5 ms·

I doubt the real identity of Satoshi will ever be revealed. Seriously, if the claims of Satoshi mining the first 20,000 Bitcoins is true (with a value of almost

I doubt the real identity of Satoshi will ever be revealed. Seriously, if the claims of Satoshi mining the first 20,000 Bitcoins is true (with a value of almost one billion), would he seriously want to be publicly known? I would imagine the FBI amongst other Government organisations and figures would love nothing more than to pick Satoshi's brain (by force if need be) if his or her identity were to ever be truly revealed. We won't ever know who the real Satoshi is. I can make baseless and factless accusations as to who I think Satoshi is as well. I think it's Al Gore, he invented the Internet after all.

manuelflara 13y ago
Where did you get that 20,000 Bitcoins are worth (even hypothetically) one billion? Even at $1,000 per BTC that's just $20M.
- saalweachter 13y ago
  I think that's coming from the idea that the "ultimate value" of the BTC money supply should be ~$1 trillion (in order for it to replace real-world currencies in a significant fraction of transactions). 20,0000 Bitcoins is ~1/1000th of 21,000,000 potential Bitcoins.
- unreal37 13y ago
  The paper linked speculates that a small group of people mined the first 20,000 blocks of Bitcoin. 20,000 blocks (@50 coins each) is 1,000,000 bitcoins, which @ $1000 is $1 billion.
  - manuelflara 13y ago
    Ah, got it. Confused bitcoin with blocks. Thanks.
- theintern 13y ago
  Some people estimate his net worth to have been not 20,000, but 1.6 million bitcoins. That adds to over a billion dollars. http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto-the-creator-of-bitcoin http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto-the...
  - judk 13y ago
    But $1B in nominal marginal priced BTC is faaar less liquid (less order book depth) than most other assets.
    - runeks 13y ago
      Yeah, it's worth more like $50M if you place your sells across exchanges: 1,600,000.00 bitcoins can be sold for 35,066,701.01 USD on Mt. Gox with a slippage of 1,544,789,298.99 USD (97.78%) 222,043.14 bitcoins (insufficient bid volume) can be sold for 15,395,973.27 USD on Bitstamp with a slippage of 1,493,404,026.73 USD (98.98%)
saraid216 13y ago
I think Satoshi is the NSA. This is 99% because it would be the most entertaining result, and 1% actual reasoning ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6206086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6206086 ).
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  Can we rule out the FBI?
  - Munksgaard 13y ago
    Not smart enough?
  - saraid216 13y ago
    I think so. Bitcoin is too global to be interesting to a domestic agency. It's more likely to be CIA. If it's part of a policing effort, then it's obviously part of the UN, which according to Tim LeHaye, rules over the United States with an iron fist and is where the shadow government of totally-not-Jews would do exactly this kind of thing. The only name I have for that is New World Order.
    - sliverstorm 13y ago
      I would believe NSA before CIA. The FBI gets involved in the internet space, but it doesn't seem like the CIA does all that much.
      - saraid216 13y ago
        You're not supposed to think the CIA does much. They're the actual spy agency; the whole "just a star on the wall at Langley" thing is CIA; you don't hear about their victories, and if you do, it's a failure of some kind. Stuxnet, for instance, was almost certainly CIA. If Bitcoin is a targeted strike against China somehow (not completely impossible), then the CIA is the likeliest candidate. Otherwise, of the USGov national agencies, the NSA is most likely. The FBI doesn't really get anything out of it. The only reason I can think of for the FBI to do it is for paying off informants anonymously. (And as I've pointed out before, if anyone's an expert on money laundering, it's the FBI.)
njharman 13y ago
> I doubt the real identity of Satoshi will ever be revealed. They should include revelation in their will. For history's sake if nothing else.
judk 13y ago
It would be interesting if (inplementors of a majority of the client software installed base of) the community declared and anti-hoarders coup, and refused to verify transactions involving the low ID bitcoins.

manuelflara 13y ago

Where did you get that 20,000 Bitcoins are worth (even hypothetically) one billion? Even at $1,000 per BTC that's just $20M.

saalweachter 13y ago
I think that's coming from the idea that the "ultimate value" of the BTC money supply should be ~$1 trillion (in order for it to replace real-world currencies in a significant fraction of transactions). 20,0000 Bitcoins is ~1/1000th of 21,000,000 potential Bitcoins.
unreal37 13y ago
The paper linked speculates that a small group of people mined the first 20,000 blocks of Bitcoin. 20,000 blocks (@50 coins each) is 1,000,000 bitcoins, which @ $1000 is $1 billion.
- manuelflara 13y ago
  Ah, got it. Confused bitcoin with blocks. Thanks.
theintern 13y ago
Some people estimate his net worth to have been not 20,000, but 1.6 million bitcoins. That adds to over a billion dollars. http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto-the-creator-of-bitcoin http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto-the...
- judk 13y ago
  But $1B in nominal marginal priced BTC is faaar less liquid (less order book depth) than most other assets.
  - runeks 13y ago
    Yeah, it's worth more like $50M if you place your sells across exchanges: 1,600,000.00 bitcoins can be sold for 35,066,701.01 USD on Mt. Gox with a slippage of 1,544,789,298.99 USD (97.78%) 222,043.14 bitcoins (insufficient bid volume) can be sold for 15,395,973.27 USD on Bitstamp with a slippage of 1,493,404,026.73 USD (98.98%)

saraid216 13y ago

I think Satoshi is the NSA. This is 99% because it would be the most entertaining result, and 1% actual reasoning ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6206086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6206086 ).

sliverstorm 13y ago
Can we rule out the FBI?
- Munksgaard 13y ago
  Not smart enough?
- saraid216 13y ago
  I think so. Bitcoin is too global to be interesting to a domestic agency. It's more likely to be CIA. If it's part of a policing effort, then it's obviously part of the UN, which according to Tim LeHaye, rules over the United States with an iron fist and is where the shadow government of totally-not-Jews would do exactly this kind of thing. The only name I have for that is New World Order.
  - sliverstorm 13y ago
    I would believe NSA before CIA. The FBI gets involved in the internet space, but it doesn't seem like the CIA does all that much.
    - saraid216 13y ago
      You're not supposed to think the CIA does much. They're the actual spy agency; the whole "just a star on the wall at Langley" thing is CIA; you don't hear about their victories, and if you do, it's a failure of some kind. Stuxnet, for instance, was almost certainly CIA. If Bitcoin is a targeted strike against China somehow (not completely impossible), then the CIA is the likeliest candidate. Otherwise, of the USGov national agencies, the NSA is most likely. The FBI doesn't really get anything out of it. The only reason I can think of for the FBI to do it is for paying off informants anonymously. (And as I've pointed out before, if anyone's an expert on money laundering, it's the FBI.)

njharman 13y ago

> I doubt the real identity of Satoshi will ever be revealed. They should include revelation in their will. For history's sake if nothing else.

judk 13y ago

It would be interesting if (inplementors of a majority of the client software installed base of) the community declared and anti-hoarders coup, and refused to verify transactions involving the low ID bitcoins.