10 ms·

Bit gold (2005)

107 points by Tycho 13y ago

applecore 13y ago
Nick Szabo ≡ Satoshi Nakamoto?
- alexmat 13y ago
  I like how the initials are inverted. Cute.
  - dnautics 13y ago
    well in japanese that would be Nakamoto Satoshi
    - almosnow 13y ago
      this
heydenberk 13y ago
Should be captioned (2008)
- oscilloscope 13y ago
  It was first published in 2005 according to the URL and comment permalinks.
  - infruset 13y ago
    References all the way to 1998 can be found over the internet these days..
    - Gravityloss 13y ago
      But can they be trusted? How much do google and archive.org control?
  - bachback 13y ago
    yes, and according to webarchive. strangely Nagy's post is gone in the archive, but present today. perhaps some quirk in blogger or webarchive.
    - jqhart 13y ago
      This means Nagy didn't comment until after the archive date. He probably commented when it was re-posted in 2008.
- hendzen 13y ago
  Look at the URL. Blogspot allows you to retroactively change the date, but the URL stays the same. Obviously one might wonder why he changed the date.
- jqhart 13y ago
  Nope, 2005. http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20060329122942/http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20060329122942/http://une... Blogger updates the date in the article but not in the URL if you repost something you posted earlier.
bushido 13y ago
This is one of the greater reasons why so many are convinced that Nick Szabo is in fact Satoshi Nakamoto. I'm personally undecided/don't have an opinion yet, one things for sure Nick Szabo must be bummed if he is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
frisco 13y ago
I personally like the theory that Satoshi is Nick Szabo and Hal Finney, with maybe one other. Nick Szabo was way ahead of the curve on the design of a proof-of-work based cryptocurrency. When Dan Kaminsky looked at the Bitcoin source early on, he reported that "entire classes of bugs are missing" [1] and that it was almost "preternaturally sound" [2] and Hal Finney is one of the the few people realistically capable of producing that kind of code. Hal Finney was the recipient of the first Bitcoin transaction, and was active on the mailing list that Bitcoin was announced through. Further, a few months before the Bitcoin paper announcement, Nick Szabo put out a request for collaborators to try and prototype out the proof-of-work currency system he'd been thinking about [3], and he and Hal Finney were known to get in touch around that time. I hope the identity of Satoshi is never confirmed. If it's them, good for them! If not, it doesn't matter! [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=34458.0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=34458.0 [2] http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/05/lets-cut-through-the-bitcoin-hype/ http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/05/lets-cut-through-the-bi... [3] http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2008/04/bit-gold-markets.html#3741843833998921269 http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2008/04/bit-gold-markets.ht...
- hendzen 13y ago
  The relationship between Szabo and Finney goes back way further than that. They were both on the cypherpunks list in the 90's. See this paranoid rant [0] from the 90's about Hal Finney, Szabo and others being fake personas invented by Tim May (author of the Cyphernomicon). Additionally, Szabo was an employee of Agoric Systems, publisher of the Agoric Papers [1], a treatise on market based systems. He was also an employee of Digicash [2], a failed electronic money startup created by David Chaum. However, Szabo has released a bit of code [3], which is very different than code I would expect Satoshi Nakamoto to have written. That said, for someone who was a professor at GWU law school, there is a remarkably small amount of public information about Nick Szabo. [0] - http://w2.eff.org/Net_culture/Folklore/Humor/squish.hoax http://w2.eff.org/Net_culture/Folklore/Humor/squish.hoax [1] - http://e-drexler.com/d/09/00/AgoricsPapers/agoricpapers.html http://e-drexler.com/d/09/00/AgoricsPapers/agoricpapers.html [2] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DigiCash http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DigiCash [3] - https://github.com/nicksz/jTime https://github.com/nicksz/jTime
blasphemous 13y ago
This is fairly convincing for me: https://likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-nick-szabo/#%21 https://likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakam...
- bachback 13y ago
  the analysis is fairly flawed. the words are naturally related, because of the topic. szabo might have collaborated on the project, but its hard to tell. his counter arguments to bitcoin are quite convincing (which of course implies he is not satoshi).
- gwern 13y ago
  No. It's completely smoke and mirrors and the method he claims to have done cannot deliver reliable answers. He refuses to approve any comments at all which are critical of him or his blog post, and has not corrected factual mistakes in it. For my detailed rebuttal, see http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1ruluz/satoshi_nakamoto_is_probably_nick_szabo/cdr2vgu http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1ruluz/satoshi_naka...
rokhayakebe 13y ago
Ask HN: What backs the value of a Bitcoin? Isn't Bitcoin the only currency which is in fact backed by Nothing valuable? Paper money imo is backed by regional Economy or iow labor + what labor can buy/buys/saves.
- a3voices 13y ago
  Bitcoin is more similar to gold than it is to a currency.
  - DrStalker 13y ago
    If you ignore the industrial uses of gold its even closer; it's something that is exchanged for other things but never used to do anything on its own.
- simbolit 13y ago
  The value of bitcoin, as of any other instrument of exchange, is backed by the trust that someone else will exchange it for something else in the future. Everyday goods, like corn or crude oil, additionally have intrinsic usefulness and thus gain value from this. Government issued currencies have another aspect, namely that you have to pay taxes in gov issued currency, and thus there is always someone who wants gov issued currency, thus it is easy to trust. There are also often "legal tender" laws, which force people selling to the public to accept gov issued currency. This also makes it easy to invest that trust. But basically it is just how much you (and by extension the market) believe you will be able to get for your instrument of exchange in the future that determines its value.
  - philwelch 13y ago
    That's not quite how legal tender laws work. If I want to operate a business that only accepts Bitcoin, that's not illegal. You give me the Bitcoin and I give you the donut. Legal tender only applies to debts, which include things like damages from lawsuits. In fact, if you want to receive anything other than dollars in a lawsuit, that's considered "specific performance" and is not always available. For instance, if I have a contract to ship you ten tons of flour for $10,000 and I don't ship the flour, most of the time you can sue me for some dollar amount of damages. Specific performance would be if the court ordered me to ship you flour--or indeed, gold, Bitcoin, or Euros.
bachback 13y ago
See this discussion about bitcoin, including the comment section: http://unenumerated.blogspot.de/2011/05/bitcoin-what-took-ye-so-long.html http://unenumerated.blogspot.de/2011/05/bitcoin-what-took-ye...
adrianwaj 13y ago
Startup.com (2001) Bit gold (blog post, 2005) The Social Network (2010) The Cryptocurrency (2014) ... it staggers the mind at what the plotlines could be and the characters incolved. Some rags to riches to rags story meets its opposite. Maybe a 2015 release would yield more possiblities... the greater awakening of cryptocurrency is about putting money into perspective, and finding some equality in it all: it's not about replacing one paper elite with another (who could end up the same people anyway.) I think this was SM's intention to begin with: new technical structures, creating new economic structures, creating new social stuctures... the characters that realize this earn or retain their money (or fame) in the film.
derian 13y ago
Does it really matter who Bitcoin's creators are? Their agenda is quite clear, anyway. It puzzles me that people give Satoshi Nakamoto's real identity so much importance yet they seem to take for granted their economic views even though those same views are seen as very controversial by what seems like a sizable chunk of today's economists. It is portrayed again in this blog post: "As many inflationary and hyperinflationary episodes during the 20th century demonstrated, this is not an ideal state of affairs." As somebody who likes Bitcoin as an idea yet is economically illiterate, I find myself in a pickle. I would like to know the truth but apparently even history itself is contested when it comes to economics.
jv22222 13y ago
FAQ on bitcoin FUD - http://justinvincent.com/page/2172/bitcoin-fear-uncertainty-doubt http://justinvincent.com/page/2172/bitcoin-fear-uncertainty-... - Hope it's helpful :)
- the_hangman 13y ago
  > Bitcoin deals with this issue by having 8 decimal places. The higher the Bitcoin value rises, the smaller the decimal transaction size will become. Each decimal place has a name, with the smallest unit being 1 Satoshi. If 1 Bitcoin was worth as much as one million dollars 1 Satoshi would still only be worth 1 USD cent. In other words, there is no need to print new currency, we can simply use smaller units of Bitcoin. This explanation glosses over what I've always thought was the main problem with deflationary currency. Why would I want to use Bitcoins (or any other deflationary asset, for that matter) as a currency instead of an investment? It just doesn't make sense to the customer. You wouldn't sell land that you own just to purchase basic necessities unless you had no other choice. In the same way, I'm not sure it will ever be a rational decision to buy something with Bitcoins unless you had no other choice of currency to use. I'm not an economist so I could be misunderstanding the nature of deflationary assets, but doesn't that imply that Bitcoins should be used only as an investment vehicle or to purchase things which other currencies can't (or shouldn't) be used?
  - gigq 13y ago
    By the same logic why wouldn't you use all the extra cash you have to buy bitcoins? If you frame it that way then the answer is obvious, there is no guarantee the value will continue to rise so you will use it to purchase when you think it's over priced (I bought a TV and new camera when the price was over 1k). The volatility actually ends up being a good thing in this regard because sometimes you are better off purchasing other goods with bitcoin, sometimes you are better off holding. If the value eventually balances out and is truly deflationary against inflation then I don't think people are going to lose sleep over selling bitcoins that are going up 3% each year the same way they don't worry about taking money out of a savings account to buy something they don't really need.
muyuu 13y ago
What's up with the witch hunt? If someone wants to remain private, why don't we just leave him alone?
- diab0lic 13y ago
  Is it really a witch hunt? People are just fascinated with the enigma that is Satoshi. He's (they've?) done something amazing in many people's eyes but has avoided taking credit for it -- in an arena where people are often seeking credit and fame (financial, if you'd call it that). It reminds me a lot of Isildur1 in the online poker scene a few years ago. This guy played an insane style at the highest stakes, went millionaire to busto more times than I can count on my hand, and completely hid his identity -- all in an industry where people nearly always seek fame. People suspected he was Victor Blom (along with a few others) but I'm not sure if they were more fascinated because of what he did or that he did it while hiding behind an online identity. This situation bears many similarities, so its no surprise people are very interested for no other reason than that he's made an effort to be an enigma.
  - 0x0 13y ago
    Never heard about the poker guy before, but I looked it up and it seems it was confirmed first-hand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Blom#cite_note-starsblog-1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Blom#cite_note-starsblog...
chuinard 13y ago
Nick was guessed to be Satoshi weeks ago. Has he not made a statement on this?
jzwinck 13y ago
I like this quote from Nick in 1999 (http://szabo.best.vwh.net/intrapoly.html http://szabo.best.vwh.net/intrapoly.html - linked from TFA as "obscure"): > spammers may be able to defeat compute-cost postage by using custom chips optimized for computing the particular puzzle function. This presaged the ASIC miners that so quickly came to dominate Bitcoin. It's almost wonder that new types of coins are being mined without (semi) custom chips at all; perhaps only because FPGA development tools have improved much slower than software in general.
MacsHeadroom 13y ago
The Internet Archive says this was first posted in May 2013, not 2005 or 2008. https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://unenumerated.blogspot.co.uk/2005/12/bit-gold.html https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://unenumerated.blogspot.c... What's the deal?
- Sprint 13y ago
  That's not what IA does. It says this is the first copy of that URL they have archived. Blogspot does some beyond idiotic redirection to locale TLDs which fucks up all kinds of stuff. See https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://unenumerated.blogspot.c...
bachback 13y ago
Has someone the refutation of Szabo that he is not Szabo? haven't been able to find the comments of Szabo and Dai.

Bit gold (2005)

107 points by Tycho 13y ago

applecore 13y ago

Nick Szabo ≡ Satoshi Nakamoto?

alexmat 13y ago
I like how the initials are inverted. Cute.
- dnautics 13y ago
  well in japanese that would be Nakamoto Satoshi
  - almosnow 13y ago
    this

heydenberk 13y ago

Should be captioned (2008)

oscilloscope 13y ago
It was first published in 2005 according to the URL and comment permalinks.
- infruset 13y ago
  References all the way to 1998 can be found over the internet these days..
  - Gravityloss 13y ago
    But can they be trusted? How much do google and archive.org control?
- bachback 13y ago
  yes, and according to webarchive. strangely Nagy's post is gone in the archive, but present today. perhaps some quirk in blogger or webarchive.
  - jqhart 13y ago
    This means Nagy didn't comment until after the archive date. He probably commented when it was re-posted in 2008.
hendzen 13y ago
Look at the URL. Blogspot allows you to retroactively change the date, but the URL stays the same. Obviously one might wonder why he changed the date.
jqhart 13y ago
Nope, 2005. http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20060329122942/http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20060329122942/http://une... Blogger updates the date in the article but not in the URL if you repost something you posted earlier.

bushido 13y ago

This is one of the greater reasons why so many are convinced that Nick Szabo is in fact Satoshi Nakamoto. I'm personally undecided/don't have an opinion yet, one things for sure Nick Szabo must be bummed if he is not Satoshi Nakamoto.

frisco 13y ago

I personally like the theory that Satoshi is Nick Szabo and Hal Finney, with maybe one other. Nick Szabo was way ahead of the curve on the design of a proof-of-work based cryptocurrency. When Dan Kaminsky looked at the Bitcoin source early on, he reported that "entire classes of bugs are missing" [1] and that it was almost "preternaturally sound" [2] and Hal Finney is one of the the few people realistically capable of producing that kind of code. Hal Finney was the recipient of the first Bitcoin transaction, and was active on the mailing list that Bitcoin was announced through. Further, a few months before the Bitcoin paper announcement, Nick Szabo put out a request for collaborators to try and prototype out the proof-of-work currency system he'd been thinking about [3], and he and Hal Finney were known to get in touch around that time. I hope the identity of Satoshi is never confirmed. If it's them, good for them! If not, it doesn't matter! [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=34458.0 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=34458.0 [2] http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/05/lets-cut-through-the-bitcoin-hype/ http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/05/lets-cut-through-the-bi... [3] http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2008/04/bit-gold-markets.html#3741843833998921269 http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2008/04/bit-gold-markets.ht...

hendzen 13y ago
The relationship between Szabo and Finney goes back way further than that. They were both on the cypherpunks list in the 90's. See this paranoid rant [0] from the 90's about Hal Finney, Szabo and others being fake personas invented by Tim May (author of the Cyphernomicon). Additionally, Szabo was an employee of Agoric Systems, publisher of the Agoric Papers [1], a treatise on market based systems. He was also an employee of Digicash [2], a failed electronic money startup created by David Chaum. However, Szabo has released a bit of code [3], which is very different than code I would expect Satoshi Nakamoto to have written. That said, for someone who was a professor at GWU law school, there is a remarkably small amount of public information about Nick Szabo. [0] - http://w2.eff.org/Net_culture/Folklore/Humor/squish.hoax http://w2.eff.org/Net_culture/Folklore/Humor/squish.hoax [1] - http://e-drexler.com/d/09/00/AgoricsPapers/agoricpapers.html http://e-drexler.com/d/09/00/AgoricsPapers/agoricpapers.html [2] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DigiCash http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DigiCash [3] - https://github.com/nicksz/jTime https://github.com/nicksz/jTime

blasphemous 13y ago

This is fairly convincing for me: https://likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-nick-szabo/#%21 https://likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakam...

bachback 13y ago
the analysis is fairly flawed. the words are naturally related, because of the topic. szabo might have collaborated on the project, but its hard to tell. his counter arguments to bitcoin are quite convincing (which of course implies he is not satoshi).
gwern 13y ago
No. It's completely smoke and mirrors and the method he claims to have done cannot deliver reliable answers. He refuses to approve any comments at all which are critical of him or his blog post, and has not corrected factual mistakes in it. For my detailed rebuttal, see http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1ruluz/satoshi_nakamoto_is_probably_nick_szabo/cdr2vgu http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1ruluz/satoshi_naka...

rokhayakebe 13y ago

Ask HN: What backs the value of a Bitcoin? Isn't Bitcoin the only currency which is in fact backed by Nothing valuable? Paper money imo is backed by regional Economy or iow labor + what labor can buy/buys/saves.

a3voices 13y ago
Bitcoin is more similar to gold than it is to a currency.
- DrStalker 13y ago
  If you ignore the industrial uses of gold its even closer; it's something that is exchanged for other things but never used to do anything on its own.
simbolit 13y ago
The value of bitcoin, as of any other instrument of exchange, is backed by the trust that someone else will exchange it for something else in the future. Everyday goods, like corn or crude oil, additionally have intrinsic usefulness and thus gain value from this. Government issued currencies have another aspect, namely that you have to pay taxes in gov issued currency, and thus there is always someone who wants gov issued currency, thus it is easy to trust. There are also often "legal tender" laws, which force people selling to the public to accept gov issued currency. This also makes it easy to invest that trust. But basically it is just how much you (and by extension the market) believe you will be able to get for your instrument of exchange in the future that determines its value.
- philwelch 13y ago
  That's not quite how legal tender laws work. If I want to operate a business that only accepts Bitcoin, that's not illegal. You give me the Bitcoin and I give you the donut. Legal tender only applies to debts, which include things like damages from lawsuits. In fact, if you want to receive anything other than dollars in a lawsuit, that's considered "specific performance" and is not always available. For instance, if I have a contract to ship you ten tons of flour for $10,000 and I don't ship the flour, most of the time you can sue me for some dollar amount of damages. Specific performance would be if the court ordered me to ship you flour--or indeed, gold, Bitcoin, or Euros.

bachback 13y ago

See this discussion about bitcoin, including the comment section: http://unenumerated.blogspot.de/2011/05/bitcoin-what-took-ye-so-long.html http://unenumerated.blogspot.de/2011/05/bitcoin-what-took-ye...

adrianwaj 13y ago

Startup.com (2001) Bit gold (blog post, 2005) The Social Network (2010) The Cryptocurrency (2014) ... it staggers the mind at what the plotlines could be and the characters incolved. Some rags to riches to rags story meets its opposite. Maybe a 2015 release would yield more possiblities... the greater awakening of cryptocurrency is about putting money into perspective, and finding some equality in it all: it's not about replacing one paper elite with another (who could end up the same people anyway.) I think this was SM's intention to begin with: new technical structures, creating new economic structures, creating new social stuctures... the characters that realize this earn or retain their money (or fame) in the film.

derian 13y ago

Does it really matter who Bitcoin's creators are? Their agenda is quite clear, anyway. It puzzles me that people give Satoshi Nakamoto's real identity so much importance yet they seem to take for granted their economic views even though those same views are seen as very controversial by what seems like a sizable chunk of today's economists. It is portrayed again in this blog post: "As many inflationary and hyperinflationary episodes during the 20th century demonstrated, this is not an ideal state of affairs." As somebody who likes Bitcoin as an idea yet is economically illiterate, I find myself in a pickle. I would like to know the truth but apparently even history itself is contested when it comes to economics.

jv22222 13y ago

FAQ on bitcoin FUD - http://justinvincent.com/page/2172/bitcoin-fear-uncertainty-doubt http://justinvincent.com/page/2172/bitcoin-fear-uncertainty-... - Hope it's helpful :)

the_hangman 13y ago
> Bitcoin deals with this issue by having 8 decimal places. The higher the Bitcoin value rises, the smaller the decimal transaction size will become. Each decimal place has a name, with the smallest unit being 1 Satoshi. If 1 Bitcoin was worth as much as one million dollars 1 Satoshi would still only be worth 1 USD cent. In other words, there is no need to print new currency, we can simply use smaller units of Bitcoin. This explanation glosses over what I've always thought was the main problem with deflationary currency. Why would I want to use Bitcoins (or any other deflationary asset, for that matter) as a currency instead of an investment? It just doesn't make sense to the customer. You wouldn't sell land that you own just to purchase basic necessities unless you had no other choice. In the same way, I'm not sure it will ever be a rational decision to buy something with Bitcoins unless you had no other choice of currency to use. I'm not an economist so I could be misunderstanding the nature of deflationary assets, but doesn't that imply that Bitcoins should be used only as an investment vehicle or to purchase things which other currencies can't (or shouldn't) be used?
- gigq 13y ago
  By the same logic why wouldn't you use all the extra cash you have to buy bitcoins? If you frame it that way then the answer is obvious, there is no guarantee the value will continue to rise so you will use it to purchase when you think it's over priced (I bought a TV and new camera when the price was over 1k). The volatility actually ends up being a good thing in this regard because sometimes you are better off purchasing other goods with bitcoin, sometimes you are better off holding. If the value eventually balances out and is truly deflationary against inflation then I don't think people are going to lose sleep over selling bitcoins that are going up 3% each year the same way they don't worry about taking money out of a savings account to buy something they don't really need.

muyuu 13y ago

What's up with the witch hunt? If someone wants to remain private, why don't we just leave him alone?

diab0lic 13y ago
Is it really a witch hunt? People are just fascinated with the enigma that is Satoshi. He's (they've?) done something amazing in many people's eyes but has avoided taking credit for it -- in an arena where people are often seeking credit and fame (financial, if you'd call it that). It reminds me a lot of Isildur1 in the online poker scene a few years ago. This guy played an insane style at the highest stakes, went millionaire to busto more times than I can count on my hand, and completely hid his identity -- all in an industry where people nearly always seek fame. People suspected he was Victor Blom (along with a few others) but I'm not sure if they were more fascinated because of what he did or that he did it while hiding behind an online identity. This situation bears many similarities, so its no surprise people are very interested for no other reason than that he's made an effort to be an enigma.
- 0x0 13y ago
  Never heard about the poker guy before, but I looked it up and it seems it was confirmed first-hand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Blom#cite_note-starsblog-1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Blom#cite_note-starsblog...

chuinard 13y ago

Nick was guessed to be Satoshi weeks ago. Has he not made a statement on this?

jzwinck 13y ago

I like this quote from Nick in 1999 (http://szabo.best.vwh.net/intrapoly.html http://szabo.best.vwh.net/intrapoly.html - linked from TFA as "obscure"): > spammers may be able to defeat compute-cost postage by using custom chips optimized for computing the particular puzzle function. This presaged the ASIC miners that so quickly came to dominate Bitcoin. It's almost wonder that new types of coins are being mined without (semi) custom chips at all; perhaps only because FPGA development tools have improved much slower than software in general.

MacsHeadroom 13y ago

The Internet Archive says this was first posted in May 2013, not 2005 or 2008. https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://unenumerated.blogspot.co.uk/2005/12/bit-gold.html https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://unenumerated.blogspot.c... What's the deal?

Sprint 13y ago
That's not what IA does. It says this is the first copy of that URL they have archived. Blogspot does some beyond idiotic redirection to locale TLDs which fucks up all kinds of stuff. See https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://unenumerated.blogspot.c...

bachback 13y ago

Has someone the refutation of Szabo that he is not Szabo? haven't been able to find the comments of Szabo and Dai.