3 ms·

what exactly is the evidence for number 1? occam's razor seems to suggest it's false. it doesn't make any sense why he would double cross us. he clearly doesn't

by jolux 11y ago

what exactly is the evidence for number 1? occam's razor seems to suggest it's false. it doesn't make any sense why he would double cross us. he clearly doesn't care that we know he's satoshi if 1 is true.

blowski 11y ago
For me at least, it doesn't make any sense that Satoshi wouldn't reveal his own identity in the first place. Almost nothing about this story makes sense, and we have to deal with a lot of conjecture and misinformation. For someone as dumb as me when it comes to Bitcoin and blockchain technology, it's hard to tell fact from unfounded assertion in just about every post I read.
- jolux 11y ago
  some people are just secretive. I liken Satoshi's disappearance to that of _why and as such I find it very odd that they would go to all this trouble into tricking us into thinking they're not Satoshi Nakamoto when they could have just never revealed themselves in the first place. In short, if you are Satoshi, what's the point of deceiving everyone into thinking you aren't when the only reason people think you are is because you chose to say so?
- ethbro 11y ago
  > it doesn't make any sense that Satoshi wouldn't reveal his own identity in the first place If I were disrupting the banking industry, I wouldn't be too eager to forgo anonymity either. That's a lot of money that stands to be lost for some already very rich people.
  - blowski 11y ago
    I see where you're coming from, but I doubt the finance industry is worried that they're going to be put out of business - if anything, right now they view Bitcoin as another source of revenue. There have been a lot of inventors that have killed off much bigger businesses, and I can't think of any that wanted to stay anonymous.
    - ethbro 11y ago
      Oh, I don't think the entire industry will be. There's a large class of necessary & billable activities that the blockchain doesn't impact. But transaction / settling fees aren't zero revenue either. The more immediate explanation was probably "he or she or they knew the first use was going to be facilitating illegal transactions and didn't want to be associated."
  - vectorpush 11y ago
    > If I were disrupting the banking industry This is a quintessential example of bitcoin hyperbole. Please offer an example of how bitcoin is disrupting the banking industry.
  - jcranmer 11y ago
    Bitcoin is way, way too small to disrupt banking. The total value of the M2 money supply of USD is $12,500 billion. Bitcoin's total value is only around ~$40 billion. That may seem large, but it is puny compared to the banking industry.

by jolux 11y ago

blowski 11y ago

For me at least, it doesn't make any sense that Satoshi wouldn't reveal his own identity in the first place. Almost nothing about this story makes sense, and we have to deal with a lot of conjecture and misinformation. For someone as dumb as me when it comes to Bitcoin and blockchain technology, it's hard to tell fact from unfounded assertion in just about every post I read.

jolux 11y ago
some people are just secretive. I liken Satoshi's disappearance to that of _why and as such I find it very odd that they would go to all this trouble into tricking us into thinking they're not Satoshi Nakamoto when they could have just never revealed themselves in the first place. In short, if you are Satoshi, what's the point of deceiving everyone into thinking you aren't when the only reason people think you are is because you chose to say so?
ethbro 11y ago
> it doesn't make any sense that Satoshi wouldn't reveal his own identity in the first place If I were disrupting the banking industry, I wouldn't be too eager to forgo anonymity either. That's a lot of money that stands to be lost for some already very rich people.
- blowski 11y ago
  I see where you're coming from, but I doubt the finance industry is worried that they're going to be put out of business - if anything, right now they view Bitcoin as another source of revenue. There have been a lot of inventors that have killed off much bigger businesses, and I can't think of any that wanted to stay anonymous.
  - ethbro 11y ago
    Oh, I don't think the entire industry will be. There's a large class of necessary & billable activities that the blockchain doesn't impact. But transaction / settling fees aren't zero revenue either. The more immediate explanation was probably "he or she or they knew the first use was going to be facilitating illegal transactions and didn't want to be associated."
- vectorpush 11y ago
  > If I were disrupting the banking industry This is a quintessential example of bitcoin hyperbole. Please offer an example of how bitcoin is disrupting the banking industry.
- jcranmer 11y ago
  Bitcoin is way, way too small to disrupt banking. The total value of the M2 money supply of USD is $12,500 billion. Bitcoin's total value is only around ~$40 billion. That may seem large, but it is puny compared to the banking industry.