46 ms·

Look at his comment here, then you will realize why it’s definitely Back. And why he certainly would never claim to be satoshi https://xcancel.com/adam3us/stat

Look at his comment here, then you will realize why it’s definitely Back. And why he certainly would never claim to be satoshi https://xcancel.com/adam3us/status/2041816020776611935?s=46 https://xcancel.com/adam3us/status/2041816020776611935?s=46

olalonde 6mo ago
I didn't realize anything. Everyone and their mother has been saying that about Satoshi since day one... Also, Adam would have infinitely more to gain from being Satoshi than from Satoshi remaining unknown. He's been trying to take credit for Bitcoin ever since he realized that Bitcoin was actually worth something (he initially dismissed it). All his actions point to someone who's largely motivated by financial gain whereas Satoshi hasn't touched a single of his 1M+ BTC. If you're interested in serious research about Satoshi's identity, try this paper instead: https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.10257 https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.10257
- adastra22 6mo ago
  And your HN account was created right between the release of the white paper and Bitcoin 0.1. Coincidence? Are you Satoshi?!? That’s about the level of investigative journalism performed by NYT here. Thanks for being sensible.
  - olalonde 6mo ago
    Maybe :) But seriously, Satoshi is most likely a relatively unknown dude. Why would you spend so much effort hiding your identity and then become a very public figure of the Bitcoin community?
    - adastra22 6mo ago
      I founded a company with Adam. He is not Satoshi. Neither is Szabo. Best not to speculate publicly as no good comes from it - not least of which there are organized crime rings targeting potential suspects for violent kidnapping or home invasion.
      - silisili 6mo ago
        Not to be a jerk, but it'd be helpful for a reader to know how and why you came to that conclusion.
        adastra22 6mo ago
        Not to be a jerk, but none of this is anybody's business.
        storystraight 6mo ago
        you literally detailed why you think it’s not him in another comment. You can’t even get your story straight. Give actual evidence or keep your mouth shut for everyone’s sake since it doesn’t add anything to the discussion
        deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
szmarczak 6mo ago
As per the quotes, it could've been that he had read them, liked them and kept repeating them. However given other matching circumstances such as grammar this becomes unlikely. Also, this is just a single journalist; to know precisely this should be outsourced to a company doing forensics.

olalonde 6mo ago

I didn't realize anything. Everyone and their mother has been saying that about Satoshi since day one... Also, Adam would have infinitely more to gain from being Satoshi than from Satoshi remaining unknown. He's been trying to take credit for Bitcoin ever since he realized that Bitcoin was actually worth something (he initially dismissed it). All his actions point to someone who's largely motivated by financial gain whereas Satoshi hasn't touched a single of his 1M+ BTC. If you're interested in serious research about Satoshi's identity, try this paper instead: https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.10257 https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.10257

adastra22 6mo ago
And your HN account was created right between the release of the white paper and Bitcoin 0.1. Coincidence? Are you Satoshi?!? That’s about the level of investigative journalism performed by NYT here. Thanks for being sensible.
- olalonde 6mo ago
  Maybe :) But seriously, Satoshi is most likely a relatively unknown dude. Why would you spend so much effort hiding your identity and then become a very public figure of the Bitcoin community?
  - adastra22 6mo ago
    I founded a company with Adam. He is not Satoshi. Neither is Szabo. Best not to speculate publicly as no good comes from it - not least of which there are organized crime rings targeting potential suspects for violent kidnapping or home invasion.
    - silisili 6mo ago
      Not to be a jerk, but it'd be helpful for a reader to know how and why you came to that conclusion.
      - adastra22 6mo ago
        Not to be a jerk, but none of this is anybody's business.
        storystraight 6mo ago
        you literally detailed why you think it’s not him in another comment. You can’t even get your story straight. Give actual evidence or keep your mouth shut for everyone’s sake since it doesn’t add anything to the discussion
      - deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]

szmarczak 6mo ago

As per the quotes, it could've been that he had read them, liked them and kept repeating them. However given other matching circumstances such as grammar this becomes unlikely. Also, this is just a single journalist; to know precisely this should be outsourced to a company doing forensics.