
No, Nick Szabo wasn't Satoshi in 2014 either - davidgerard
https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2018/12/16/no-nick-szabo-wasnt-satoshi-in-2014-either/
======
truantbuick
It's interesting that there are a few bits of evidence that are used for and
against the Satoshi = Szabo question:

1\. Szabo wasn't cited in Satoshi's white paper

2\. Szabo barely mentioned Satoshi or bitcoin in his own blog or posts until
Satoshi had disappeared

3\. In an email to Wei Dai (another pioneer in this space), Satoshi introduces
himself and seems to imply he had only recently learned about Wei Dai (and by
association, Szabo)

I tend to lean in the direction that Szabo probably knows more than he's let
on.

Basically, it comes down to that I find it almost impossible that whoever
developed bitcoin was entirely unaware of Szabo and Wei Dai's previous
proposals and efforts during the development. Newton and Leibniz supposedly
invented Calculus independent of one another, and considering their approach
and notation, that seems plausible, but bit gold is so much like bitcoin
(including, but not limited to the name), I just refuse to accept that.

And then when you suppose that Satoshi must've known about Szabo, the three
bits of evidence above seem very suspicious. Taking the evidence above:

1\. Once Satoshi discovered Wei Dai's similar work and cited him, why didn't
he cite Szabo?

2\. This was Szabo's baby. Why was he almost silent for 3+ years about the
very thing he had written about for 10 years that was finally put into
practice?

3\. Satoshi contacted the other pioneers in the space (Adam Back, Wei Dai),
and yet Szabo hasn't mentioned a thing about any communications he received
from Satoshi.

------
api
I think it was Hal Finney. If that's the case it means the creator of the
first working cryptocurrency is presently cryopreserved in liquid nitrogen,
once again proving that we live in a cyberpunk novel.

