3 ms·

Bear in mind that this is the same sort of analysis that attributed large amounts of the initially mined coins to "Satoshi", when they were in fact core develop

by nwh 13y ago

Bear in mind that this is the same sort of analysis that attributed large amounts of the initially mined coins to "Satoshi", when they were in fact core developer Gregory Maxwell's. There's a lot of room for error, especially when the email in question has an address in between with no attributable person behind it.

sillysaurus3 13y ago
That's fine though, because at that point our theory has been proven wrong. So I propose we take the best guess that fits the available evidence and act accordingly. In this case, that action has already been taken: to notify Bitstamp that if the person trading those coins is an associate of Mt. Gox, then there's a high probability that illegal trades are occurring on their servers. This would let them take an action like freezing the account until they can provide an explanation about where the coins came from. (We're slowly turning into Paypal...) analysis that attributed large amounts of the initially mined coins to "Satoshi", when they were in fact core developer Gregory Maxwell's You just reminded me of something cool (but totally offtopic): https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-fortune-of-satoshi-nakamoto/ https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-f... Someone recently came up with a previously-unknown technique for mapping out Satoshi's fortune.
- nwh 13y ago
  You forget that this is a community that threatens violence over this sort of bullshit.
  - sillysaurus3 13y ago
    You're right, I forgot. It's a real concern, and preventing witch hunts from forming should probably be the highest priority.
- dopamean 13y ago
  Scientist?
maaku 13y ago
> Bear in mind that this is the same sort of analysis that attributed large amounts of the initially mined coins to "Satoshi", when they were in fact core developer Gregory Maxwell's. Citation or redaction, please. If Gregory Maxwell owns a life-changing sum of early bitcoins, it is certainly news to me. If he does not, then you are making claims that could endanger the life and well being of someone who has worked very hard in service of the bitcoin community.
- sillysaurus3 13y ago
  Anecdotally, I think I remember that incident, but unfortunately I don't remember precisely where I heard it. There have been a lot of very-wrong analyses of the blockchain which have gotten people riled up about one thing or another and then turned out to be bogus. The whole process has sometimes shown unsettling parallels with numerology. It's good that nwh is reminding everyone to try to be as skeptical as possible. It'll be interesting to see whether the evidence turns out to match the story.
  - maaku 13y ago
    The only incident I can think of was a paper by Adi Shamir and Dorit Ron claiming Satoshi had a connection to Silk Road, and the actual owner of the coins (Dustin Trammell) came forward and demonstrated that (a) the coins were his and (b) the transaction was with MtGox not Silk Road. Gregory Maxwell was not involved in any way: http://blog.dustintrammell.com/2013/11/26/i-am-not-satoshi/ http://blog.dustintrammell.com/2013/11/26/i-am-not-satoshi/ I know of no other incident involving mis-identification of Satoshi's stash.
- testacular 13y ago
  There are numerous public lists of wealthy individuals. Nobody gets upset about them. But every time a BTC-holder is identified, somebody claims that the person might be killed. One more fun side-effect of anonymous, irreversible transactions.
- nwh 13y ago
  He's mentioned it on the forums directly, though I'm not in a position to dig it up right now. It's fairly easy to infer that he sold a lot at low prices, from his posts it doesn't seem that he is particularly rolling in the stuff. Probably best not to speculate on such things too much though unless he specifically brings it up.
nullc 13y ago
Hm? I think this is being read in a confused way— that some gazillion coins are mine or something. Basically people were going around claiming that _all_ the unspent coins during a particular time period were "satoshi's"— and this is a claim which is obviously untrue on its face, if nothing else because there are other people who mined blocks during time (and lost them), including myself. Thats all. Nothing especially interesting. Reliably analysis from historical data is pretty lossy. Bitcoin exists in an odd equilibrium where speculative analysis from the chain alone is both enough to frequently break privacy but often not enough to make reliable inferences.
- nwh 13y ago
  In hindsight I see how people have read this in a way I didn't intend, I'm being bitten by HN's two hour editing window. I meant that people picked out a large amount of coins as "satoshi's", and you mentioned that some of them were yours. If I could edit or delete the parent I certainly would.

by nwh 13y ago

sillysaurus3 13y ago

That's fine though, because at that point our theory has been proven wrong. So I propose we take the best guess that fits the available evidence and act accordingly. In this case, that action has already been taken: to notify Bitstamp that if the person trading those coins is an associate of Mt. Gox, then there's a high probability that illegal trades are occurring on their servers. This would let them take an action like freezing the account until they can provide an explanation about where the coins came from. (We're slowly turning into Paypal...) analysis that attributed large amounts of the initially mined coins to "Satoshi", when they were in fact core developer Gregory Maxwell's You just reminded me of something cool (but totally offtopic): https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-fortune-of-satoshi-nakamoto/ https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-f... Someone recently came up with a previously-unknown technique for mapping out Satoshi's fortune.

nwh 13y ago
You forget that this is a community that threatens violence over this sort of bullshit.
- sillysaurus3 13y ago
  You're right, I forgot. It's a real concern, and preventing witch hunts from forming should probably be the highest priority.
dopamean 13y ago
Scientist?

maaku 13y ago

> Bear in mind that this is the same sort of analysis that attributed large amounts of the initially mined coins to "Satoshi", when they were in fact core developer Gregory Maxwell's. Citation or redaction, please. If Gregory Maxwell owns a life-changing sum of early bitcoins, it is certainly news to me. If he does not, then you are making claims that could endanger the life and well being of someone who has worked very hard in service of the bitcoin community.

sillysaurus3 13y ago
Anecdotally, I think I remember that incident, but unfortunately I don't remember precisely where I heard it. There have been a lot of very-wrong analyses of the blockchain which have gotten people riled up about one thing or another and then turned out to be bogus. The whole process has sometimes shown unsettling parallels with numerology. It's good that nwh is reminding everyone to try to be as skeptical as possible. It'll be interesting to see whether the evidence turns out to match the story.
- maaku 13y ago
  The only incident I can think of was a paper by Adi Shamir and Dorit Ron claiming Satoshi had a connection to Silk Road, and the actual owner of the coins (Dustin Trammell) came forward and demonstrated that (a) the coins were his and (b) the transaction was with MtGox not Silk Road. Gregory Maxwell was not involved in any way: http://blog.dustintrammell.com/2013/11/26/i-am-not-satoshi/ http://blog.dustintrammell.com/2013/11/26/i-am-not-satoshi/ I know of no other incident involving mis-identification of Satoshi's stash.
testacular 13y ago
There are numerous public lists of wealthy individuals. Nobody gets upset about them. But every time a BTC-holder is identified, somebody claims that the person might be killed. One more fun side-effect of anonymous, irreversible transactions.
nwh 13y ago
He's mentioned it on the forums directly, though I'm not in a position to dig it up right now. It's fairly easy to infer that he sold a lot at low prices, from his posts it doesn't seem that he is particularly rolling in the stuff. Probably best not to speculate on such things too much though unless he specifically brings it up.

nullc 13y ago

Hm? I think this is being read in a confused way— that some gazillion coins are mine or something. Basically people were going around claiming that _all_ the unspent coins during a particular time period were "satoshi's"— and this is a claim which is obviously untrue on its face, if nothing else because there are other people who mined blocks during time (and lost them), including myself. Thats all. Nothing especially interesting. Reliably analysis from historical data is pretty lossy. Bitcoin exists in an odd equilibrium where speculative analysis from the chain alone is both enough to frequently break privacy but often not enough to make reliable inferences.

nwh 13y ago
In hindsight I see how people have read this in a way I didn't intend, I'm being bitten by HN's two hour editing window. I meant that people picked out a large amount of coins as "satoshi's", and you mentioned that some of them were yours. If I could edit or delete the parent I certainly would.