Satoshi about to be unmasked


#1

Various reports in this, but from the teaser screenshots and other attempts to prove authenticity, this looks credible for now. Much more so than the last supposed unmasking anyway:
http://pastebin.com/Qw2wkH1n

Also there’s a Wired article.

The above link points to two teaser images below, and the Wired article reports messages posted by the hacker using other accounts known to be used by Satoshi (e.g on P2P forum).


#2

Hard to believe this is real. Almost too surreal…


#3

How is this not a hoax? or am I missing something… because I looked at the images, and couldn’t that be just anyone and they can make their alias satoshin@gmx.com

unless this is the actual email which satoshi actually used since < 2009


#4

Yeah, it seems fishy and it hardly matters who SN is.
My bet: the account expired. The geniuses at the ISP didn’t delete the mailbox. Someone opened or reactivated the same account.


#5

Its trash: look at the response by collective consciousness:
https://blockchain.info/address/1FCYd7j4CThTMzts78rh6iQJLBRGPW9fWv

he got 0.003654 BTC performing this hoax lol.


#6

I have never got the anonymous thing anyway, so what if he/she/they were nsa/crooks/professors etc. it should be down to the code and what it can do. A lot has changed now anyway and perhaps it would be good to post a % of what remains as written by SN then it would matter even less.

It’s all a media hysteria as far as I can tell and I think it’s boring and irrelevant, just as when SAFE is years old and none of our code remains, as long as it achieves the goal then who cares who any of us were, it should not matter.

Of course people, people !! I know people will care and make stuff up about how it changes bitcoin etc. but really it should be irrelevant.


#7

People just like to gossip :stuck_out_tongue:


#8

Here is visualization of the github expansion; indeed there are so many individuals who have contributed way beyond the beginning; Though the beginning is planted by Satoshi;

EDIT: on topic with the reply: if you fast forward to 1:15 seconds into the github there are 2 additional participants in the code, and the video lasts until 6 minutes and satoshi basically is no where to be found after 1:30 seconds therefore satoshi nakamoto is responsible for just only 20% of the code, though probably much less because of length, time, and rewrites to the original code. So 20% at the most!


#9

It matters because people love the mystery, and so will continue until s/he is unmasked.

For the skeptics who posted here, I didn’t make my assessment based on the image alone. I referred to a Wired article and there is now another from motherboard (I think), both of which add further credence to this. It is clear that someone does have control of an email account that is very likely authentic, and several other accounts used by SN.

@dirvine the other reason it matters is all those unspent bitcoin that Satoshi may have access to (around 400 I believe). If SN (or anyone else) has control of them, they create a massive centralisation risk.

I agree that SAFE is a different kettle of fish. You have worked hard to ensure that. Thank you for being more trustworthy than Satoshi Nakamoto allows him/her self to be! :slight_smile:


#10

Yes this has always bugged me a bit that 10% or so. It is a risk if they still exist as well. I know that I lost a ton way back when I tried out mining in the early days, so knows during testing many may have been lost. A fair point(s) though Mark


#11

I saw speculations that it may be up to 1 million coins, not just 400 (400 is not worth talking about - the confiscated 30K coins were sold to a private investor with 0 impact on the market price), but whatever it is, the rational seller would sell them slowly so as to maximize his gain. Even if the coins were all stolen, the same principle holds.


#12

Yes we found out through contacts that even cashing in $1M would affect the price by $30-$40 at the current liquidity, although we were not cashing in anything like that. ! million coins would cause a huge strain. I think the 30K coins were OK as they never went through exchanges, which helped. Its all a very illiquid market these early days. I hope safecoin has more utility than only fiat conversions as that seems to be an issue that perhaps we do not need to suffer so much from. If we get the utility correct!


#13

Care to elaborate?


#14

I was pretty involved in some economics issues with perpetual coin and got the bitcoin paper and tried it out basically. I could not see the scale working and was to involved in MaidSafe anyway (running about begging for money). I ran bitcoind for a while to basically see if it worked, but never bothered much about the coins I was generating at all. I was delighted to see it work though, even a bit.


#15

well, i think credit always need to be given to whom its due sometimes


#16

Now that this is over, the work is amazing :slight_smile:

It’s like, it is an honor to take a first step into a serious infrastructure project in computing engineering with MaidSafe; thanks for sticking to this despite all the adversities that attach themselves to the greatest endeavors.

Note to self: back to work!


#17

I agree but credit the ideas not the person, there only a bunch of molecules. As a species we advance, but not by recognition, but action alone. It matters not who does what, only that it’s done.