3 ms·
This is true. I would very much like an article in this style examining Satoshi and how many bits he theoretically had left.
by lawn 7y ago
This is true. I would very much like an article in this style examining Satoshi and how many bits he theoretically had left.
- mjevans 7y agoBaseless gut-guess: Any move clearly associated to Satoshi, including use of any of the Bitcoin value, would receive such unrelenting scrutiny that there are only two likely outcomes. A) Satoshi would be identified as a unique individual and any number of bad things would happen since they are such a high value target. B) Satoshi would be identified as (effectively?) a pseudonym for one or more nation states and whatever value they derived from creating Bitcoin would evaporate. Given we are currently in a superposition between states A and B, as well as a possible state C where the pseudonym Satoshi is either effectively dead (lost the credentials) or actually dead (end of life); one can infer that the value of Bitcoin continuing to exist as it is either outweighs any change of state or that such a change of state is no longer possible.
- gwern 7y agoI have written one but haven't posted it for obvious reasons. In Satoshi's case, it's vexed by the problem that it depends heavily on what datasets you have access to. For example, the California IP leak reduces Satoshi's anonymity to perhaps 2 or 3 bits... but only if you know the location/identity of everyone in California and also where that IP was assigned to at that time.