273
this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2024
273 points (97.2% liked)
Technology
60112 readers
2187 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Then it would be trivial to sign a message using his known wallet address that could be cryptographicly verified. But he is lying so he can't.
I don't think this guy is Satoshi but no Bitcoin wallets known to belong to Satoshi have been active since their initial transactions. I think it's likely that the keys for those wallets have been lost. So I don't think the inability to sign these messages proves that he's not Satoshi, the fraud does though.
I think that's entirely possible. But I think it's also quite likely that those wallets are intentionally being left alone. I think there are legitimate fears that revealing the identity of Satoshi would destabilize the Bitcoin economy (as well as make that person a serious target). Personally, if I were Satoshi, I would try to keep my identity secret.
Also, if you were to ask me, i'd say that this guy isn't Satoshi because in all likelihood, Satoshi is Nick Szabo.
I pretty much see any person claiming to be nakamoto wether the claim is legitimate or not to be treated exactly as they are treating this guy. Governments In collusion with the military and prison industry profiteers who control all the major financial institutions want to do whatever they want with BTC’s blockchain technology and arent about to let any pesky copyright claims become a hindrance regardless of the validity or lack thereof.
Nobody who understands the technology wants it. Blockchain is an extraordinarily wasteful and buggy solution to the distributed-ledger problem, with some appallingly bad privacy problems (pseudonimity is not anonymity). And the other technical features of the bitcoin implementation are even less novel.
The only banks getting involved with cryptocurrency are doing it to get a piece of the grift. Governments have a legitimate interest in preventing money-laundering, and we've seen what happens when unprincipled people with money can pay off whoever they like. So your paranoia is misplaced.