1. 15
  1.  

  2. 8

    Might be related in some way, but having looked over some of his papers on LinkedIn, and having seen the screenshots of the blog posts in these articles, I personally doubt it’s him.

    Then again, I honestly despise all of these attempts to put the label of Satoshi on anyone. Whoever (t|s)?hey? (is|are), Satoshi clearly wants to be anonymous, and given the value we’ve received from him/her/them, I personally prefer to express my gratitude by honoring that simple request.

    I much prefer this sort of sentiment:

    “At that moment, the crypto-currency enthusiast realized that the real Satoshi had been in his heart all along.”

    1. 5

      Then again, I honestly despise all of these attempts to put the label of Satoshi on anyone. Whoever (t|s)?hey? (is|are), Satoshi clearly wants to be anonymous, and given the value we’ve received from him/her/them, I personally prefer to express my gratitude by honoring that simple request.

      While I generally agree that requests for privacy should not be ignored, I don’t see it as simple nor in any way springing from the value we’ve received.

      a) The value an impact is debatable, so I don’t see how attaching the plea for privacy to that perceived value makes any sense. If I see bitcoin as harmful, do I gain a different moral position to talk about his privacy wish?

      b) It is also not simple. Satoshi is a person that created something of high impact and as such a person of historical interest. He’s able to answer a lot of interesting questions. While I agree that privacy is still something that can be preserved, I can also see an interest in his identity.

      c) Out of personal experience, I can say that the respect for the request to stay anonymous is widely differing at whim depending on the topic spoken about. Also compare that to e.g. court cases where the privacy of the defendant is always somewhat of a sliding scale depending on the accusation.

      There’s harm done though by false accusations and I would hold back on speaking too much about this actual person until we can be sure.

      1. 1

        There’s harm done though by false accusations and I would hold back on speaking too much about this actual person until we can be sure.

        Now it seems this was an extortion attempt. @algernon also links to evidence that the GPG key was fabricated.

      2. 7

        What about those of us who think Satoshi has inflicted a huge negative externality on the rest of the world?

        1. 4

          How so?

          1. 7

            Bitcoin makes it harder for societies to enforce rules and easier for individuals or small groups to work around them. I think this damages all our ability to solve coördination problems, which is the biggest problem facing societies that have free markets, liberal values and all the rest of it. See http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

            1. 9

              s/societies/governments/g

              Please don’t conflate government with society, those are two very different things. Incidentally, for me, Bitcoin’s ability to undermine the harmful influence of centralized government is one of the most attractive qualities of Satoshi’s invention.

              1. 6

                No, I’m pretty sure Bitcoin helps people evade any societal rules, whether enforced via the mechanism of government or by some other means.

                1. 2

                  I’m pretty sure Bitcoin helps people evade any societal rules

                  That’s like saying “I’m pretty sure freedom of will helps people evade any societal rules”. Yeah, it does, and that’s a beautiful thing. “Societal rules” cannot even prevent murder from happening (and no technology is necessary for that).

                  The world does actually have (seemingly) infallible rules called the laws of physics, but beyond that you cannot (and should not) try to force your control over other people’s lives. You’re welcome to try, but you won’t succeed, so it’s better to realize that maybe there’s a reason people (a society even) is choosing to not cooperate with some “rules” that someone decided to put down on paper.

                  1. 3

                    “Societal rules” cannot even prevent murder from happening

                    Reducing the probability of murder by a couple of orders of magnitude is good enough for me.

                2. 1

                  except it takes everyone’s transactions and effectively centralizes them in one block chain. This is obviously much more centralized than me giving you paper currency.

                  1. 3

                    except it takes everyone’s transactions and effectively centralizes them in one block chain.

                    That’s a misunderstanding of what the words “centralized” and “decentralized” mean. First off, it doesn’t “take everyone’s transactions”. It concerns itself only with Bitcoin transactions (and there are many blockchains, sidechains, altcoins, and even chains-within-chains).

                    Second, there isn’t “one Bitcoin blockchain” but rather a fork choice rule for deciding which is the “correct blockchain”. Both the location and the control over the blockchain is decentralized.

                    Finally, for any digital currency, a ledger of ordered transactions is required to make the currency work, whether or not that ledger is centralized or decentralized. The centralized ledgers (like Liberty Dollar), are simply not secure and are vulnerable to trivial manipulation or shut down.

                    See also: Deconfusing Decentralization

                    1. 1

                      By “all transactions” i obviously meant bitcoin transactions.

                      Finally, for any digital currency, a ledger of ordered transactions is required to make the currency work

                      This is a limitation of digital currency. Again, the ledger must be public and for it to work there must be the one “correct” ledger, as you stated.

                      This is still centralized with replication. Because at any one time, there is only one “correct” ledger that gets replicated across the network. This is no different than using google, which is centralized but behind the scenes is built on decentralized tech. The only difference is not one entity controls the bitcoin machines, but the community.

                      In other words, there is no digital equivalent of paper currency.

                      My opinion about this is straight forward. I don’t want to see a future with decentralized currency. I want to see a future without ANY currency. Because digital currency for me isn’t decentralized enough. We need to do better.

              2. 5

                It is considered declasse to admit in bitcoin circles that drugs, gambling, extortion, and other crimes are the plurality (if not majority) uses.

                1. 3

                  I always thought the first two are not only admitted, but admitted with a certain rebel pride.

                  Re: drugs, here’s an olden goldie that one may wonder about https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/11/06/how-the-fbi-just-made-the-world-a-more-dangerous-place-by-shutting-down-silkroad-2-0-and-a-bunch-of-online-drug-markets/

                  By taking drug transactions off the street and putting them online, you eliminate a significant link in the chain of violence between drug suppliers and end users. Drugs purchased online are typically less adulterated with dangerous contaminants than street drugs are, and a system of reviews rewards sellers who provide high-quality product.

                  Maybe it’s not all bad.

                  1. 3

                    For me, the only thing on that list worth calling a crime is extortion. Extortion is a real crime (one not unique to Bitcoin). Gambling is exploitation and predation, but a different level from extortion. Drugs on the other hand, are only a “crime” on paper in some places. The drug war itself is more appropriately compared to a global holocaust in terms of sheer number of lives lost or destroyed, and that Bitcoin can help address that problem is one of its greatest virtues.

                    1. 3

                      By being untraceable, Bitcoin doesn’t enable particular crimes, but crimes in general. I agree with you on the drug war, but are you also for trading weapons and radioactive waste, human trafficking, tax evasion, financial machinations and The Assasination Market? We, as a society, decided that certain financial transactions are illegal, and it’s not Nakamoto’s job to override our decisions. If the society is against the war on drugs but it’s still going on, we should fix democracy, not replace it with mob rule.

                      Besides, Bitcoin doesn’t stop the drug war. If a suitcase of heroin is found in your house, you’re still going to jail. Bitcoin only gives more power to Mexican drug cartels, escalating the war further. I want to see drug producers, distributors and sellers regulated, making them look like Glenfiddich, <mumble> and supermarkets, and Bitcoin is not helping.

                      1. 2

                        We, as a society, decided that certain financial transactions are illegal, and it’s not Nakamoto’s job to override our decisions.

                        You don’t speak for “society”. It’s especially ironic when the actual decision makers on this topic have constituted less than 1% of “society” to date.

                        By being untraceable, Bitcoin

                        Bitcoin is not untraceable. Cash is more untraceable.

                        If the society is against the war on drugs but it’s still going on, we should fix democracy

                        That is what blockchains are doing.

                        1. 1

                          You don’t speak for “society”.

                          I’m just explaining it as I see it. It’s Nakamoto who’s trying to decide for the society.

                          It’s especially ironic when the actual decision makers on this topic have constituted less than 1% of “society” to date.

                          I vote. And if it doesn’t work, we should fix the system.

                          Bitcoin is not untraceable. Cash is more untraceable.

                          I may have used the wrong term, but with Bitcoin one can pay without knowing where the money goes, which enables all kinds of “business models”.

                          If the society is against the war on drugs but it’s still going on, we should fix democracy

                          That is what blockchains are doing.

                          That’s the thing, no. Individual freedoms and democracy are different things. Democracy is a system of government, which blockchains specifically try to subvert.

                          1. 1

                            Individual freedoms and democracy are different things.

                            They are, and thank god for that.

                            Democracy is a system of government

                            Wherein 0.00008% of the population decides the rules for the rest to follow. I’m not making that number up. No thanks.

                            1. 1

                              Wherein 0.00008% of the population decides the rules for the rest to follow. I’m not making that number up.

                              How did you arrive at this number? The electorate decides who gets to decide the rules.

                              No thanks.

                              What do you propose? Anarchy?

                              Look, I get your issues with politicians telling you what to do. But where I live it’s safe to walk around at night alone. Murders and muggings are quite rare. I can order food anywhere without being concerned of poisoning. If I take a bus, a train or a plane, I’m very very likely to arrive to the destination alive. Somebody builds roads and maintains parks. When I lay on asphalt bleeding, people drive me away and fix me up. I’m quite confident I won’t ever starve to death, no matter what. There’s no slavery or child labour in sight. All of this is possible because we organized in a structure different from roaming bands of mutants. If this doesn’t warrant spelling society without ironic quotation marks, I don’t know what does.

                  2. 4

                    There’s also concerns about carbon footprint

                    1. 2

                      That’s a good point. There’s another analysis of Bitcoin’s energy consumption here.

                      But remember: All payment systems require energy. What is the energy consumption of fiat, with its multitude of air conditioned 9-5 buildings, its fleets of armored cars and ATMs, and its high-tech printing processes?

                  3. 5

                    Bad think detected.

                2. 6

                  The guys house was also raided, because of some tax issues.

                  1. 5

                    This article has a bit more investigation and a bit more detail:

                    http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692

                    1. 5

                      FYI, Wright’s GPG key appears to be backdated.

                      1. 1

                        Here’s an interesting guess as to why Wright might want to pretend to be Nakamoto.