3 ms·
Me neither. As it appears he have not premined any significant amount of bitcoins, so it's not like he is going to cash out. So the version, besides that he wan
by cLeEOGPw 13y ago
Me neither. As it appears he have not premined any significant amount of bitcoins, so it's not like he is going to cash out. So the version, besides that he wants to be "hidden super character" may be that he was not allowed by some organization to reveal who made this breakthrough. It's not even clear if it was a single person. But even if it was by some organization, why hide? Maybe they didn't want bitcoins forever be associated with NSA for example, which would repulse people and led into believing that the organization controls the currency. But it still doesn't make much sense.
Since Satoshi seems to be heavily influenced by cypherpunk community, maybe it really is one person who just wanted the bitcoin really work and made everything that's the best for the currency? If so, one day, when bitcoin or it's derivative will be a thing on which the world economy depends, he will be the man of the year. Maybe he will even disclose his identity, since that will not have an effect on bitcoin itself any more.
- wmf 13y agoA movement cannot outgrow its charismatic leader until the leader dies. Satoshi would find it very difficult to retire if he wasn't anonymous. Also, Satoshi mined ~1.5M BTC, now "worth" over $1B.
- nullc 13y agoFounder's syndrome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder%27s_syndrome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder%27s_syndrome) is a common problem that Satoshi nicely sidestepped for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a zero-trust system, it should be judged on its merits, not extrapolations of its creators motivations. The 1.5M claim is bullshit, however. People come up with these gigantic numbers by claiming that all coins unspent mined in the first year (or all coins mined in the first year at all!) were Satoshi. This is known to be untrue because there are many other people who mined in the first year and have coins unspent (or lost!) from then.
- wmf 13y agoHere's a detailed analysis (just under 1M BTC; I'm not sure why I remembered 1.5M): http://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-fortune-of-satoshi-nakamoto/ http://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-fo... http://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/satoshi-s-fortune-a-more-accurate-figure/ http://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/satoshi-s-fortune-a-...
- nullc 13y agoYes, but the 1M number there is simply counting up all the unspent blocks in the first year. Though the author presented an argument for further distinguishing blocks into "maybe satoshi" "not satoshi" sets, that wasn't actually done for the count.