5 ms·
It‘s a pretty strong case for Len to be Satoshi, admittedly. And it would explain the mysterious silence from Satoshi Nakamoto - he's dead. Of course one could
by axiosgunnar 6y ago
It‘s a pretty strong case for Len to be Satoshi, admittedly. And it would explain the mysterious silence from Satoshi Nakamoto - he's dead.
Of course one could argue that Satoshi is alive and choses to be silent on purpose, since being worth tens of billions of dollars might come with some strings attached, ie kidnappings, black mail, extortions etc.
But one would have to have a rather strong personality to not give in and become a public and admired figure.
Then again, cypherpunks might just be that breed...
- paulie_a 6y agoI've never bought the argument about kidnappings etc, with billions of dollars you can hire people with lots of guns
- axiosgunnar 6y agoI think the problem is that if you are born into a family of billionaires, it comes with connections and you probably just kinda had people with guns since generations so you just keep it up But when you suddenly become a billionaire, what do you do? Ring up some private security company? You would need to trust them not to screw you over. It's kinda boils down to you not being able to trust anyone, not even governments that might consider you a criminal.
- rdl 6y agoThere are plenty of publicly traded large security companies. They may not be the absolute best, but they're not going to screw you over. I would feel pretty comfortable calling G4S, Securitas, GardaWorld, DynCorp, Brinks, Control Risks, etc. Alternative, you call the whitest of white shoe law firms and retain them to find a good security firm for you.
- vga805 6y agoIt's worth mentioning that those 10s of billions have never been touched. This is a very strong case for Len to be Satoshi.
- sneak 6y agoNo, it's not.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Meekro 6y agoLen is a good candidate, but here's one problem: Satoshi spoke up in 2014 on a long-dormant account[1] to say "I am not Dorian Nakamoto." This was a response to a Newsweek article that claimed to have found his identity. So maybe someone hacked that account-- but then, why didn't we get any more Satoshi activity? Or maybe Len (who took his own life in 2011) isn't Satoshi after all! [1] http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topic/listForContributor?user=0ye0gncqg772o http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topic/listForContributor...
- diego 6y agoYes, 2014 in fact is when Hal Finney died, a few months after that post. He is perhaps the strongest candidate for Satoshi, and if so we'll probably never know.
- kragen 6y agoMaybe if the cryonics thing works out, but that's a long shot.
- VectorLock 6y agoThats a serious sci-fi plot right there. Man cryonically freezes himself after inventing a cryptocurrency, wakes up in the far future the richest man in the world.
- fearthetelomere 6y agoGuessing you haven't seen Futurama. Not the same exact plot of course, but I immediately thought of it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Fishful_of_Dollars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Fishful_of_Dollars
- VectorLock 6y agoYes I've seen that episode. The crypto/most wealthy man in the world thing would be a variation of that. They'd also be the typical Human Popsicle tropes about how horrified he'd be by how his creation was used.
- sneak 6y agoSatoshi's silence period began at the same time that Gavin Andressen went to the CIA (at the CIA's invitation) to present about Bitcoin. It is widely assumed that it was caused by Andressen's decision to accept the invite. Just because Satoshi went silent for a while doesn't mean that he/they are dead.
- ardy42 6y ago> It‘s a pretty strong case for Len to be Satoshi, admittedly. And it would explain the mysterious silence from Satoshi Nakamoto - he's dead. I think it's pretty likely that the person (or people) who went by Satoshi is dead, and probably died before their Bitcoin hoard was worth much. If not, you'd have to explain why someone is giving up the opportunity to never have to work for someone else to support themselves ever again. And those are less believable to me: e.g. 1) already having so much FU money they're secure in their lifestyle w/o the Bitcoin, 2) being either extremely ascetic or happy to work for someone else to support themselves, 3) deliberately choosing to destroy it for some reason, 4) losing the all keys in an accident (more understandable for a rando playing around than the creator), etc.
- bitexploder 6y agoI mean they probably mined other Bitcoin along the way. I’m pretty sure they could have cashed in at points without touching those earlier addresses.