The secret identity of Satoshi Nakamoto

One of the most interesting aspects of the history of Bitcoin is the anonymity of its creator. Absence generates respect. And Satoshi Nakamoto, the mysterious creator of Bitcoin, has become an idol largely because of his disappearance. Who is really Satoshi? Well, nobody knows. The issue is an enigma. His identity is the cause of heated debates and a source of constant speculation. Many have been designated as possible “Satoshis” and have denied it. Others have proclaimed themselves as Satoshi, but nobody believes them. Why did you choose anonymity? Why did it disappear? Is this good or bad for Bitcoin? Let’s talk a little about Satoshi and the consequences of his absence.

In a society obsessed with fame and recognition, people who renounce these delicacies are the object of great admiration and wonder. They become heavenly beings. For some reason, we think they enjoy superior spiritual purity and moral integrity from another world. In fact, it is a surprising phenomenon. The archetype of the anonymous and inaccessible creator is simply irresistible. And ironically it brings its fame to the stratosphere. The crypto community sees Satoshi as a saint. Most consider him a messiah and his white paper is a kind of bible. “Satoshi said.” “Satoshi thought.” “Satoshi wanted.” “That was not Satoshi’s intention.” “The vision of Satoshi.” No one takes a plane citing the Wright brothers. Nobody uses Windows and says: “This is what Bill Gates wanted.” People don’t give a damn what Bill Gates thinks. Technology is used and now. The intentions of the creator are rarely taken into account. Users are always more important than creators. Moreover, the creators of an important invention tend to become villains over time.

The effects of Satoshi’s anonymity could be divided into two parts. You could say that it has psychological implications on the one hand and practical implications on the other. Of course, both implications have positive and negative aspects. An absent Satoshi is easy to mitigate. That is, Satoshi is what we want it to be. In myth, Satoshi may be the most intelligent and noble man in the universe. After all, his code is brilliant and his resignation to fame could mean that his altruism is unrivaled. That obviously gives him supernatural powers. This gives Bitcoin an air of mysticism. Satoshi will never let us down. It is perfect. The emptiness he left also becomes a unifying element, because we all have a common faith, faith in Satoshi. In other words, Satoshi loves us all equally. Of course, nobody has the courage to criticize him because his works and words are sacred. If something goes wrong, it is not Satoshi’s fault. The culprits are others. That faith system makes us extremely conservative. That may be good, but it can also be harmful.

The myth of Satoshi is so powerful that almost every division within the Bitcoin community is based on a reinterpretation of the supposed intentions of the supreme creator. Bitcoin Cash, for example, is a fork that claims to be the “true Bitcoin” and, according to its faithful, Bitcoin has lost its way. Back to the same. “Satoshi said.” “Satoshi wanted.” “Satoshi thought.” And since Satoshi is not to contradict anyone, Satoshi is always on our side. Nobody creates a new operating system saying that the new software is what Bill Gates really wanted and Microsoft lost the way. That would be absurd. Technologies are judged by their usefulness not by the intentions of their creator. Nobody cares if Netflix betrayed Blockbuster or not. If a technology is better for us, we adopt it, period. This is the problem with myths. Myths dumbfound us.

In practice, however, its absence is very advantageous. A decentralized system that does not have a visible head to whom we have to obey, applaud or attack is very useful. Bitcoin is your community and does not depend on a charismatic leader. That is a bit chaotic, but it forces us to agree. That is, the project depends on everyone and we must all contribute. The churches that have a pastor like Ethereum, Ripple, Litecoin and almost all altcoins have a serious systemic flaw. That is the asymmetry that exists between the founder and the community. Bitcoin, for better or worse, does not have a king. If the United States Congress finds problems with Libra, call Mark Zuckerberg. If he finds problems with Tether or Ethereum, he would know very well which head he should cut. In the case of Bitcoin, it is more complicated. Bitcoin is your community. If they cut a head, a thousand more arise.    

Now, who is Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin? Satoshi’s quest has been the Gold of journalists. Many articles with possible suspects have been published, but each article that comes out obscures the matter more. Of course, the first suspicions fall on computer scientists Nick Szabo, Hal Finney and Wai Dai. These people worked for years on similar projects. Hal Finney, in particular, had direct contact with the Bitcoin project. He made contributions and wrote with Satoshi. In fact, he was the recipient of the first Bitcoin transaction in history. However, Hal denied being Satoshi with an extremely convincing tone and people believed him. The others, Nick and Wai, also denied it. But the question remains. They are lying? Another suspect is Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto, Hal Finney’s neighbor, computer scientist, cryptographer and libertarian, with a past full of bitter relations with banks and government agencies. In an interview, Dorian hinted at being the creator of Bitcoin, but then retracted saying he had misunderstood the questions. Locked cat? Or simple misunderstanding?

Many have been signaled to be Satoshi, but have denied it. The list is very wide and is not really worth entering into details. But there is another group. This is the group of self-proclaimed people who claim to be Satoshi, but nobody believes them. The star of them is, of course, Craig Wright. The Australian computer scientist claims to be Satoshi and the author of the Bitcoin white paper. If Craig Wright is really Satoshi, that would be a big disappointment. Of course it is not. But if by a cruelty of fate it were, it would be extremely pathetic. I do not mean the fact that the person in question is an extremely conceited and pedantic subject. Indeed, it has all the characteristics of a charlatan and a trickster. Is not that. The point is that his vision of cryptocurrencies is a complete absurdity. His idea that money must be 100% traceable to avoid crime is an extremely dangerous totalitarian proposal from a George Orwell novel. If it really is Satoshi, then Satoshi is a public threat and it is better not to hear it. Thanks for the code, but your ideas are pure bullshit.

Now, a curiosity. There is a conspiracy theory that says that Satoshi Nakamoto is the National Security Agency (NSA) of the United States. According to this theory, the code was created to be able to pay covert operations clandestinely and finance irregular groups. And, as in any conspiracy theory that is respected, it is full of “extraordinary” clues and rare connections. Here goes one. Satoshi in Japanese could mean vision, clarity or intelligence. Nakamoto means origin or center. That? Intelligence center! With the help of some comments made by Edward Snowden, these conspiracy theorists claim that the CIA and the NSA invented Bitcoin and use it to track all our operations in a secret world domination plan. Is this true?

Interestingly, John McAfee claims to know the secret identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. The controversial American computer scientist said he is an expert in tracking people and finding the real Satoshi was a piece of cake for him. He thought for a while to reveal his identity, but he stopped his plan fearing a lawsuit. Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? Who built the pyramids? Who killed Kennedy? What is in area 51? Well, that doesn’t really matter. Total, there is Bitcoin. There is the code. It is public and free. Bitcoin is not Satoshi. Bitcoin is an open source. Bitcoin is a community.

Reference es.cointelegraph.com

Disclaimer: This press release is for informational purposes information does not constitute investment advice or an offer to invest. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of infocoin, and should not be attributed to, Infocoin.

You may also like...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *