

Someone claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto just wrote to the Bitcoin developer list - LukeB_UK
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.html

======
pstrateman
The headers indicate that this email was legitimately sent by
satoshi@vistomail.com

Satoshi used this email address in his first announcement of bitcoin.

I have never seen anything PGP signed by Satoshi, thus the lack of a signature
does not indicate forgery.

Further to that point Satoshi meticulously employed strong operational
security techniques, making it very likely that he/she/they destroyed the
private key after withdrawing from the community.

The evidence isn't strong either way, however it's certainly leaning towards
the email being legitimate.

Received: from mail.vistomail.com (vistomail.com [190.97.163.93]) by
smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2175813F for <bitcoin-
dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; Sat, 15 Aug 2015 19:00:05 +0000 (UTC)

[http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.encryption.general/12588...](http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.encryption.general/12588/)

( Originally posted on reddit
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h4goc/satoshi_nak...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h4goc/satoshi_nakamoto_speaks_about_bitcoin_fork/cu452nu)
)

~~~
mathieutd
The header says that it's from vistomail.com. It doesn't have to be
satoshi@vistomail.com.

~~~
pstrateman
The header indicates that it was sent via webmail.

Assuming vistomail.com is not compromised, then that indicates it was in fact
sent by satoshi@vistomail.com

(I'll also note that they do not appear to expire registrations ever)

------
dang
I'm no stylometrist, but that sounds so much like every other internet fake
that we're going to demote this story pending some evidence.

~~~
pstrateman
My post contains some evidence.

------
amingilani
Just lemme vent it out: shit shit shit shit shit shit shit. Oh shit.

Anyways, rationality now kicking in, and until proven otherwise, I'll assume
it is not the real Satoshi.

Regardless, I think it's fair point this person raises. I'm all for lower
fees. In my country, the current transaction fee costs 2 rupees, and I
wouldn't buy a 5 rupee lollipop for 7, and raising the blocksize sounded like
a quickfix, but it comes at a terrible cost. I can't imagine bitcoin being
bitcoin if the blockchain become so hideously large to the point hobbyists
couldn't download and run a full node on their pcs. Not to mention the obvious
harmful precedence it sets if the lead devs bully their way into a community
project (which is the defacto super cryptrocurrency)

IMHO the community should put resources into finding a sustainable solution..
lightning networks are a great hack, and i'm waiting on them with bated
breath.

If you don't know about them, watch the video on this:
[https://lightning.network/](https://lightning.network/)

~~~
maaku
> Anyways, rationality now kicking in, and until proven otherwise, I'll assume
> it is not the real Satoshi.

Why? So far there hasn't been any evidence pointing towards it not being
Satoshi.

I mean sure, the prior probability is low, but that's it. it appears to have
actually been sent by vistomail to the linux foundation. Unless you want to
assume that this was an IP spoofed mail or vistomail was cracked? No evidence
of that so far.

------
nas
I really doubt it is him. The writing style doesn't seem to match.

------
ChuckMcM
Well that proves at least _someone_ feels threatened enough by the Bitcoin
fork's possible success. Interesting move on the counter party parts, I would
expect something more along the lines of a counter point to Mike Hearn's blog
posting rather than this.

I also find it kind of sobering the kind of enemies you would have if you're
fork of a project managed to "kill" its viability.

~~~
gregr401
I don't see it as a issue / question of whether or not the forks possible
success, but the way which the fork is being pushed without wide and near
unanimous acceptance (assuming that was a core principal and vision).

If the original intent was to made it super hard to change the rules, but now
the rules are being changed by a 'few in power', I could see how that would be
concerning in general.

Regardless, this is rather interesting to watch play out. Especially for all
the companies that have popped up.

------
joshuak
For reference here is a description of the fork being discussed.

    
    
      - Mike Hearn [1]
      - Redit [2]
    

\--

    
    
      [1]: https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1
      [2]: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h42cz/bitcoin_is_forked/

------
crocal
What would be the actual consequence of Nakamoto declaring Bitcoin a "failed
Project"?

~~~
maaku
Nothing. The genius behind Bitcoin is that it doesn't stand or fall on one
person's opinion.

