Satoshi Nakamoto: Thoughts on excerpt from Duality?
As all before to date... no proof... yet what does it matter, and is not history a footnote to futures already present, and are not tales woven within reality interesting, plausibly true in their own right, even philosophically leaned upon. Arthurian Cycles, MesoAmerican Rituals, Ancient Societies... Honne and Tatemae: We Are All Cypherpunk... More interesting is that to truly understand adopt and use Cryptocurrency, one must seek understand adopt Cypherpunk and surrounding philosophies. Hundreds of millions of people worldwide are now seeking understanding, of their own free will, as it involves an area of direct primary executive interest in daily life... money... not abstract vagaries of crypto / privacy / anonymity / anarchism. This seeking is a monumental first, it is pull, not push... Cryptocurrency is the fabled killer app of Cypherpunk. Its impact upon the future cannot be underestimated.
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 07:03:24AM -0700, mark M wrote:
http://nakamotofamilyfoundation.org/
Is this the real Nakamoto, speculations? Didn't see crypto key to prevent potential future impostors of this "identity".
Satoshi actually never, ever signed anything cryptographically. We don't even know for sure if whitepaper Satoshi, genesis block Satoshi, email address(es, there were two) Satoshi, and BitcoinTalk Satoshi were the same person. On 3 July 2018 at 15:07, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 07:03:24AM -0700, mark M wrote:
http://nakamotofamilyfoundation.org/
Is this the real Nakamoto, speculations?
Didn't see crypto key to prevent potential future impostors of this "identity".
Tbf there are no (spendable) accounts which are known to be Satoshi for sure. There's the genesis block reward (not spendable due to a quirk in the protocol), the address Satoshi used to send the first transaction to Hal Finney (was this really Satoshi? We don't know for sure) and there are a bunch of blocks that we strongly suspect were mined by Satoshi due to their characteristics (mainly the incrementing nonce value). Something signed with the genesis block reward address's private key would be best proof... But still not perfect, since we don't really even know if Satoshi was the same person over time, or if the same person operated all the Satoshi email/forum accounts. I don't believe this new pretender really is Satoshi though (or, hypothetically, any of the people who spoke as "Satoshi") because the writing style is way off. Satoshi was never a mystic. Satoshi never spoke in grand narratives either, just engineering pragmatism. On Tue, 3 Jul 2018, 4:42 pm Georgi Guninski, <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 03:56:19PM +0200, Tom Busby wrote:
Satoshi actually never, ever signed anything cryptographically.
No problem. As a proof of identity I request 1337.7331 bitcoins from one of their accounts ;)
Georgi That’s a great test 🙏👍 Tom The personal identity of Satoshi over time as you say is very nuanced much like dpr of Silk road as multiple characters over time took the mantle of dpr But even with all of the dprs Ross Ulbricht was definitely doxed by the feds Just worried there’s the very first og Satoshi who might still be around
On Jul 3, 2018 at 8:49 PM, <Tom Busby (mailto:tom@busby.ninja)> wrote:
Tbf there are no (spendable) accounts which are known to be Satoshi for sure.
There's the genesis block reward (not spendable due to a quirk in the protocol), the address Satoshi used to send the first transaction to Hal Finney (was this really Satoshi? We don't know for sure) and there are a bunch of blocks that we strongly suspect were mined by Satoshi due to their characteristics (mainly the incrementing nonce value).
Something signed with the genesis block reward address's private key would be best proof... But still not perfect, since we don't really even know if Satoshi was the same person over time, or if the same person operated all the Satoshi email/forum accounts.
I don't believe this new pretender really is Satoshi though (or, hypothetically, any of the people who spoke as "Satoshi") because the writing style is way off. Satoshi was never a mystic. Satoshi never spoke in grand narratives either, just engineering pragmatism.
On Tue, 3 Jul 2018, 4:42 pm Georgi Guninski, <guninski@guninski.com (mailto:guninski@guninski.com)> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 03:56:19PM +0200, Tom Busby wrote:
Satoshi actually never, ever signed anything cryptographically.
No problem. As a proof of identity I request 1337.7331 bitcoins from one of their accounts ;)
I'll be honest, I suspect that Satoshi was either Nick Szabo, Hal Finney, or both working together. We'll never know for sure though. On Tue, 3 Jul 2018, 5:31 pm mark M, <write2mark1@gmail.com> wrote:
Georgi That’s a great test 🙏👍
Tom The personal identity of Satoshi over time as you say is very nuanced much like dpr of Silk road as multiple characters over time took the mantle of dpr
But even with all of the dprs Ross Ulbricht was definitely doxed by the feds Just worried there’s the very first og Satoshi who might still be around
On Jul 3, 2018 at 8:49 PM, <Tom Busby <tom@busby.ninja>> wrote:
Tbf there are no (spendable) accounts which are known to be Satoshi for sure.
There's the genesis block reward (not spendable due to a quirk in the protocol), the address Satoshi used to send the first transaction to Hal Finney (was this really Satoshi? We don't know for sure) and there are a bunch of blocks that we strongly suspect were mined by Satoshi due to their characteristics (mainly the incrementing nonce value).
Something signed with the genesis block reward address's private key would be best proof... But still not perfect, since we don't really even know if Satoshi was the same person over time, or if the same person operated all the Satoshi email/forum accounts.
I don't believe this new pretender really is Satoshi though (or, hypothetically, any of the people who spoke as "Satoshi") because the writing style is way off. Satoshi was never a mystic. Satoshi never spoke in grand narratives either, just engineering pragmatism.
On Tue, 3 Jul 2018, 4:42 pm Georgi Guninski, <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 03:56:19PM +0200, Tom Busby wrote:
Satoshi actually never, ever signed anything cryptographically.
No problem. As a proof of identity I request 1337.7331 bitcoins from one of their accounts ;)
Yes, he did sign the genesis blocks as they ran on his laptop ?
On Jul 3, 2018 at 7:26 PM, <Tom Busby (mailto:tom@busby.ninja)> wrote:
Satoshi actually never, ever signed anything cryptographically.
We don't even know for sure if whitepaper Satoshi, genesis block Satoshi, email address(es, there were two) Satoshi, and BitcoinTalk Satoshi were the same person.
On 3 July 2018 at 15:07, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com (mailto:guninski@guninski.com)> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 07:03:24AM -0700, mark M wrote:
http://nakamotofamilyfoundation.org/
Is this the real Nakamoto, speculations?
Didn't see crypto key to prevent potential future impostors of this "identity".
Are you talking about Craig Wright's "private demonstrations" to Gavin Andresen etc? On Tue, 3 Jul 2018, 5:16 pm mark M, <write2mark1@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, he did sign the genesis blocks as they ran on his laptop ?
On Jul 3, 2018 at 7:26 PM, <Tom Busby <tom@busby.ninja>> wrote:
Satoshi actually never, ever signed anything cryptographically.
We don't even know for sure if whitepaper Satoshi, genesis block Satoshi, email address(es, there were two) Satoshi, and BitcoinTalk Satoshi were the same person.
On 3 July 2018 at 15:07, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 07:03:24AM -0700, mark M wrote:
http://nakamotofamilyfoundation.org/
Is this the real Nakamoto, speculations?
Didn't see crypto key to prevent potential future impostors of this "identity".
Georgi There’s no crypto key or proof of ownership of the genesis blocks 😥 in this site or excerpt But the excerpt does read very well a Little too wordy for Satoshi who I remember as terse and matter of fact
On Jul 3, 2018 at 6:37 PM, <Georgi Guninski (mailto:guninski@guninski.com)> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 07:03:24AM -0700, mark M wrote:
http://nakamotofamilyfoundation.org/
Is this the real Nakamoto, speculations?
Didn't see crypto key to prevent potential future impostors of this "identity".
Might be of interest to you. https://keepingstock.net/not-all-post-2011-satoshi-appearance-has-been-debun... This latest "Satoshi" is a hoax though, not very credible at all. On 3 July 2018 at 17:15, mark M <write2mark1@gmail.com> wrote:
Georgi There’s no crypto key or proof of ownership of the genesis blocks 😥 in this site or excerpt But the excerpt does read very well a Little too wordy for Satoshi who I remember as terse and matter of fact
On Jul 3, 2018 at 6:37 PM, <Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com>> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 07:03:24AM -0700, mark M wrote:
http://nakamotofamilyfoundation.org/
Is this the real Nakamoto, speculations?
Didn't see crypto key to prevent potential future impostors of this "identity".
participants (4)
-
Georgi Guninski -
grarpamp -
mark M -
Tom Busby