http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/09/bitcoin-
fo...](http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/09/bitcoin-founder-
craig-wrights-home-raided-by-australian-police)

~~~
sosuke
Raided his out just a little while after these were sharing a theory he was
the bitcoin founder. And in the name of the Tax Office? I'm in shock at the
speed they moved in to try and catch him for ... tax evasion?

~~~
bquinn
As the articles say, he has been under investigation for a while for his
bitcoin mining work (which as far as I can tell is not under dispute). The
Australian government has decreed that all bitcoin "investments" should be
taxed for capital gains [1] so he could be up for a huge tax bill on his paper
"profits" even if he was just mining back in the early days.

[1] [https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Gen/Tax-treatment-of-
crypto-c...](https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Gen/Tax-treatment-of-crypto-
currencies-in-Australia---specifically-bitcoin/)

------
RockyMcNuts
Also Gizmodo was separately leaked to, it seems, has a bunch of screenshots

[http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-
frie...](http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-
invented-bi-1746958692)

if it's a hoax, seems like an awfully long and meticulous one.

[edit - Dang this fell off front page fast! Thought this one was going to be
almost Steve Jobs in terms of having a life of its own]

~~~
Steko
It's being flagged down by the 'oh no they're going to kill satoshi' crowd;
based on pts and time it should be the #1 post atm.

~~~
RockyMcNuts
really? as if not having it on the front page of HN will totally keep the lid
on it. plus the guy either outed himself or is pulling a massive hoax. either
way he had time to plan for it. meanwhile the death of the Williams-Sonoma
founder on 12/5 is basking on front page with 1/10 number of points. karma
conspiracy HN is the worst form of HN but how odd.

------
calcsam
Worth noting that the main source on this is Gwern
([https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=gwern](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=gwern)).
Gwern, care to comment?

~~~
tgcordell
Can you share where you see that Gwern is the source?

~~~
betenoire
first line on the page: > ANDY GREENBERG AND GWERN BRANWEN

------
btym
_" The PGP key associated with Nakamoto’s email address and references to an
upcoming “cryptocurrency paper” and “triple entry accounting” were added
sometime after 2013"_

Why is this not at the beginning of the article? That's pretty strong evidence
that this is a hoax.

~~~
mshron
I went back and read it more carefully, and it's linked to an email address
one character off from the known Satoshi one. satoshin@vistomail.com vs
satoshi@vistomail.com.

~~~
btym
Yeah, I don't know why they're taking that as proof either. What's more
likely, Satoshi having two near-identical addresses on the same host, or
someone registering a near identical address to impersonate him?

------
tlrobinson
This looks more like a trail of deliberately planted evidence to make us think
he's Satoshi.

The email/tweet/transcript quotes almost suggest sort of multiple personality
disorder where he believes he's Satoshi.

~~~
Steko
A plausible explanation is that he was part of a 'Satoshi partnership' with
Kleiman and, with Kleiman's passing, began trying to retroactively make
himself look like a bigger part of it.

------
zmanian
I wonder if Steven Wright has any open source code that we could review.

While it seems plausible that he would obfuscate his styleometry, it would be
interesting to do a comparison with early Bitcoin.

The early Bitcoin code is super awkward.

~~~
mortehu
> I wonder if Steven Wright has any open source code that we could review.

I've been looking, and so far the only thing I've found is this:
[https://digital-forensics.sans.org/blog/2009/04/24/code-
skil...](https://digital-forensics.sans.org/blog/2009/04/24/code-skills-make-
better-forensic-analysts)

------
CyberDildonics
If someone wants to prove they are Satoshi Nakamoto all they have to do is
sign a message with the private keys from the genesis block. Until then it's a
little pointless to guess.

~~~
adrusi
That's assuming they still have it. Perhaps the reason none of the bitcoin
created in the genesis block has ever moved is because Satoshi thought there
would be some value in having it be static and never expected bitcoin to have
actual value.

They may have deleted that key.

~~~
nickpsecurity
It's going to be really funny if we find out he, too, tossed a HD full of
Bitcoins in the trash thinking it was nothing. ;)

~~~
joshstrange
Yeah, I did this... I mined 100BTC Solo on my CPU right around the time it
first came out. Then it wasn't even worth $1. Multiple formats/rebuilds later
it's worth over $1K/btc (yes that was an artificially inflated price, I know).
_sigh_ I could be student-debt free but it wasn't worth it for me to hold on
to at the time...

~~~
nickpsecurity
Man, that sucks. Sorry to hear it.

~~~
joshstrange
I always just tell myself I would have probably got excited and sold at $2/BTC
or when it hovered around $8. Such is life, no use wondering what might have
been.

~~~
nickpsecurity
I hear you and you might have so it's at least semi-true. My own loss was a
triple HD failure that cost almost a TB of software, research papers, photos,
everything. I have none of my prior work as an INFOSEC pro. Three in a month
when I was too broke from recession to replace them. So I feel the pain. ;)

One time I told that story to a Marine who instantly went PTSD. First time I
met someone with similarly messed up HD loss. He had his slim, external laying
on a table in maybe Iraq. Another Marine, round in the chamber, casually
dropped his M16 on the table as he came in. It fired a burst right into the
HD, leaving it unrecoverable. I said, "Damn. I'm at a loss for words." So, you
ain't the only one haha.

~~~
joshstrange
Yeah, at this point I keep massive replaceable data backed up locally and
important "can't lose" in 1-2 clouds and locally

~~~
nickpsecurity
Good start. Remember to hash and check the files regularly for bit rot. My
three HD method kept three copies of the stuff while scripting the checks on
the files and replacing broken ones with 2 out of 3 voter logic. Obviously,
three HD's didn't work out so my next scheme will be like yours plus my bit
rot solution when I'm not broke. ;)

------
robotcookies
He seems obsessed with being Satoshi. And the article itself said he made
edits to insert bitcoin related entries into past writings. I'm sure he's a
very smart guy but he's also one of the last people I'd think was Satoshi.

------
norea-armozel
Why is it important to know who Satoshi Nakamoto is/was? It seems like all
this desire to know the person defeats the point of the pseudo-anonymity here.
I assume it's meant to keep people focused on the idea of the crypto-currency
and less on any specific ideology SN may espouse. But that's just me.

~~~
derefr
Personally, I want to know who this guy is because he did something really
rare: putting together some bits of common, _old_ math—just bits that nobody
thought to put together before—into a system with entirely novel (some would
say "emergent") high-level semantics. He's an "inventor" in the most crucial
sense.

And really, he's created one of the few things in Computer Science that I
wouldn't argue with being patented. A blockchain is a configuration of
algorithms into a novel abstract "machine", with many possible
implementations, which isn't domain-specific, and that nobody had thought
of—or, really, was likely to ever think of—without him.

Really, I'm just hoping that he's still actively working on other ideas; I
would love to follow his research.

------
gregmac
Motherboard seems to think this is a hoax[1].

In sum:

* Only one key, the Original Key, is actually known to be associated with Satoshi.

* The Wired and Gizmodo Keys that supposedly lead back to Satoshi weren’t previously known to be linked to Satoshi, and their 2008 creation date could have been faked.

* Both keys use a longer and less-common key size than the Original Key.

* Both keys use a list of cipher-suites that don’t match up to the Original Key, and weren’t added to GPG until 2009.

* The Wired key was retroactively added to a 2008 blogpost sometime between 2012 and 2014, as noted in its story.

* A core Bitcoin developer who’s been involved from nearly the beginning looked back at 2011 chatlogs referring to “fake” Satoshi keys on keyservers, and found no reference to either the Gizmodo or Wired keys. He thinks that those keys weren’t yet uploaded to the keyserver in 2011.

[1] [http://motherboard.vice.com/read/satoshis-pgp-keys-are-
proba...](http://motherboard.vice.com/read/satoshis-pgp-keys-are-probably-
backdated-and-point-to-a-hoax)

------
slantedview
Watching the video:

"I've got a couple doctorates... I forget what I've actually got these days".

It's hard to take seriously someone who is trying this hard not to appear
self-aware.

------
elif
I wish people would respect satoshi's wish of anonymity.

Having probably the only concentration of wealth over $100M not guarded by a
full security detail, it could very well lead to not only his own harm, but
perhaps his family members being kidnapped, etc.

That is not even to mention the bilderberg/rothschild/etc. type of people that
probably aren't big fans.

~~~
mikeyouse
There are something like 5,000 families in the US worth more than $100M, the
majority don't have private security, don't worry about kidnappings, and don't
take any real actions to protect themselves from the Bilderbergs (?)

~~~
hatred
Is there some leaked "source" that claims that Satoshi is American too ?

PS: Getting kidnapped for ransom is not so uncommon in third world countries.

~~~
mikeyouse
The linked article combined with the Gizmodo one make a compelling case that
the creators of Bitcoin are an American and an Australian.. Where kidnapping
for ransom is extraordinarily uncommon.

------
DaniFong
Does anybody have access to Craig Steven Wright's papers? Google Scholar only
turns up a single patent application (apparently a patent on a registration
server -- vaguely related to bitcoin but without the decentralized aspect--
and very ideologically misaligned...)

I've seen people want to mysteriously associate themselves with something
large before. This could be an example of it.

------
cornchips
he is actively deleting himself from the internet; his several blogs (gse in
particular as it was posted here a few weeks ago, but there are more), his
youtube channel and any reference to him.

i doubt this is speculation as the actions definitely show he is trying to
hide something (his original writing from analysis). this is also apparent in
his replies to wired.

also, it sucks that this kind of content is being cleared. i found it
interesting and hope it will make it back. please put it back craig.

edits:

the following quote is quite odd; anyone have any clarity?

“About 20 years ago, I was at the launch of Alta Vista. It was the first big
commercial search engine. Back in the early '90s… everyone told me how much of
a ‘coo-coo’ [crazy] I was for wasting all this money to be part of something
that’s a ‘bloody piece of computer code’," said Wright. [1]

[1]
[http://www.cio.com.au/article/549278/bitcoin_safe_/](http://www.cio.com.au/article/549278/bitcoin_safe_/)

------
wityak
If Satoshi is Wright, and he really wanted to remain nameless, he almost
certainly would not have shown up to the Bitcoin Investor’s Conference. Poor
op-sec.

That said, the issue with outing him is that he could hold more sway over the
direction of BTC than if it were a truly decentralized currency. Not sure this
if that's in the best interests of BTC.

~~~
symlinkk
Judging by the trainwreck that the debate over the change in block size ended
up being, maybe Bitcoin could use a benevolent dictator.

~~~
sneak
It wasn't a trainwreck; it worked exactly as it should.

Bitcoin is not a system for those that favor changing the rules once the game
is in play.

~~~
DennisP
Bitcoin has gone through lots of changes. For example, the blocksize limit was
added in July 2010, a year and a half after launch.

------
3301cicada
I used to follow him Twitter, G+, Blogspot and LinkedIn. Within minutes of the
article being published all his accounts have been out (disconnected?). Only
LinkedIn is still up.

------
swang
I find it eerily odd that that pencil making article was posted on HN a couple
of weeks ago.

~~~
bvm
The submitter's account has only submitted links from Craig Wright's blog and
was created 36 days ago, but is an active participant in discussions about the
recent revelations...

[https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=cba9](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=cba9)

------
maaarghk
I came here to say "oh god not again", but then I read it and found out gwern
was involved in the investigation. Suddenly it's quite interesting. :)

------
wityak
Gizmodo now chiming in and saying Satoshi was 2 people, but basically
confirming the Wired article on Dr. Wright.

[http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-
frie...](http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-
invented-bi-1746958692)

~~~
slantedview
Confirming it based on the same leaked information which can't entirely be
corroborated.

~~~
Obi_Juan_Kenobi
The interesting thing about these claims is that they tie so many parties
together, I think ongoing investigations will be able to figure out whether
all of this is true.

While so much seems 'too good to be true' and potentially a plant, it is quite
incredible that someone would put this all together after the fact to make a
perfect fitting story. Either some ends won't meet, or we'll have the answer
at long last.

~~~
brandoncordell
I don't really understand. If he is claiming to Satoshi (as some people have
mentioned, although all I've seen is stuff leaked about him) can't he just
sign a message with Satoshi's widely known PGP key?

------
vessenes
Most of the 'evidence' seems to have been added in 2013, a year when prices
hit nearly $1,000 per coin. Maybe it's Mr. Wright, maybe not.

But, it's quite credulous to say "Oh, what an unusual and determined person it
must to be to think of claiming to be Satoshi in 2013."

------
hindenburg
Wouldn't it be fun if we could set up a prediction market so that we could all
place bets on whether Mr. Wright is or is not an inventor of Bitcoin?

------
hackuser
Trying to identify one member in a population of 7 billion, you are likely to
find many more than one very persuasive false positive.

------
chollida1
This feels like a really weird story, on one hand I've wanted to know the
answer to this forever and on the other hand, this doesn't really seem to be a
story at all:)

So what does this mean for bitcoin, anything?

~~~
Analemma_
If this turns out to be true, it could mean a lot or nothing, depending on
what Wright decides to do. The big questions would be, a) does he have the
private keys to Satoshi's 1.1MM BTC stash or has he lost them and b) will he
decide to be actively involved in Bitcoin development/governance.

The Bitcoin market has mostly been assuming that Satoshi's bitcoins are lost
forever, and the price reflects that. If it turns out Wright can still sell
those Bitcoins it would have a dramatic- but probably not cataclysmic- effect
on the price.

The other question would be if he wanted to involve himself in Bitcoin
development. If he really is Satoshi, his voice would carry a lot of weight on
big, divisive issues like block size. For better or worse.

------
kelvin0
I'm really wondering why the author of bitcoin would hide their identity?
Don't want the attention? Plenty of innovative people are simply footnotes in
history. Or is the true origin of this digital currency a dubious agency, who
if revealed would stop people from wanting to use it? Is it a second try at
Amero?
[http://forextrading.about.com/od/forexhistory/a/amero_conspi...](http://forextrading.about.com/od/forexhistory/a/amero_conspiracy.htm)

~~~
draw_down
I would have done the same thing. People are insane, can you imagine what they
would do to the inventor of digital money? (I realize Satoshi is not that, but
a lot of people will think he/she is.)

~~~
kelvin0
What do you think people would do to him? I'm not sure I understand the
'danger' you seem to perceive.

~~~
nickpsecurity
He's presumably a computer geek sitting on a fortune that can be stolen and
transferred without FinCEN knowing or able to do crap. I think that's enough
reason to keep his identity secret.

~~~
kelvin0
What's FinCEN? Is that the Australian equivalent of the USA IRS?

~~~
nickpsecurity
It's a U.S. organization that goes after financial crime world-wide. I just
gave it as an example. Point being, many types of money moving require careful
laundering to prevent traces for financial or other prosecution. It's why most
crooks focus on trying to steal straight cash if they're here in U.S.. A guy
with an easily-moved, unregulated, semi-anonymous stash of millions is a much
easier target and the government might not be able to help him. So, more risk
than usual and varies depending on his location.

~~~
snowwrestler
Let's say someone stole Satoshi's stash. To convert it to non-Bitcoin value,
they would have to spend it or transfer it. Wouldn't people notice that the
famous Satoshi block is suddenly in play? And the point at which it is
converted to real value is the point at which a criminal investigation would
begin.

I don't understand why Satoshi's stash of bitcoins is any easier to spend
untraceably than any other store of value.

~~~
nickpsecurity
Not easier to spend than stock, bonds, derivatives, and so on that most wealth
is stored in? Last I heard, there was more liquidity and less auditing for
Bitcoin spending in general. An expert on Bitcoin might know that particular
block moving would be a high risk operation. Thugs reading about his identity,
worth, and use of Bitcoin in criminal dealings might think differently. They
might decide to go get his money.

That's the risk. Not sure of its likelihood in terms of a percentage or even
verbal description. It's near zero while he's anonymous, though.

~~~
snowwrestler
There is more auditing for bitcoin than almost any other store of value,
because every transaction is broadcast to the entire network. Crowd-sourced
auditing is essentially all bitcoin _is._

Like bitcoin itself, the anonymity of bitcoin is also a chain. Bitcoins can be
mined anonymously, and therefore transacted anonymously. But any point where
they are converted to other stores of value will create connections to real-
world identity. For example, cash has to be picked up in a physical place, or
it has to be transfered into a bank account, which creates an auditable
transaction record. Purchased objects have to be delivered somewhere.
Purchased services are interacted with in some way. Etc.

~~~
nickpsecurity
I thought crooks successfully transact services with Bitcoin like they do
cash, western union, and traded CC's. Must not be as hard to obfuscate as you
make it seem regardless of the ledger. Someone else mentioned mix networks to
hide whose doing what as well but I'm not up-to-date on them.

Overall point of the discussion is that people finding out he has a
physical/digital object worth millions might try to rob him. Some of them also
use Bitcoin as payment for crime. So, anonymity seems like a good choice.

------
AlyssaRowan
Perhaps it's just me, but I find the - repeated - attempted unmasking of a
cypherpunk nym adopted with good cause and reason for the creation of a very
disruptive technology terribly disrespectful, although perhaps inevitable.

"Who is but the form following the function of what, and _what_ I am is a man
in a mask." (Well I can see that.) "Of course you can. I'm not questioning
your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a
masked man _who_ he is." [-V, 2005]

------
pen2l
gwern, should we really be doing this? Why not leave the guy alone? Obviously
he does not want to be found out... let him have his peace!

~~~
lvs
I'm really not too sure why you're being downvoted. I think there are a number
of people who agree that outing him isn't necessary or valuable. A man trying
not to be in the public eye deserves as much.

~~~
kybernetikos
Not just that - outing satoshi could cause him and any close family
significant danger, given that there is a strong chance he is in possession of
the secret keys of addresses containing 1M bitcoins.
[https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-
deserved-f...](https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-
fortune-of-satoshi-nakamoto/)

~~~
kiba
What makes him different from say, Bill Gate?

~~~
eric_h
Bill Gates doesn't have billions in cash sequestered under the digital
equivalent of his mattress.

------
nickpsecurity
The Newsweek one made more sense than this one. Especially him saying he
wasn't involved in it any more. Imperfect English wouldn't make me think I
worked on a project called Bitcoin, which also doesn't even sound like most
tech. He certainly issued a rebuttal but would if it was true or false. Same
for the email saying he's not Dorian. Meaningless.

So, she might be wrong or right. Who knows. That story wasn't convincing
mainly due to how it was presented. I think this guy is onto something about
that:

[http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/03/10/satoshi-
why...](http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/03/10/satoshi-why-newsweek-
isnt-convincing/)

So, now we have a new one with leaked emails and blog posts. The writer is
wise enough, as Analemma noted, to mention it could be a hoax with some
indications of that. It's actually the first thing I think given the two
source are both huge red flags, one already has editing, and they center on a
sort of egomaniac. An egomaniac who also has financial conflicts of interest
and major investments in Bitcoin that might benefit from a false reveal. I'm
not buying it until we have good external or first-hand data tying him to
Bitcoin like prior work attempted.

The trust chain and leveraging Satoshi's stash without directly moving it is
good thinking, though. I predicted that in private conversations as a
significant possibility. Learned the trick from Wall St where they have all
kinds of ways to make money on less money or static assets. Hell, they even
make money on non-existent assets lol. A person sitting on a Bitcoin fortune
able to prove it without it being published could do a lot of the same stuff.

------
grubles
"comparisons of different archived versions of the three smoking gun posts
from Wright’s blog show that he did edit all three—to insert evidence of his
bitcoin history. The PGP key associated with Nakamoto’s email address and
references to an upcoming “cryptocurrency paper” and “triple entry accounting”
were added sometime after 2013."

------
myth_buster
Craig Wright's home raided by Australian police[0].

[0] [http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/09/bitcoin-
fo...](http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/09/bitcoin-founder-
craig-wrights-home-raided-by-australian-police)

~~~
webXL
Anyone know why the presumed inventor would have existing tax problems, given
the ample amount of valuable bitcoin that could be used to pay bills?

Edit: Gizmodo mentions a bunch of tax issues [http://gizmodo.com/this-
australian-says-he-and-his-dead-frie...](http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-
says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692)

------
bishnu
Well, this is compelling stuff. Certainly moreso than the easily-dismissed
Newsweek story.

------
mjbellantoni
_" As Wright told the Bitcoin Investor’s conference, he’s applying that second
machine towards the mysterious task of 'modeling Bitcoin's scalability'[.]"_

If he is Nakamoto, I wonder if he's using this computing power to test
strategies for divesting of the "nine-figure fortune" of coins which is
assumed to be controlled by Nakamoto.

~~~
reddytowns
Can you explain your theory better? The coin's Satoshi owns haven't moved
since they were mined long ago.

~~~
mjbellantoni
Basically, it's supply and demand.

Satoshi has a large position relative to the whole market. If he every wanted
to convert those coins to US dollars or some other currency, I'm guessing the
supply it would introduce would cause the conversion rate to crash unless done
in a sophisticated way.

~~~
elif
Satoshi's fortune (1.5Mbtc) is almost as large as the daily volume (1.9Mbtc)
of the entire market... its sudden change from dormant and, for all purposes
inert, to "potentially market-destroying" would be way too spooky.

Even a single satoshi leaving one of his known wallets could spook enough
people to cause a crash. I can't speak for other investors, but even though I
have been long in bitcoin for years, I would be out in a heartbeat, for at
least a month.

------
agorabinary
Why do we care? How does knowing the identity of Satoshi advance Bitcoin in
any way? If someone wants to stay anonymous...

------
BenoitP
I'll believe it when I see something here:
[https://blockchain.info/fr/address/1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SL...](https://blockchain.info/fr/address/1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa?filter=1)

------
moomin
They don't seem to have spotted that the second "perplexing" email is a word-
for-word quote from Neuromancer. Which is particularly funny given that they
managed to figure out the William Gibson reference.

I had to explain to my wife why I was laughing so hard.

~~~
duskwuff
Which email are you referring to? None of the phrases in the second email
(starting with "The nature of this moniker") appear in any of Gibson's Sprawl
trilogy.

------
swairshah
this twitter account just got deleted
[https://twitter.com/dr_craig_wright](https://twitter.com/dr_craig_wright)

~~~
3301cicada
I followed him for his work on Cloudcroft, until an hour ago both of his blogs
and Google+ account were active. Completely out now :( [http://gse-
compliance.blogspot.com/](http://gse-compliance.blogspot.com/)
[http://security-doctor.blogspot.com/](http://security-doctor.blogspot.com/)
[https://plus.google.com/117910648569393591305/posts](https://plus.google.com/117910648569393591305/posts)

------
perseusprime1
Is this the same Dave Kleiman who is the Microsoft MVP?

------
JustSomeNobody
The NSA has nothing on these wannabe journalists. Good grief, why can't
someone's identity remain private even when they make something popular?

------
stephaneh
Satoshi is very probably Nick Szabo...

~~~
nickpsecurity
Does anyone have source code of Nick's from around the time period of what
Satoshi submitted? Satoshi's style is so weird that Nick's should be the same
unless the style was itself an obfuscation.

~~~
toufka
Got any examples of the weirdness in the original code?

~~~
nickpsecurity
I didn't read it. People that fo writeups on Satoshi and people who read the
code always mention it's weird style. Irritates them, even.

------
oldmanjay
It almost feels like this is a double bluff designed to confuse and discredit
pursuers.

------
webkike
Lets be clear: This is not an article you should write, or should have been
written.

------
kleer001
I would submit that posting this drivel on HK is unnecessary.

I'm all for real Bitcoin news, even about whats-his-face in Japan or
interviews with old cypherpunks. Or new forks or new coins or ponzi schemes or
silly lost hard drives even.

But this article is unfounded clickbait nonsense. Whomever the real SN is has
done good security work on their identity and won't be found unless they want
to.

~~~
Phlarp
I would agree with you, except that it's based on work by Gwern, who is not a
guy to sell wolf tickets.

