5 ms·

How much is there code available written by Hal Finney?

by akskos 9y ago

akskos 9y ago
Although we have the actual source code for Satoshi's Bitcoin implementation so not exactly relevant to the article
- bringtheaction 9y ago
  Well it could in theory be that the author of Bitcoin had previously written and released software under their real name but without ever providing the source code for said software, in which case comparing the first binary release of Bitcoin to such executables could give a hint as to who Satoshi is/was.
  - NicoJuicy 9y ago
    The inventor of BitTorrent would be the inventor of Bitcoin ( most likely)
- godelmachine 9y ago
  Maybe it's a huge team, so there are multiple individual signatures and it's tough to track down heterogenous signatures.
  - wolfgke 9y ago
    > Maybe it's a huge team, so there are multiple individual signatures and it's tough to track down heterogenous signatures. In this case I would expect that we see a multitude of code styles in the source code of the very first publicly released version of the Bitcoin client. But I think nobody has yet pointed this out. This to me at least implies that if there were multiple programmers involved, there was at least someone who "ironed over" the complete source code to make the code style much more homogenous. But under this hypothesis we would expect that the code was audited at least somewhat thoroughly. But in fact the first versions of the Bitcoin client were rather "put together hastily" and contained lots of bugs that were fixed afterwards. Look for example at the following comment: > https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/595a7bab23bc21049526229054ea1fff1a29c0bf/src/consensus/merkle.cpp#L9-L43 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/595a7bab23bc21049526... So first versions of the Bitcoin client rather look to me like some solo person who can program, but at least whose job is not to program in C++ every day, put together an experiment (the Bitcoin client) hastily. Now let us assume that there was a huge team behind, but only 1-2 (at most 3) programmers with very similar code signatures. But of course the other team members also had things to do (to be worth their salary), like working out the math etc. But if it were a huge team that contains people of such special skills, why the hell did they hire such a bad programmer to implement it? In this sense I believe there is strong evidence to drop the "huge team hypothesis".
    - Erlangolem 9y ago
      Has it ever been floated that it might have been the work of an intelligence agency, as a means to fund black bag operations? It seems unlikely, but possible.
      - jstanley 9y ago
        Yes, it's also been floated that it's the work of a super-intelligent AI that needed a system of money that it could use without providing identification documents. The internet is a vast network where the individual components don't understand the whole, just like a brain is. How do we know the internet itself hasn't turned into a super-intelligent AI already?
        Erlangolem 9y ago
        I’m sensing just a bit of sarcasm, and an implied, “no you paranoid noodlebrain.” Honestly, I don’t blame you, my head is actually full of noodles. Al dente, baby.
        jstanley 9y ago
        Not sarcastic! I think your suggestion was quite reasonable, I was just offering another suggestion that I found interesting. Albeit a slightly-more implausible one :)
        Erlangolem 9y ago
        Alright, glad to hear it, although I maintain that I’m still a noodlebrain. I’m guessing that you have, but you might enjoy Ghost In The Shell, which runs along a similar premise to what you’re talking about.
    - nickpsecurity 9y ago
      "In this case I would expect that we see a multitude of code styles in the source code of the very first publicly released version of the Bitcoin client. " Would that be the case if they used software that enforced a common, coding style on the team? And on top of the team putting in at least a little effort to keep consistent? There's quite a bit of that software already used in big organizations, including defense sector.
- jcora 9y ago
  Uhh Satoshi is Nick Szabo...
  - wolfgke 9y ago
    > Uhh Satoshi is Nick Szabo... My bet would rather be on Dave Kleiman > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Kleiman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Kleiman His death 2013 fits well with the public disappearance of Satoshi Nakamoto. Also Dave Kleiman worked in computer forensics and was from very early on involved in the Bitcoin community. It is well-known that Dave Kleiman and the "self-claimed Satoshi Nakamoto" Craig Steven Wright knew each other (Craig Steven Wright claimed that they collaborated when creating Bitcoin). Also the fact that Craig Steven Wright could convince people that are deeply involved in the Bitcoin community in a one-on-one interview that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, provides strong evidence that Craig Steven Wright knew lots of obscure things about Satoshi Nakamoto "that only Satoshi Nakamoto should be able to know". If he knew this information from Dave Kleinman, this can be plausibly explained.
  - rotred 9y ago
    Wei Dai's AMA makes me doubt that. http://lesswrong.com/lw/jgz/aalwa_ask_any_lesswronger_anything/ap3c http://lesswrong.com/lw/jgz/aalwa_ask_any_lesswronger_anythi... Specifically this comment http://lesswrong.com/lw/jgz/aalwa_ask_any_lesswronger_anything/ap3c# http://lesswrong.com/lw/jgz/aalwa_ask_any_lesswronger_anythi...
    - psyc 9y ago
      > No I don't think it's Szabo or anyone else whose name is known to me. I have always thought the speculation about SN's identity suffered alarmingly from availability bias. Everyone wants to believe he's someone they know about. Someone who's extremely well-known for working on or writing about things extremely similar to Bitcoin. There are far more smart nobodies tinkering with things than there are top names working on those things. Also suffers from a bias I'll call "Shakespeare didn't write Shakespeare bias." The idea is that a notable thing must have been written by a high-status and well-credentialed person, and could not have been done by a talented no-name.
- rotred 9y ago
  https://www.princeton.edu/~aylinc/papers/caliskan-islam_deanonymizing.pdf https://www.princeton.edu/~aylinc/papers/caliskan-islam_dean... for source code stylometry

How much is there code available written by Hal Finney?

by akskos 9y ago

How much is there code available written by Hal Finney?

akskos 9y ago

Although we have the actual source code for Satoshi's Bitcoin implementation so not exactly relevant to the article

bringtheaction 9y ago
Well it could in theory be that the author of Bitcoin had previously written and released software under their real name but without ever providing the source code for said software, in which case comparing the first binary release of Bitcoin to such executables could give a hint as to who Satoshi is/was.
- NicoJuicy 9y ago
  The inventor of BitTorrent would be the inventor of Bitcoin ( most likely)
godelmachine 9y ago
Maybe it's a huge team, so there are multiple individual signatures and it's tough to track down heterogenous signatures.
- wolfgke 9y ago
  > Maybe it's a huge team, so there are multiple individual signatures and it's tough to track down heterogenous signatures. In this case I would expect that we see a multitude of code styles in the source code of the very first publicly released version of the Bitcoin client. But I think nobody has yet pointed this out. This to me at least implies that if there were multiple programmers involved, there was at least someone who "ironed over" the complete source code to make the code style much more homogenous. But under this hypothesis we would expect that the code was audited at least somewhat thoroughly. But in fact the first versions of the Bitcoin client were rather "put together hastily" and contained lots of bugs that were fixed afterwards. Look for example at the following comment: > https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/595a7bab23bc21049526229054ea1fff1a29c0bf/src/consensus/merkle.cpp#L9-L43 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/595a7bab23bc21049526... So first versions of the Bitcoin client rather look to me like some solo person who can program, but at least whose job is not to program in C++ every day, put together an experiment (the Bitcoin client) hastily. Now let us assume that there was a huge team behind, but only 1-2 (at most 3) programmers with very similar code signatures. But of course the other team members also had things to do (to be worth their salary), like working out the math etc. But if it were a huge team that contains people of such special skills, why the hell did they hire such a bad programmer to implement it? In this sense I believe there is strong evidence to drop the "huge team hypothesis".
  - Erlangolem 9y ago
    Has it ever been floated that it might have been the work of an intelligence agency, as a means to fund black bag operations? It seems unlikely, but possible.
    - jstanley 9y ago
      Yes, it's also been floated that it's the work of a super-intelligent AI that needed a system of money that it could use without providing identification documents. The internet is a vast network where the individual components don't understand the whole, just like a brain is. How do we know the internet itself hasn't turned into a super-intelligent AI already?
      - Erlangolem 9y ago
        I’m sensing just a bit of sarcasm, and an implied, “no you paranoid noodlebrain.” Honestly, I don’t blame you, my head is actually full of noodles. Al dente, baby.
        jstanley 9y ago
        Not sarcastic! I think your suggestion was quite reasonable, I was just offering another suggestion that I found interesting. Albeit a slightly-more implausible one :)
        Erlangolem 9y ago
        Alright, glad to hear it, although I maintain that I’m still a noodlebrain. I’m guessing that you have, but you might enjoy Ghost In The Shell, which runs along a similar premise to what you’re talking about.
  - nickpsecurity 9y ago
    "In this case I would expect that we see a multitude of code styles in the source code of the very first publicly released version of the Bitcoin client. " Would that be the case if they used software that enforced a common, coding style on the team? And on top of the team putting in at least a little effort to keep consistent? There's quite a bit of that software already used in big organizations, including defense sector.
jcora 9y ago
Uhh Satoshi is Nick Szabo...
- wolfgke 9y ago
  > Uhh Satoshi is Nick Szabo... My bet would rather be on Dave Kleiman > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Kleiman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Kleiman His death 2013 fits well with the public disappearance of Satoshi Nakamoto. Also Dave Kleiman worked in computer forensics and was from very early on involved in the Bitcoin community. It is well-known that Dave Kleiman and the "self-claimed Satoshi Nakamoto" Craig Steven Wright knew each other (Craig Steven Wright claimed that they collaborated when creating Bitcoin). Also the fact that Craig Steven Wright could convince people that are deeply involved in the Bitcoin community in a one-on-one interview that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, provides strong evidence that Craig Steven Wright knew lots of obscure things about Satoshi Nakamoto "that only Satoshi Nakamoto should be able to know". If he knew this information from Dave Kleinman, this can be plausibly explained.
- rotred 9y ago
  Wei Dai's AMA makes me doubt that. http://lesswrong.com/lw/jgz/aalwa_ask_any_lesswronger_anything/ap3c http://lesswrong.com/lw/jgz/aalwa_ask_any_lesswronger_anythi... Specifically this comment http://lesswrong.com/lw/jgz/aalwa_ask_any_lesswronger_anything/ap3c# http://lesswrong.com/lw/jgz/aalwa_ask_any_lesswronger_anythi...
  - psyc 9y ago
    > No I don't think it's Szabo or anyone else whose name is known to me. I have always thought the speculation about SN's identity suffered alarmingly from availability bias. Everyone wants to believe he's someone they know about. Someone who's extremely well-known for working on or writing about things extremely similar to Bitcoin. There are far more smart nobodies tinkering with things than there are top names working on those things. Also suffers from a bias I'll call "Shakespeare didn't write Shakespeare bias." The idea is that a notable thing must have been written by a high-status and well-credentialed person, and could not have been done by a talented no-name.
rotred 9y ago
https://www.princeton.edu/~aylinc/papers/caliskan-islam_deanonymizing.pdf https://www.princeton.edu/~aylinc/papers/caliskan-islam_dean... for source code stylometry