Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
[flagged]
elguillaume on Jan 31, 2016 | hide | past | web | favorite



The quality of these "unmaskings" has been getting lower over time.

The paper he cites from 2007 describes a system nothing like Bitcoin. Digital cash papers have been coming out every year for decades, it's always been a hot topic of research in the field of cryptography, since the days of Chaum. You could pick almost any time in any year and find some e-cash paper like that one.

The attempt to link the Satoshi Nakamoto name with random fragments of random authors in random citations of an essentially randomly chosen paper is ... especially entertaining.

The reasons Bitcoin took off despite a billion other crypto papers that also tried to crack the problem of digital cash are:

• Bitcoin was simple enough for non-cryptographers to understand: no advanced maths, almost certainly because Satoshi himself was not a professional or academically trained cryptographer.

• The unique monetary policy and coin distribution scheme that incentivised people to take part early on, and engaged people who weren't technologists but cared about monetary policy.

• Most importantly of all, Satoshi actually implemented his scheme in a downloadable app that was fairly easy to use. So people could try it out and get excited about it.

• Actually, truly P2P. Many e-cash schemes descended from Chaum's (and the 2007 paper is no different) assume a "central bank". Bitcoin was one of the only schemes that had literally no special nodes.


Can we stop getting this stuff to the front page? It doesn't matter who Satoshi really is, and there is no proof he is even one single man.

I'm all for Bitcoin stories on the front page, but this is just a regurgitation of what I've seen on the BitcoinTalk forum's frequent conspiracy theorist threads.


Basically he thinks it's the authors of this paper http://eprint.iacr.org/2007/216

Discussion on bitcointalk: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1345468.0


Maybe people should stop trying to find someone who so obviously does not want to be found?


I doubt the guy even read the paper, this is nothing like bitcoin.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: