top | item 37793496

(no title)

lyind | 2 years ago

Why do so many just assume he'd be a single real person?

Could be a whole dev team at a company (Twitter Inc. for example) or a government agency just as well.

discuss

order

modeless|2 years ago

There is zero chance that a whole team and management above them would have been able to keep this secret for this long with this much attention on it. And there is no reason to believe a single person could not do the things Satoshi did.

Even a single person would have continued communication as Satoshi if they were able to, as their life's work became an incredible success. No, Satoshi was a single person who is no longer able to communicate because they are dead. And there are several good candidates who meet that description.

Personally I'm a fan of the "butler did it" theory, i.e. Hal Finney, who indeed died at the right time.

TheBlight|2 years ago

It's unlikely a large dev team would be able to keep this secret. The code was also very consistent and not that large of a code base. It reads to me very much like a single person wrote it.

mortallywounded|2 years ago

Not only was the early code consistent with itself, it was messy as hell and full of "Windows-isms" which reaked of academia/not-a-fulltime-engineer.

Beijinger|2 years ago

Why not? AFAIK, the wallets that are supposed to belong to him have not been touched in a long time. Based on the industry he created, he likely would be a candidate for the Nobel prize in economics.

I think it can safely be assumed that he is dead. Or that he is a person with very little interest in money and fame, which is possible but unlikely. Persons like Grigory Perelman are rare.

usrusr|2 years ago

Are people assuming? Or are they just not speculating about cardinality and sticking to the identifier they have? Would you expect people in the DC universe who don't know about Bruce Wayne refer to sightings as batmen? They can't know!

One thing that suggests a single author (but certainly no proof) is the continued secrecy: bigger group means higher probability of a leak (accidental as much as deliberate). In a way, the probability of an author group is sinking over time, because "unexposed for n years" and "unexposed for n+1 years" aren't the same observation.

polishdude20|2 years ago

What's the motivation for the secrecy though?

TheBlight|2 years ago

It certainly wasn't clear if what they did would be considered legal or not by all locales. And if the project was successful you wouldn't want to make yourself a potential target. There isn't really much advantage to being famous.

mortallywounded|2 years ago

The motivation? It clearly has roots somewhere in the cypherpunk crew, which was already obsessed with privacy, secrecy, etc.

Biganon|2 years ago

A friend once told me it was probably a government agency, and according to him it was probably Japan (and not only because the name sounds Japanese)

anonporridge|2 years ago

The metadata of how Satoshi operated suggests living in Europe at the time.

However, a government agency with extreme competency and desire to keep their involvement secret could spoof this, as well as spoof looking like an individual.

But Occam's Razor pushes me to believe it was just a single dude who happened to get enough things right to produce an escape velocity money protocol.