9 ms·
Why do you assume state-backed actors failed to identify him? I would guess he is probably known with a high degree of certainty to at least one nation's intel
by acjohnson55 3y ago
Why do you assume state-backed actors failed to identify him?
I would guess he is probably known with a high degree of certainty to at least one nation's intelligence but that publicizing that knowledge and the documentation of it is not in anyone's interest.
- bugglebeetle 3y agoI would assume that his entire identity is a little more than a cutout for a U.S. state intelligence agency.
- voidfunc 3y agoThis. I assume Satoshi is nation state actor. Most likely the US.
- neoncontrails 3y agoWhat makes you think the US would be motivated to hamstring its own Federal Reserve, or threaten the dollar's status as the world's reserve currency?
- lolinder 3y agoWhat makes you think that Bitcoin poses any threat to the dollar or the Federal Reserve?
- TimeBearingDown 3y agoIt’s no threat at all for the foreseeable future. Make no mistake though, over the next decades, the core idea is an existential threat. If a currency like Monero with further developed scaling and privacy features is able to gain a foothold in developing nations, and enough off-ramps are set up via decentralized exchanges like Bisq and through direct acceptance for goods and services, then it is difficult to see the spread stopping between nations with reasonably free Internet, especially as factions within each government will likely have some direct interest. The US dollar will be least threatened, the longest.
- lottin 3y agoPrivacy features in a currency are a double-edged sword. It means that the money is very difficult or impossible to recover in the event of theft, fraud, or even user errors. It isn't a risk most people want to be exposed to.
- pjerem 3y agoThat’s not an issue to replace cash, which shares the same flaws. But yeah, you don’t want to have your savings in monero (or in crypto, tbf). However for decentralized people to people transactions, monero may have its chance.
- lottin 3y agoPhysical cash is typically used in face-to-face transactions, which somewhat reduces the risks. The scenarios in which a digital version of physical cash might make sense are few and far between. To suggest that such a currency could one day threaten the US dollar dominance is absurd, in my opinion.
- Breza 3y agoI completely agree with you. And you're assuming that a crypto network even exists that could support that kind of transaction volume, so the reality is even more absurd.
- pjerem 3y ago> To suggest that such a currency could one day threaten the US dollar dominance is absurd, in my opinion. Since I’m far from a crypto bro, I wasn’t suggesting this ;) I don’t even own any crypto.
- lottin 3y agoSure... I was alluding to OP's comment, not yours.
- bee_rider 3y agoI don’t think bitcoin is some sort of intelligence thing, Occam’s razor, it is probably just a dude. I mean, what was his big feat of secrecy? Writing a paper needn’t necessarily leave a big footprint. But! Bitcoins are too clunky to threaten the federal reserve really. And, a system that is widely understood by laymen to be anonymous, but is actually pseudonymous and inherently traceable, seems like Christmas for intelligence and police organizations.
- spaceman_2020 3y agoThe funny thing is, crypto is actually good for the dollar. USDT/USDC are far easier to acquire than actual USD in third world countries. There’s a separate economy built up in Africa, Phillippines, etc. that operates entirely on USDT. You can see this in the price of USDT vs USD in these countries - USDT commands a premium. Crypto via coins like USDT means that Nigerians increasingly want to work for USDT, not Naira. Bad for Naira, good for the USD
- elif 3y agoSilver (#8 asset in the world) is also "clunky" but it is close to being surpassed in market cap by Bitcoin (#10 asset in the world). A large part of that value is derived from a market cap based upon the stability created by the dormant coins, like gold sitting dormant in fort knox used to stabilize the USD value. It really does seem like an intelligent design passes Occam's razor more than "oops i conveniently formatted that harddrive then disappeared"
- mtnGoat 3y agoSpitballing here… it could have been a test to see how easy they could get a digital currency into common use. The idea of a digital currency offers the Fed a lot of advantages… no money laundering, traceability, etc. it could actually advance them if well executed, not threaten them.
- coffeebeqn 3y agoDoes the fed employ a lot of cryptographers? I feel like people expect the U.S. gov to be omnipotent when the last 20 years have been just fumble after another
- wsanf 3y agoWhile not omnipotent, the NSA does hire a huge amount of mathematicians and has a budget in the tens of billions. Most of what they do is also behind (extremely) closed doors.
- DinaCoder99 3y agoSeems like a very poor fit for the Fed's needs outside of a honeypot for people actually trying to launder money.
- ikiris 3y agoHas bitcoin done either of these laughable things within any plausibility?
- neoncontrails 3y agoBitcoin? No. But if you're asking whether digital currencies (which share a lot of the same underlying characteristics) might transform the global monetary landscape, well, they already have: 11 countries have issued CBDCs, and another 130 are actively exploring them as a more convenient alternative to USD for international transaction settlements. Several of those are in advanced pilot stages. No one with serious ties to the US financial system finds this to be a laughing matter, I assure you. The dollar is by far the currency of choice in trade invoicing (more than 50% of total trade) and foreign exchange transaction volume (almost 90% of the total) globally (Moronoti, 2022). This also means that US settlement authorities and financial institutions are involved in finalising most global transactions. If two countries have CBDCs, then they in principle would have the ability to settle transactions between themselves with near-instant finality, potentially bypassing the current dollar-based system. I think we can safely expect at least one major CBDC-based cross-border payment system to launch by the end of the year. Soramitsu is the most promising candidate IMHO. A prevailing theory is that foreign corporations that operate domestically within a country will need to create accounts with a domestic central bank for CBDC payments to work efficiently. If this becomes a reality, the status of the dollar's "exorbitant privilege" will be up for immediate dispute. Its geopolitical hegemony over global finance won't be swept away overnight, but it will suffer a major blow. Only time will tell how serious.
- lottin 3y agoYou don't say why a CBDC would be a more convenient alternative to USD for international transaction settlements. A CBDC is simply a digital version of an existing currency. It isn't nothing new, since bank deposits already allow digital transactions with any currency.
- neoncontrails 3y agoYou're missing the point. The reason the dollar is the global currency of choice is because it offers the infrastructure for any two parties to settle a transaction. The existence of CDBCs for wholesale purposes has the potential to fundamentally change that. Central banks could directly settle transactions between themselves in local currencies via dedicated corridors that bypass the dollar settlement system. That would mean more diversification of currency pairs, with increased liquidity for currency pairs that do not include USD. > It isn't nothing new, It is though. The infrastructure to support cross-border payments with CBDCs is bleeding edge stuff. The term floated around in obscurity for a while, but it's only been in use since 2019 or so. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CBDCs_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CBDCs_by_country
- sangnoir 3y agoHypothetically, getting those who hate "the feds" to record their transactions on a public ledger would be criminal intelligence coup even bigger than when FBI's "Encrypted Phone" platform became popular with criminals[1]. In this hypothetical, the FBI would hack/subvert/operate their own mixer service and eliminate uncooperative services, so that all money-flows are transparent to investigators. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/fbi-s-encrypted-phone-platform-infiltrated-hundreds-criminal-syndicates-result-massive https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/fbi-s-encrypted-phone-p...
- TimeBearingDown 3y agoNot all cryptocurrencies use public ledgers. Bitcoin was the first, but it was always intended to add privacy tech - see MimbleWimble. Zero knowledge proofs and other strong privacy protections are available on more modern projects. Some ledgers are entirely dark, granting a decent anonymity set.
- sangnoir 3y agoHow many of those cryptocurrency were created by Satoshi Nakamoto, the subject of the thread's speculation? I was speculating on the why a 3LA would have created Bitcoin, specifically.
- TimeBearingDown 3y agoOthers like Monero also have mysterious origins. I don’t think Satoshi was behind the design even in part, but it’s one theory. I’m pointing out that even if Bitcoin was the creation, the introduction of this concept and class of data structure is much more important and will have more lasting impact. Surely any government agency would have considered the feasibility of new alternatives with similar designs.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- awaythrow999 3y agoFor the same reason it created tor. For cover. And to move assets beyond enemy lines?
- elif 3y agoThe Bretton-Woods paradigm was already in collapse at the advent of bitcoin due to the corresponding growth of the US trade deficit as the US stopped producing/exporting and began massive consumption from the east. The USA is in a debt spiral spending $659B on interest on debt annually (13% of tax revenue) while running larger and larger deficits. This cannot really be escaped, and it's impact on inflation is becoming unavoidable.
- reachableceo 3y agoFor when it isn’t? To move assets to agents without a trace?
- layer8 3y agoOr a GPU manufacturer. ;)
- Fnoord 3y agoOr a nation state where energy is very cheap and people can live anonymously over the internet ie. Russia or China.
- eru 3y agoWhat makes you think Russia or China make living 'anonymously over the internet' easier than other places? About energy: https://www.statista.com/statistics/263492/electricity-prices-in-selected-countries/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/263492/electricity-price... says that China and Russia both have lower absolute household electricity prices than eg the US. But they are higher when compared to average incomes.
- Fnoord 3y agoThose in China essentially have a get out out of jail free card for hacking. Just like we do for Chinese targets. Any rich Chinese could've banked on cryptocurrency. Also, the poor in China and Russia are very poor. While the rich and middle incomes could easily afford energy prizes. I don't know about China but Russia is a maffia state in disguise where a criminal rich club runs it with Putin. The middle class (those living in St. Petersburg and Moscow) need to be kept happy enough as a kind of unwritten deal between Putin and those people.
- eru 3y ago> Those in China essentially have a get out out of jail free card for hacking. Just like we do for Chinese targets. What does this have to do with inventing Bitcoin? And what does it have to do with living 'anonymously over the internet'? Btw, you can try hacking into Chinese targets and getting caught, and seeing whether you face any legal repercussions. But, what does any of what you say have to do with inventing Bitcoin? Especially as you say, if you are rich in China or Russia, more likely than not you are on more than friendly terms with the ruling clique. So what do you need cryptocurrency for?
- timschmidt 3y agoI've always figured some intelligence agency figured out how to reverse SHA-256 by calculating hash collisions on a global scale while wresting some capital and power from the international banks in one move.
- hibikir 3y agoIMO you have way too much faith in state agencies' ability to keep secrets. It's information the world would like to know, so it's a hard secret to keep. On top of that anyone with access to the keys of big wallets would be very tempted to just use them. This doesn't seem like a situation that can be kept secret by a mid-sized conspiracy. If this was a state project, how many people would have to know about it and still keep quiet, despite all the advantages of not keeping it quiet, or the risk of leaks? It'd be tough to get three people to keep this quiet. The dozens that would have to be involved at an intelligence agency, if this is really a project that was started in one of them? The specifics would have leaked by now.
- ryanSrich 3y ago> It'd be tough to get three people to keep this quiet Incompetence fallacy and impossibility complex. Just because something seems difficult or impossible doesn't mean it is. Especially when it's the most logical explanation. People often like to think the government is just a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats. Yet the U.S. government is the most powerful entity on earth. There's not a single reason to believe that any large number of government employees could keep a secret on the level of Satoshi's true identity.
- nodesocket 3y agoHonestly somebody should put a bounty to be paid of course in BTC for definitively identifying Satoshi. With enough incentive I’m sure can be figured out. Recent AI improvements should be able to be used to scan all his/their writings and code.
- martindevans 3y agoIsn't there effectively a multi-billion dollar bounty on finding out who Satoshi is and deploying a bit of "Rubber-hose cryptanalysis"?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- chx 3y agoAll three good candidates for Satoshi are beyond said cryptanalysis: Sassaman and Finney are dead, Paul Le Roux is in a federal prison and it is not known to the public where, even without Bitcoins, quite a few people want him dead so the feds are not going to make it easy to get access to him.