it is only more thorough than prior efforts because they list the names of the other people they applied the same textual analysis to. HOWEVER, this type of ana

it is only more thorough than prior efforts because they list the names of the other people they applied the same textual analysis to. HOWEVER, this type of analysis is too subjective. It may help when you definitively know the suspect is one of 12 or 20 but it is useless when it could be literally anyone. You might as well water board random people on the street demanding they tell you who Satoshi is. Szabo is definitely a candidate but the onion of who Satoshi is requires you look at much more information. Such as what the target was doing 2 years before the publication (this is the known timeframe of when he started working on bitcoin), the style of coding, the times of coding which indicate sleep patterns and what happened the end of last year to Satoshi (nov 2013) which lead him to diverge control of all final assets (known from whois records for bitcoin.net and bitcoins.org, confirmed by theymos). If you cant complete that, don't bother writing an article on who Satoshi is and don't bother telling a journalists about your textual pseudo-suspicions.