SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the ooops...we-got-the-wrong-guy dept.
Cornell computer science professor Emin Gün Sirer has posted a blog on MIT Technology Review reacting to the recent news 'outing' the Australian Craig Steven Wright as the person most likely to be 'Satoshi Nakamoto', the creator of Bitcoin. The WIRED story presents evidence both for and against the Wright-as-Satoshi hypothesis; for starters, Wright is supposedly a polymath with two Ph.Ds who has dabbled in finance, has spent considerable time in the cyber-underground, and has a huge stash of coin. Most tellingly, there are a series of blog posts and emails referencing Bitcoin made by Wright in 2008 and 2009, coinciding almost to the day with posts made by Satoshi to the cryptography mailing list. But the WIRED story points out that there is evidence that the blog posts were edited by Wright in 2013 to include the Bitcoin references, raising the possibility of a hoax. And Wright's awesome Linkedin profile seems to have been recently deleted.
More doubts about Wright (warning: possible paywall) here.
Sirer thinks the press, and the Internet, are looking for Satoshi in the wrong place. Rather than look for a polymath and uber geek with an amazingly broad range of knowledge and interests, we should look at the limited community of individuals who have expertise in consensus algorithms and protocols; in other words, a specialist. Furthermore, the person would almost certainly be one who makes mental models and presents arguments in the same manner as Satoshi; Sirer calls this a "mental signature". Sirer says that Wright doesn't satisfy either of these criteria, based on his personal dealings with the man.
But who could be a match? Sirer:
Interestingly, I have come across one person who was a perfect fit. That person had precisely the same intellectual signature as Satoshi, and could have written, word for word, some of Satoshi's forum posts.
Sirer then goes on to say why he won't disclose his suspect - not that he's 100 percent sure he's got the man (or woman).
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TheReaperD on Saturday December 12 2015, @06:34PM
Other than a mystery, what's the big deal with finding this person (or people)? I can imagine some in government, especially organizations such as the NSA really wanting to find whoever was behind the cryptocurrency to make sure he doesn't give any further contributions to society but, what's in it for people, even in the tech community? The person wants to remain anonymous and hasn't hurt anybody so, I say let them remain anonymous.
Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Saturday December 12 2015, @09:51PM
It's mostly to figure out who to hit up for some cash, as he supposedly has a whole bunch of bitcoins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 12 2015, @10:29PM
There's that, and control over that many bitcoins could be used to manipulate the price of bitcoins, yielding even more money.
(Score: 1) by TheReaperD on Tuesday December 15 2015, @01:06AM
If I invented bitcoin and wanted to remain anonymous, I would't own a single one as that would be one of the easiest ways to track me.
Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Saturday December 12 2015, @11:01PM
For one thing the govmu'nt want their Bittaxes. For another, most govmu'nts like here in the U.S. of A say that only they have the right to mint and print money.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 13 2015, @04:24AM
To know that it was actually individual(s) acting alone instead of an entity. For example, there's possibly an organization that designed a catastrophic weakness in the block chain. It doesn't mean there wouldn't be if it was an individual, but the other would guarantee something is amiss.