Who invented Bitcoin? Tracking down Satoshi Nakamoto

Biblical End Time Events: The Truth Unfolded (A Super Conspiracy) Part 1

Biblical End Time Events: The Truth Unfolded (A Super Conspiracy) Part 1
I run a web company. On our homepage we offer free quotes. On August 11, 2020, I received the following "free quote request":

Free Quote Request: This Google doc exposes how this scamdemic is part of a bigger plan to crush your business and keep it closed or semi-operational (with heavy rescritions) while big corporations remain open without consequences. This Covid lie has ruined many peoples lives and businesses and is all done on purpose to bring about the One World Order. It goes much deeper than this but the purpose of this doc is to expose the evil and wickedness that works in the background to ruin peoples lives. So feel free to share this message with friends and family. No need to reply to the email i provided above as its not registered. But this information will tell you everything you need to know. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HOZcA9jQlS2ngj4cspGv-F4Bu-E84Rj2Vr-u__Nuw5w/edit

The following is the contents of the google doc broken up into 3 parts due to its massive length.
Part 1 Part 2 Part 3
This is part 1/3:

Here is a quick synopsis of Bill Gates Vaccine/Microchip and the Mark of the Beast as mentioned in the bible

PROOF~THE NEW WORLD ORDER IS RISING. ACCEPT JESUS CHRIST TODAY!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGHzSUEgx_E&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
A Military-Funded Biosensor Could Be the Future of Pandemic Detection
https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2020/03/military-funded-biosensor-could-be-future-pandemic-detection/163497/
The final days. What REALLY happens when you take the Microchip? 2/12/2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39B4OPukuAQ&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
The Master Plan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oaJpKkFTlI&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
ALERT! Pandemic is Planned! Bill Gates ID2020 Exposed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aR7cz30chE&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
This will give you the Total Understanding you need in this Hour!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_UhcFqyKco&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
Microsoft submits a patent for the microchip. This is a legit patent site and a legit patent. You can't make this stuff up.
WO2020060606 = World Order 2020 666
Publication Number WO/2020/060606
Publication Date 26.03.2020
Applicants MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, LLC [US/US]; One Microsoft Way Redmond, Washington 98052-6399, US
Microsoft patents cryptocurrency system using body data
https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2020060606&tab=PCTBIBLIO
The connection between the vaccine, the microchip, and how they link to The Mark of the Beast
Although you see information in regards to Bill Gates's vaccine as well as the microchip patent submitted by Microsoft recently, a conclusive parallel we can draw from both of these things is the microchip could very well be within the vaccine itself (within the syringe needle that is) as a single event or the vaccine and microchip will be administered in 2 different events (which i highly doubt given with what is currently going on).
Either way, I ask those reading this document, to never take the vaccine/microchip whether these are administered at the same time or not, as they represent the Mark of the Beast.
Essentially, the evil powers that be will push for a cashless society using this plandemic (eventually saying it's not safe to handle cash), and in doing so, if people want to continue to buy and sell, then they must take the vaccine/microchip to signify they are deemed "safe" enough to return back into society. Basically the microchip will act as your new digital wallet in which it will be used to buy and sell things. But before this happens the evil powers that be will purposely crash all currencies (to make them worthless; look at the biblical verse Ezekiel 7:19 below) so they can usher in their version of bitcoin type of cryptocurrency in conjunction with the microchip.
Ezekiel 7:19 King James Version (KJV)
19 They shall cast their silver in the streets, and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the Lord: they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels: because it is the stumblingblock of their iniquity.
During this time many people will be fooled into taking the Mark of the Beast because they will have trusted their governments, false teachers/prophets, and mainstream media without carefully reading what the bible has to say about the Mark of the Beast.
Despite all this info, one thing is for sure, if you cannot buy or sell, or continue life normally as you used to unless you take the vaccine/microchip, then you will know this is the Mark of the Beast as mentioned in the Bible.

Revelation 13:16-18 King James Version (KJV)

16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

https://preview.redd.it/6e6k1zcd50h51.png?width=935&format=png&auto=webp&s=4d58f1ed953c0fe312c6c54ba33d17b1a35f54d5

https://preview.redd.it/dd3uo8df50h51.png?width=899&format=png&auto=webp&s=4b09e65929de4059d0e4789d53d3dea1da83d026

LUCIFERASE - BILL GATES QUANTUM DOT MICRONEEDLE VACCINE TO ALTER YOUR DNA

https://www.bitchute.com/video/XSvEKJKAUiBD/
Luciferase Quantum Dot COVID-19 Vaccinations - The Bill and Melinda Gates Satanic Agenda (Video)
https://www.thelightinthedarkplace.com/2020/05/luciferase-quantum-dot-covid-19-vaccinations.html
An Invisible Quantum Dot 'Tattoo' Could Be Used to ID Vaccinated Kids
https://www.sciencealert.com/an-invisible-quantum-dot-tattoo-is-being-suggested-to-id-vaccinated-kids
It's a Beautiful day in BILL'S neighborhoodhttps://youtu.be/DoLOtwUcHgg?t=1175
The Bible is very clear: If you take the Mark of The Beast, you will be cast into the Lake of Fire!!!
Revelation 14:9-11 King James Version (KJV)
9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
To help you understand the cashless society/microchip narrative, here is some evidence in regards to that:
1. THE C-19 WILL LEAD TO THE MARK OF THE BEAST....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9VbNx--MP4&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
2. One ID To Rule Them All - Preparing The Way For The RFID Chip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p8Si-rCLOo&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
3. RFID Chip is Mark of the Beast - (Testimony of Carl Saunders the RFID Chip Inventor)**Must Watch*\*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7y3S539tt4&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
4. First Time Ever: 700 Employees Face the Microchip Implant at Work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ot4qqSmLxI&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
5. Why human microchipping is so popular in Sweden | ITV News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWVQR99bXt8&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
6. Two Prophetic Dreams / God Warns About What's Coming
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGcnFPZX8UU&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
7. Sweden sees microchip implant revolution | Al Jazeera English
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl_gemn9a9E&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
8. ID, Wallet, Keys All In Your Hand: Sweden Moves Into The Future With Microchipping | Nightly News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ksw-arKvMPk&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
If you want to learn more, I have put together a playlist of 500+ videos (always adding new videos everyday) that bases itself around biblical end time prophecies through people's dreams, visions, along with other videos that expose the evil and wicked things the higher powers that be, have planned for us. This playlist helps bring the darkness into light while connecting the dots relating to the bible. I hope this information serves you well in uncovering the real truth.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup
I have a lot more info to share. In case you want a more detailed breakdown of the many things that are happening, here it is:
Bill Gates is a wicked man. I'll break down the evidence for you in a series of videos located down below.
1. Innovating to zero! | Bill Gates
https://youtu.be/JaF-fq2Zn7I?t=236
Bill gates mentioned back in 2010 about reducing the global population through vaccines video starts around 3:56 min
2. Bill Gates Caught Funding Netflix Docuseries PANDEMIC #coronaviruses #VirusCorona #virus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En3-eHyf68c&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
Bill gates funded the netflix series called "Pandemic" which was in production 6 months prior to the virus outbreak in Wuhan China. Not only did he fund it, but the netflix series paints Bill gates as a savior in his fight to "save lives" and mysteriously releases a few days after the virus was breaking out in Wuhan China.
3. Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Highlights Reel
https://youtu.be/AoLw-Q8X174
Bill gates funded the event 201 that was hosted back in Nov 2019 which was 3 months prior to the virus outbreak in Wuhan China. Event 201 was used to conduct a fake simulation pandemic of a virus to see how the world would respond. Funny enough, the first 40 seconds of the event 201 use the "corona virus" as the test simulation virus in this event.
4. Bill Gates of Hell Video Series. Here is part 1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo5e7qS85ZI&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index)
The B!LL GATES of HELL | C0R0NA VIRUS (PART 2)(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AklgUzN9TcA&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index).
5. The B!LL Gates of HELL (part 3)The C0R0NA DRAGON
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpKPFx3rTp4&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
Bill Gates funded the research of the virus through the pilbright institute and not only does bill gates have the patent on the virus he also holds the cure/vaccine which he will try to get us to take. The original video that was uploaded was deleted and when the video was reuploaded, the content creator went back to the same website to check on Bill Gates having patented the virus and low and behold, that very website scrubbed bill gate's name from it
  1. Bill Gates funds the ID2020 initiative in which they (globalist elite) want to track us using digital IDs which are very very wicked and satanic. This digital ID is part of the mark of the beast system. https://id2020.org/
  2. This is all planned based on the Georgia Guidestones in which I quote "maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature". If you want picture proof of that you can visit this site https://www.auricmedia.net/tag/georgia-guidestones/
All of what Bill Gates is doing is trying to get us to take the Vaccine/Microchip which is the mark of the beast as mentioned in the bible. If you Go to your KJV (King James Version) bible and read Revelation 13:16-18 you will understand the meaning behind all this.
Revelation 13:16-18 King James Version (KJV)
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

If you take the Mark of the Beast, this is what happens

Revelation 14:9-11 King James Version (KJV)
9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

If you refuse the Mark of the Beast, this is what happens

Revelation 20:4 King James Version (KJV)
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
All of what you see, the bible foretells us of what will happen and what is to come. The wicked elite planned all of this to happen. It was all planned by design. To usher in their one world order agenda using the virus as a scapegoat, to decimate world economies where people will lose their homes, businesses, and possessions. People will be starving during these times, and there will be chaos in the streets in due time. This is so the anti christ can rush in and save the day by getting you to take this evil vaccine/microchip/mark of the beast as the bible foretells us. That is why we are called unto repentance of our sins everyday and have faith in Jesus Christ who died on the cross for our sins, was buried, and rose again on the 3rd day. In times like these, we are called to pray because there will be massive destruction from both man and God in the last days.
The tribulation will last 7 years and billions of people will die from this. Not only that, but there will be 21 judgments (7 seals, 7 vials, and 7 bowls) from God throughout the 7 years with which each judgement will be worse off than the last until the 2nd coming of Christ. These judgements are meant for people who did not repent of their sins (living in a constant sinful and ungodly lifestyle), and/or reject the word of God along with not having faith in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour who died on the cross for ALL our sins, was buried, and rose again on the 3rd day.
Because of what is happening around us, it will continue to get worse. They do this so people will be desperate enough to stop the pain. And the elites will present the vaccine/microchip/mark of the beast as the cure for the people's pain. But those that take the mark of the beast will live during the 7 years of tribulation until the 2nd coming of Christ in which Jesus Christ will come back to earth and kill those who took the mark of the beast and cast them to hell. During the 7 year tribulation, those that took the Mark of the Beast actually suffer from the 1st bowl judgement that is poured out. Here is that verse:
**Revelation 16:1-2 King James Version (KJV)**16 And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth.
2 And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.
When you take the mark of the beast, it changes your DNA conforming yourself with the beast, which is satan. Once you take the mark of the beast, you will be damned to hell and eventually be casted into the lake of fire as the final destination place forever and there is no coming back.
This information is not to be taken lightly. If you're interested to learn more of the evil and wickedness that is planned before us, here is a 500+ youtube playlist (and growing everyday) of all things relating to the end times as the bible describes.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup
I encourage you to share this information with friends and family to help them understand the times we are living in.
We are called to pray everyday in order to repent (turn away) from our sins and to have faith in Jesus Christ, who died on the cross for all our sins, was buried, and rose again on the 3rd day. It's important to repent daily because we sin on a daily basis whether we commit intentional sin or not. Also, pray daily because you are never promised a tomorrow.
John 3:16-21 King James Version (KJV)
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
John 14:6 King James Version (KJV)
6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11 King James Version (KJV)
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
Revelation 21:8 King James Version (KJV)
8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
1 Peter 5:6-8 King James Version (KJV)
6 Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:
7 Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.
8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
Matthew 6:24 King James Version (KJV)
24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Revelation 3:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
Matthew 7:21-23 King James Version (KJV)
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

The Dangers of the Once Saved Always Saved Doctrine

Why so many professing Christians will be left behind! The dangers of OSAS!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Wb_qb1XHNQ&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
Is Once Saved Always Saved Biblical?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IMIHljWBSg&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
Is Once Saved Always Saved Biblical? (Different Youtube Channel)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIXYRkTe7gc&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
Once Saved Always Saved? I went to the Outer Darkness (Hell) for unfaithful christians!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOHHE4r0FGw&list=PLm9W9PpTsiQp7pzG6cnmf4iByUo45suup&index
Although we are called to repent of our sins and have faith in Jesus Christ who died on the cross for all of our sins, biblical scripture also tells us that we must be born again, through water baptism, in order to enter into the kingdom of God. Here are some biblical verses that expand on that:
John 3:3-5 King James Version (KJV)
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Matthew 28:19-20 King James Version (KJV)
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
If you would like to understand what is water baptism and why Christians do it, here is a video that helps explain it better:

What is Water Baptism and Why do we Do it? | Q&A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP5n_xbn5_U
If you would like to undergo a free water baptism, here is a worldwide map of those who can perform water baptisms within your community for free!
Here is the link: https://map.thelastreformation.com/
The Last Reformation also has a youtube channel if you would like to check it out
The Last Reformation
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJXcYb9zYJ8_QA3Bcg5Fe2g
submitted by twenty7lies to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto and where is he now?

Where does Satoshi Nakamoto come from?

Any person that has been doing some research on cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, probably has heard of this name before. Satoshi Nakamoto. Who is this mysterious man and why does no one know who he is? This goes back to October 2008, when an unknown user by the name of Nakamoto sent out the whitepaper for Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System to a cryptographic newsletter. After the announcement had been done and the manifesto describing the revolution Nakamoto was aiming to start, in January the software was released. He was the person to mine the Genesis block encrypted with the headline of the New York Times of that day. Nakamoto has stopped using his Bitcoin since mid-January 2009, with nowadays having Bitcoin that is worth over 19 Billion dollars. Unclear is to say if Nakamoto still has access to these coins. If so, he could just be the 44th richest person in the world. The problem is, nobody knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Besides a couple of posts on the forums about Bitcoin, there has been no personal messages or activities shared by Nakamoto.

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

There are many different stories including many different answers to these questions. Let’s have a look at some of the most known speculations out there and see why they might be or might not be Satoshi, the creator of Bitcoin.
Hal Finney This man was one of the pioneers in the field of cryptography prior to Bitcoin being created. Back in 2009, Finney was the first person to ever do a Bitcoin transaction and besides Nakamoto himself, he was the only person to use the software. Many analysts have compared Finney’s writing to the published work of Nakamoto and found many similar techniques and styles. Years later, Finney denied all the claims as he showed correspondence between him and Nakamoto pointing at someone else being Nakamoto. Finney has died in 2014 and his family chose to freeze his body.
Dorian Nakamoto This man is the only person who actually has the same name. Dorian Nakamoto has the birth name ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, but this is not the only evidence. An article published in Newsweek showed an interview with Dorian confirming his affiliation with Bitcoin and confirming being the founder. The following interview, however, implicated Dorian had never heard of any virtual currency named Bitcoin nor does he have had anything to do with it. After the interview, the account used by Satoshi five years ago weirdly posted ‘I am not Dorian Nakamoto’. Whether this was the real Satoshi or a hacker, is unclear.
Craight Wright Probably the most known example is ‘Faketoshi’, better known as Craight Wright. Anyone that has known Bitcoin for a while knows it’s decentralized and the power is that no one is in charge. Anyone associated with Bitcoin confirms the identity of Nakamoto has to remain anonymous, except for Craig Wright. Ever since 2015, Wright has been claiming to be the inventor of Bitcoin. The fact that he has been affiliated with the project for years is clear, but being the inventor is false as confirmed by many Bitcoin pioneers. A couple weeks ago, the court has officially stated Craight Wright could not prove to be the inventor of Bitcoin.
In reality, nobody knows the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. The only way to confirm this is bringing all the old accounts back to live, moving the coins in the wallet that has been idle since 2009 and confirming the identity. This can be tough, Nakamoto might not even be alive nowadays. The beauty is, he does not have to be alive for Bitcoin to survive!
SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email about your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook The best rates on https://swapspace.co/ Why is SwapSpace https://blog.swapspace.co/2019/09/17/why-is-swapspace/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to LitecoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto and where is he now?

Where does Satoshi Nakamoto come from?

Any person that has been doing some research on cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, probably has heard of this name before. Satoshi Nakamoto. Who is this mysterious man and why does no one know who he is? This goes back to October 2008, when an unknown user by the name of Nakamoto sent out the whitepaper for Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System to a cryptographic newsletter. After the announcement had been done and the manifesto describing the revolution Nakamoto was aiming to start, in January the software was released. He was the person to mine the Genesis block encrypted with the headline of the New York Times of that day. Nakamoto has stopped using his Bitcoin since mid-January 2009, with nowadays having Bitcoin that is worth over 19 Billion dollars. Unclear is to say if Nakamoto still has access to these coins. If so, he could just be the 44th richest person in the world. The problem is, nobody knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Besides a couple of posts on the forums about Bitcoin, there has been no personal messages or activities shared by Nakamoto.

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

There are many different stories including many different answers to these questions. Let’s have a look at some of the most known speculations out there and see why they might be or might not be Satoshi, the creator of Bitcoin.
Hal Finney This man was one of the pioneers in the field of cryptography prior to Bitcoin being created. Back in 2009, Finney was the first person to ever do a Bitcoin transaction and besides Nakamoto himself, he was the only person to use the software. Many analysts have compared Finney’s writing to the published work of Nakamoto and found many similar techniques and styles. Years later, Finney denied all the claims as he showed correspondence between him and Nakamoto pointing at someone else being Nakamoto. Finney has died in 2014 and his family chose to freeze his body.
Dorian Nakamoto This man is the only person who actually has the same name. Dorian Nakamoto has the birth name ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, but this is not the only evidence. An article published in Newsweek showed an interview with Dorian confirming his affiliation with Bitcoin and confirming being the founder. The following interview, however, implicated Dorian had never heard of any virtual currency named Bitcoin nor does he have had anything to do with it. After the interview, the account used by Satoshi five years ago weirdly posted ‘I am not Dorian Nakamoto’. Whether this was the real Satoshi or a hacker, is unclear.
Craight Wright Probably the most known example is ‘Faketoshi’, better known as Craight Wright. Anyone that has known Bitcoin for a while knows it’s decentralized and the power is that no one is in charge. Anyone associated with Bitcoin confirms the identity of Nakamoto has to remain anonymous, except for Craig Wright. Ever since 2015, Wright has been claiming to be the inventor of Bitcoin. The fact that he has been affiliated with the project for years is clear, but being the inventor is false as confirmed by many Bitcoin pioneers. A couple weeks ago, the court has officially stated Craight Wright could not prove to be the inventor of Bitcoin.
In reality, nobody knows the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. The only way to confirm this is bringing all the old accounts back to live, moving the coins in the wallet that has been idle since 2009 and confirming the identity. This can be tough, Nakamoto might not even be alive nowadays. The beauty is, he does not have to be alive for Bitcoin to survive!
SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email about your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook The best rates on https://swapspace.co/ Why is SwapSpace https://blog.swapspace.co/2019/09/17/why-is-swapspace/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to bitcointrading [link] [comments]

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto and where is he now?

Where does Satoshi Nakamoto come from?

Any person that has been doing some research on cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, probably has heard of this name before. Satoshi Nakamoto. Who is this mysterious man and why does no one know who he is? This goes back to October 2008, when an unknown user by the name of Nakamoto sent out the whitepaper for Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System to a cryptographic newsletter. After the announcement had been done and the manifesto describing the revolution Nakamoto was aiming to start, in January the software was released. He was the person to mine the Genesis block encrypted with the headline of the New York Times of that day. Nakamoto has stopped using his Bitcoin since mid-January 2009, with nowadays having Bitcoin that is worth over 19 Billion dollars. Unclear is to say if Nakamoto still has access to these coins. If so, he could just be the 44th richest person in the world. The problem is, nobody knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Besides a couple of posts on the forums about Bitcoin, there has been no personal messages or activities shared by Nakamoto.

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

There are many different stories including many different answers to these questions. Let’s have a look at some of the most known speculations out there and see why they might be or might not be Satoshi, the creator of Bitcoin.
Hal Finney This man was one of the pioneers in the field of cryptography prior to Bitcoin being created. Back in 2009, Finney was the first person to ever do a Bitcoin transaction and besides Nakamoto himself, he was the only person to use the software. Many analysts have compared Finney’s writing to the published work of Nakamoto and found many similar techniques and styles. Years later, Finney denied all the claims as he showed correspondence between him and Nakamoto pointing at someone else being Nakamoto. Finney has died in 2014 and his family chose to freeze his body.
Dorian Nakamoto This man is the only person who actually has the same name. Dorian Nakamoto has the birth name ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, but this is not the only evidence. An article published in Newsweek showed an interview with Dorian confirming his affiliation with Bitcoin and confirming being the founder. The following interview, however, implicated Dorian had never heard of any virtual currency named Bitcoin nor does he have had anything to do with it. After the interview, the account used by Satoshi five years ago weirdly posted ‘I am not Dorian Nakamoto’. Whether this was the real Satoshi or a hacker, is unclear.
Craight Wright Probably the most known example is ‘Faketoshi’, better known as Craight Wright. Anyone that has known Bitcoin for a while knows it’s decentralized and the power is that no one is in charge. Anyone associated with Bitcoin confirms the identity of Nakamoto has to remain anonymous, except for Craig Wright. Ever since 2015, Wright has been claiming to be the inventor of Bitcoin. The fact that he has been affiliated with the project for years is clear, but being the inventor is false as confirmed by many Bitcoin pioneers. A couple weeks ago, the court has officially stated Craight Wright could not prove to be the inventor of Bitcoin.
In reality, nobody knows the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. The only way to confirm this is bringing all the old accounts back to live, moving the coins in the wallet that has been idle since 2009 and confirming the identity. This can be tough, Nakamoto might not even be alive nowadays. The beauty is, he does not have to be alive for Bitcoin to survive!
SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email about your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook The best rates on https://swapspace.co/ Why is SwapSpace https://blog.swapspace.co/2019/09/17/why-is-swapspace/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to ethtrader [link] [comments]

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto and where is he now?

Where does Satoshi Nakamoto come from?

Any person that has been doing some research on cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, probably has heard of this name before. Satoshi Nakamoto. Who is this mysterious man and why does no one know who he is? This goes back to October 2008, when an unknown user by the name of Nakamoto sent out the whitepaper for Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System to a cryptographic newsletter. After the announcement had been done and the manifesto describing the revolution Nakamoto was aiming to start, in January the software was released. He was the person to mine the Genesis block encrypted with the headline of the New York Times of that day. Nakamoto has stopped using his Bitcoin since mid-January 2009, with nowadays having Bitcoin that is worth over 19 Billion dollars. Unclear is to say if Nakamoto still has access to these coins. If so, he could just be the 44th richest person in the world. The problem is, nobody knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Besides a couple of posts on the forums about Bitcoin, there has been no personal messages or activities shared by Nakamoto.

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

There are many different stories including many different answers to these questions. Let’s have a look at some of the most known speculations out there and see why they might be or might not be Satoshi, the creator of Bitcoin.
Hal Finney This man was one of the pioneers in the field of cryptography prior to Bitcoin being created. Back in 2009, Finney was the first person to ever do a Bitcoin transaction and besides Nakamoto himself, he was the only person to use the software. Many analysts have compared Finney’s writing to the published work of Nakamoto and found many similar techniques and styles. Years later, Finney denied all the claims as he showed correspondence between him and Nakamoto pointing at someone else being Nakamoto. Finney has died in 2014 and his family chose to freeze his body.
Dorian Nakamoto This man is the only person who actually has the same name. Dorian Nakamoto has the birth name ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, but this is not the only evidence. An article published in Newsweek showed an interview with Dorian confirming his affiliation with Bitcoin and confirming being the founder. The following interview, however, implicated Dorian had never heard of any virtual currency named Bitcoin nor does he have had anything to do with it. After the interview, the account used by Satoshi five years ago weirdly posted ‘I am not Dorian Nakamoto’. Whether this was the real Satoshi or a hacker, is unclear.
Craight Wright Probably the most known example is ‘Faketoshi’, better known as Craight Wright. Anyone that has known Bitcoin for a while knows it’s decentralized and the power is that no one is in charge. Anyone associated with Bitcoin confirms the identity of Nakamoto has to remain anonymous, except for Craig Wright. Ever since 2015, Wright has been claiming to be the inventor of Bitcoin. The fact that he has been affiliated with the project for years is clear, but being the inventor is false as confirmed by many Bitcoin pioneers. A couple weeks ago, the court has officially stated Craight Wright could not prove to be the inventor of Bitcoin.
In reality, nobody knows the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. The only way to confirm this is bringing all the old accounts back to live, moving the coins in the wallet that has been idle since 2009 and confirming the identity. This can be tough, Nakamoto might not even be alive nowadays. The beauty is, he does not have to be alive for Bitcoin to survive!
SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email about your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook The best rates on https://swapspace.co/ Why is SwapSpace https://blog.swapspace.co/2019/09/17/why-is-swapspace/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CryptoCurrencies [link] [comments]

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto and where is he now?

Where does Satoshi Nakamoto come from?

Any person that has been doing some research on cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, probably has heard of this name before. Satoshi Nakamoto. Who is this mysterious man and why does no one know who he is? This goes back to October 2008, when an unknown user by the name of Nakamoto sent out the whitepaper for Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System to a cryptographic newsletter. After the announcement had been done and the manifesto describing the revolution Nakamoto was aiming to start, in January the software was released. He was the person to mine the Genesis block encrypted with the headline of the New York Times of that day. Nakamoto has stopped using his Bitcoin since mid-January 2009, with nowadays having Bitcoin that is worth over 19 Billion dollars. Unclear is to say if Nakamoto still has access to these coins. If so, he could just be the 44th richest person in the world. The problem is, nobody knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Besides a couple of posts on the forums about Bitcoin, there has been no personal messages or activities shared by Nakamoto.

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

There are many different stories including many different answers to these questions. Let’s have a look at some of the most known speculations out there and see why they might be or might not be Satoshi, the creator of Bitcoin.
Hal Finney This man was one of the pioneers in the field of cryptography prior to Bitcoin being created. Back in 2009, Finney was the first person to ever do a Bitcoin transaction and besides Nakamoto himself, he was the only person to use the software. Many analysts have compared Finney’s writing to the published work of Nakamoto and found many similar techniques and styles. Years later, Finney denied all the claims as he showed correspondence between him and Nakamoto pointing at someone else being Nakamoto. Finney has died in 2014 and his family chose to freeze his body.
Dorian Nakamoto This man is the only person who actually has the same name. Dorian Nakamoto has the birth name ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, but this is not the only evidence. An article published in Newsweek showed an interview with Dorian confirming his affiliation with Bitcoin and confirming being the founder. The following interview, however, implicated Dorian had never heard of any virtual currency named Bitcoin nor does he have had anything to do with it. After the interview, the account used by Satoshi five years ago weirdly posted ‘I am not Dorian Nakamoto’. Whether this was the real Satoshi or a hacker, is unclear.
Craight Wright Probably the most known example is ‘Faketoshi’, better known as Craight Wright. Anyone that has known Bitcoin for a while knows it’s decentralized and the power is that no one is in charge. Anyone associated with Bitcoin confirms the identity of Nakamoto has to remain anonymous, except for Craig Wright. Ever since 2015, Wright has been claiming to be the inventor of Bitcoin. The fact that he has been affiliated with the project for years is clear, but being the inventor is false as confirmed by many Bitcoin pioneers. A couple weeks ago, the court has officially stated Craight Wright could not prove to be the inventor of Bitcoin.
In reality, nobody knows the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. The only way to confirm this is bringing all the old accounts back to live, moving the coins in the wallet that has been idle since 2009 and confirming the identity. This can be tough, Nakamoto might not even be alive nowadays. The beauty is, he does not have to be alive for Bitcoin to survive!
SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email about your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook The best rates on https://swapspace.co/ Why is SwapSpace https://blog.swapspace.co/2019/09/17/why-is-swapspace/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CoinBase [link] [comments]

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto and where is he now?

Where does Satoshi Nakamoto come from?

Any person that has been doing some research on cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, probably has heard of this name before. Satoshi Nakamoto. Who is this mysterious man and why does no one know who he is? This goes back to October 2008, when an unknown user by the name of Nakamoto sent out the whitepaper for Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System to a cryptographic newsletter. After the announcement had been done and the manifesto describing the revolution Nakamoto was aiming to start, in January the software was released. He was the person to mine the Genesis block encrypted with the headline of the New York Times of that day. Nakamoto has stopped using his Bitcoin since mid-January 2009, with nowadays having Bitcoin that is worth over 19 Billion dollars. Unclear is to say if Nakamoto still has access to these coins. If so, he could just be the 44th richest person in the world. The problem is, nobody knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Besides a couple of posts on the forums about Bitcoin, there has been no personal messages or activities shared by Nakamoto.

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

There are many different stories including many different answers to these questions. Let’s have a look at some of the most known speculations out there and see why they might be or might not be Satoshi, the creator of Bitcoin.
Hal Finney This man was one of the pioneers in the field of cryptography prior to Bitcoin being created. Back in 2009, Finney was the first person to ever do a Bitcoin transaction and besides Nakamoto himself, he was the only person to use the software. Many analysts have compared Finney’s writing to the published work of Nakamoto and found many similar techniques and styles. Years later, Finney denied all the claims as he showed correspondence between him and Nakamoto pointing at someone else being Nakamoto. Finney has died in 2014 and his family chose to freeze his body.
Dorian Nakamoto This man is the only person who actually has the same name. Dorian Nakamoto has the birth name ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, but this is not the only evidence. An article published in Newsweek showed an interview with Dorian confirming his affiliation with Bitcoin and confirming being the founder. The following interview, however, implicated Dorian had never heard of any virtual currency named Bitcoin nor does he have had anything to do with it. After the interview, the account used by Satoshi five years ago weirdly posted ‘I am not Dorian Nakamoto’. Whether this was the real Satoshi or a hacker, is unclear.
Craight Wright Probably the most known example is ‘Faketoshi’, better known as Craight Wright. Anyone that has known Bitcoin for a while knows it’s decentralized and the power is that no one is in charge. Anyone associated with Bitcoin confirms the identity of Nakamoto has to remain anonymous, except for Craig Wright. Ever since 2015, Wright has been claiming to be the inventor of Bitcoin. The fact that he has been affiliated with the project for years is clear, but being the inventor is false as confirmed by many Bitcoin pioneers. A couple weeks ago, the court has officially stated Craight Wright could not prove to be the inventor of Bitcoin.
In reality, nobody knows the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. The only way to confirm this is bringing all the old accounts back to live, moving the coins in the wallet that has been idle since 2009 and confirming the identity. This can be tough, Nakamoto might not even be alive nowadays. The beauty is, he does not have to be alive for Bitcoin to survive!
SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email about your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook The best rates on https://swapspace.co/ Why is SwapSpace https://blog.swapspace.co/2019/09/17/why-is-swapspace/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CryptoNews [link] [comments]

CRYPTOCURRENCY BITCOIN

CRYPTOCURRENCY BITCOIN
Bitcoin Table of contents expand: 1. What is Bitcoin? 2. Understanding Bitcoin 3. How Bitcoin Works 4. What's a Bitcoin Worth? 5. How Bitcoin Began 6. Who Invented Bitcoin? 7. Before Satoshi 8. Why Is Satoshi Anonymous? 9. The Suspects 10. Can Satoshi's Identity Be Proven? 11. Receiving Bitcoins As Payment 12. Working For Bitcoins 13. Bitcoin From Interest Payments 14. Bitcoins From Gambling 15. Investing in Bitcoins 16. Risks of Bitcoin Investing 17. Bitcoin Regulatory Risk 18. Security Risk of Bitcoins 19. Insurance Risk 20. Risk of Bitcoin Fraud 21. Market Risk 22. Bitcoin's Tax Risk What is Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is a digital currency created in January 2009. It follows the ideas set out in a white paper by the mysterious Satoshi Nakamoto, whose true identity is yet to be verified. Bitcoin offers the promise of lower transaction fees than traditional online payment mechanisms and is operated by a decentralized authority, unlike government-issued currencies.
There are no physical bitcoins, only balances kept on a public ledger in the cloud, that – along with all Bitcoin transactions – is verified by a massive amount of computing power. Bitcoins are not issued or backed by any banks or governments, nor are individual bitcoins valuable as a commodity. Despite it not being legal tender, Bitcoin charts high on popularity, and has triggered the launch of other virtual currencies collectively referred to as Altcoins.
Understanding Bitcoin Bitcoin is a type of cryptocurrency: Balances are kept using public and private "keys," which are long strings of numbers and letters linked through the mathematical encryption algorithm that was used to create them. The public key (comparable to a bank account number) serves as the address which is published to the world and to which others may send bitcoins. The private key (comparable to an ATM PIN) is meant to be a guarded secret and only used to authorize Bitcoin transmissions. Style notes: According to the official Bitcoin Foundation, the word "Bitcoin" is capitalized in the context of referring to the entity or concept, whereas "bitcoin" is written in the lower case when referring to a quantity of the currency (e.g. "I traded 20 bitcoin") or the units themselves. The plural form can be either "bitcoin" or "bitcoins."
How Bitcoin Works Bitcoin is one of the first digital currencies to use peer-to-peer technology to facilitate instant payments. The independent individuals and companies who own the governing computing power and participate in the Bitcoin network, also known as "miners," are motivated by rewards (the release of new bitcoin) and transaction fees paid in bitcoin. These miners can be thought of as the decentralized authority enforcing the credibility of the Bitcoin network. New bitcoin is being released to the miners at a fixed, but periodically declining rate, such that the total supply of bitcoins approaches 21 million. One bitcoin is divisible to eight decimal places (100 millionths of one bitcoin), and this smallest unit is referred to as a Satoshi. If necessary, and if the participating miners accept the change, Bitcoin could eventually be made divisible to even more decimal places. Bitcoin mining is the process through which bitcoins are released to come into circulation. Basically, it involves solving a computationally difficult puzzle to discover a new block, which is added to the blockchain and receiving a reward in the form of a few bitcoins. The block reward was 50 new bitcoins in 2009; it decreases every four years. As more and more bitcoins are created, the difficulty of the mining process – that is, the amount of computing power involved – increases. The mining difficulty began at 1.0 with Bitcoin's debut back in 2009; at the end of the year, it was only 1.18. As of February 2019, the mining difficulty is over 6.06 billion. Once, an ordinary desktop computer sufficed for the mining process; now, to combat the difficulty level, miners must use faster hardware like Application-Specific Integrated Circuits (ASIC), more advanced processing units like Graphic Processing Units (GPUs), etc.
What's a Bitcoin Worth? In 2017 alone, the price of Bitcoin rose from a little under $1,000 at the beginning of the year to close to $19,000, ending the year more than 1,400% higher. Bitcoin's price is also quite dependent on the size of its mining network since the larger the network is, the more difficult – and thus more costly – it is to produce new bitcoins. As a result, the price of bitcoin has to increase as its cost of production also rises. The Bitcoin mining network's aggregate power has more than tripled over the past twelve months.
How Bitcoin Began
Aug. 18, 2008: The domain name bitcoin.org is registered. Today, at least, this domain is "WhoisGuard Protected," meaning the identity of the person who registered it is not public information.
Oct. 31, 2008: Someone using the name Satoshi Nakamoto makes an announcement on The Cryptography Mailing list at metzdowd.com: "I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party. The paper is available at http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf." This link leads to the now-famous white paper published on bitcoin.org entitled "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System." This paper would become the Magna Carta for how Bitcoin operates today.
Jan. 3, 2009: The first Bitcoin block is mined, Block 0. This is also known as the "genesis block" and contains the text: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks," perhaps as proof that the block was mined on or after that date, and perhaps also as relevant political commentary.
Jan. 8, 2009: The first version of the Bitcoin software is announced on The Cryptography Mailing list.
Jan. 9, 2009: Block 1 is mined, and Bitcoin mining commences in earnest.
Who Invented Bitcoin?
No one knows. Not conclusively, at any rate. Satoshi Nakamoto is the name associated with the person or group of people who released the original Bitcoin white paper in 2008 and worked on the original Bitcoin software that was released in 2009. The Bitcoin protocol requires users to enter a birthday upon signup, and we know that an individual named Satoshi Nakamoto registered and put down April 5 as a birth date. And that's about it.
Before Satoshi
Though it is tempting to believe the media's spin that Satoshi Nakamoto is a solitary, quixotic genius who created Bitcoin out of thin air, such innovations do not happen in a vacuum. All major scientific discoveries, no matter how original-seeming, were built on previously existing research. There are precursors to Bitcoin: Adam Back’s Hashcash, invented in 1997, and subsequently Wei Dai’s b-money, Nick Szabo’s bit gold and Hal Finney’s Reusable Proof of Work. The Bitcoin white paper itself cites Hashcash and b-money, as well as various other works spanning several research fields.
Why Is Satoshi Anonymous?
There are two primary motivations for keeping Bitcoin's inventor keeping his or her or their identity secret. One is privacy. As Bitcoin has gained in popularity – becoming something of a worldwide phenomenon – Satoshi Nakamoto would likely garner a lot of attention from the media and from governments.
The other reason is safety. Looking at 2009 alone, 32,489 blocks were mined; at the then-reward rate of 50 BTC per block, the total payout in 2009 was 1,624,500 BTC, which at today’s prices is over $900 million. One may conclude that only Satoshi and perhaps a few other people were mining through 2009 and that they possess a majority of that $900 million worth of BTC. Someone in possession of that much BTC could become a target of criminals, especially since bitcoins are less like stocks and more like cash, where the private keys needed to authorize spending could be printed out and literally kept under a mattress. While it's likely the inventor of Bitcoin would take precautions to make any extortion-induced transfers traceable, remaining anonymous is a good way for Satoshi to limit exposure.
The Suspects
Numerous people have been suggested as possible Satoshi Nakamoto by major media outlets. Oct. 10, 2011, The New Yorker published an article speculating that Nakamoto might be Irish cryptography student Michael Clear or economic sociologist Vili Lehdonvirta. A day later, Fast Company suggested that Nakamoto could be a group of three people – Neal King, Vladimir Oksman and Charles Bry – who together appear on a patent related to secure communications that were filed two months before bitcoin.org was registered. A Vice article published in May 2013 added more suspects to the list, including Gavin Andresen, the Bitcoin project’s lead developer; Jed McCaleb, co-founder of now-defunct Bitcoin exchange Mt. Gox; and famed Japanese mathematician Shinichi Mochizuki.
In December 2013, Techcrunch published an interview with researcher Skye Grey who claimed textual analysis of published writings shows a link between Satoshi and bit-gold creator Nick Szabo. And perhaps most famously, in March 2014, Newsweek ran a cover article claiming that Satoshi is actually an individual named Satoshi Nakamoto – a 64-year-old Japanese-American engineer living in California. The list of suspects is long, and all the individuals deny being Satoshi.
Can Satoshi's Identity Be Proven?
It would seem even early collaborators on the project don’t have verifiable proof of Satoshi’s identity. To reveal conclusively who Satoshi Nakamoto is, a definitive link would need to be made between his/her activity with Bitcoin and his/her identity. That could come in the form of linking the party behind the domain registration of bitcoin.org, email and forum accounts used by Satoshi Nakamoto, or ownership of some portion of the earliest mined bitcoins. Even though the bitcoins Satoshi likely possesses are traceable on the blockchain, it seems he/she has yet to cash them out in a way that reveals his/her identity. If Satoshi were to move his/her bitcoins to an exchange today, this might attract attention, but it seems unlikely that a well-funded and successful exchange would betray a customer's privacy.
Receiving Bitcoins As Payment
Bitcoins can be accepted as a means of payment for products sold or services provided. If you have a brick and mortar store, just display a sign saying “Bitcoin Accepted Here” and many of your customers may well take you up on it; the transactions can be handled with the requisite hardware terminal or wallet address through QR codes and touch screen apps. An online business can easily accept bitcoins by just adding this payment option to the others it offers, like credit cards, PayPal, etc. Online payments will require a Bitcoin merchant tool (an external processor like Coinbase or BitPay).
Working For Bitcoins
Those who are self-employed can get paid for a job in bitcoins. There are several websites/job boards which are dedicated to the digital currency:
Work For Bitcoin brings together work seekers and prospective employers through its websiteCoinality features jobs – freelance, part-time and full-time – that offer payment in bitcoins, as well as Dogecoin and LitecoinJobs4Bitcoins, part of reddit.comBitGigs
Bitcoin From Interest Payments
Another interesting way (literally) to earn bitcoins is by lending them out and being repaid in the currency. Lending can take three forms – direct lending to someone you know; through a website which facilitates peer-to-peer transactions, pairing borrowers and lenders; or depositing bitcoins in a virtual bank that offers a certain interest rate for Bitcoin accounts. Some such sites are Bitbond, BitLendingClub, and BTCjam. Obviously, you should do due diligence on any third-party site.
Bitcoins From Gambling
It’s possible to play at casinos that cater to Bitcoin aficionados, with options like online lotteries, jackpots, spread betting, and other games. Of course, the pros and cons and risks that apply to any sort of gambling and betting endeavors are in force here too.
Investing in Bitcoins
There are many Bitcoin supporters who believe that digital currency is the future. Those who endorse it are of the view that it facilitates a much faster, no-fee payment system for transactions across the globe. Although it is not itself any backed by any government or central bank, bitcoin can be exchanged for traditional currencies; in fact, its exchange rate against the dollar attracts potential investors and traders interested in currency plays. Indeed, one of the primary reasons for the growth of digital currencies like Bitcoin is that they can act as an alternative to national fiat money and traditional commodities like gold.
In March 2014, the IRS stated that all virtual currencies, including bitcoins, would be taxed as property rather than currency. Gains or losses from bitcoins held as capital will be realized as capital gains or losses, while bitcoins held as inventory will incur ordinary gains or losses.
Like any other asset, the principle of buying low and selling high applies to bitcoins. The most popular way of amassing the currency is through buying on a Bitcoin exchange, but there are many other ways to earn and own bitcoins. Here are a few options which Bitcoin enthusiasts can explore.
Risks of Bitcoin Investing
Though Bitcoin was not designed as a normal equity investment (no shares have been issued), some speculative investors were drawn to the digital money after it appreciated rapidly in May 2011 and again in November 2013. Thus, many people purchase bitcoin for its investment value rather than as a medium of exchange.
However, their lack of guaranteed value and digital nature means the purchase and use of bitcoins carries several inherent risks. Many investor alerts have been issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), and other agencies.
The concept of a virtual currency is still novel and, compared to traditional investments, Bitcoin doesn't have much of a long-term track record or history of credibility to back it. With their increasing use, bitcoins are becoming less experimental every day, of course; still, after eight years, they (like all digital currencies) remain in a development phase, still evolving. "It is pretty much the highest-risk, highest-return investment that you can possibly make,” says Barry Silbert, CEO of Digital Currency Group, which builds and invests in Bitcoin and blockchain companies.
Bitcoin Regulatory Risk
Investing money into Bitcoin in any of its many guises is not for the risk-averse. Bitcoins are a rival to government currency and may be used for black market transactions, money laundering, illegal activities or tax evasion. As a result, governments may seek to regulate, restrict or ban the use and sale of bitcoins, and some already have. Others are coming up with various rules. For example, in 2015, the New York State Department of Financial Services finalized regulations that would require companies dealing with the buy, sell, transfer or storage of bitcoins to record the identity of customers, have a compliance officer and maintain capital reserves. The transactions worth $10,000 or more will have to be recorded and reported.
Although more agencies will follow suit, issuing rules and guidelines, the lack of uniform regulations about bitcoins (and other virtual currency) raises questions over their longevity, liquidity, and universality.
Security Risk of Bitcoins
Bitcoin exchanges are entirely digital and, as with any virtual system, are at risk from hackers, malware and operational glitches. If a thief gains access to a Bitcoin owner's computer hard drive and steals his private encryption key, he could transfer the stolen Bitcoins to another account. (Users can prevent this only if bitcoins are stored on a computer which is not connected to the internet, or else by choosing to use a paper wallet – printing out the Bitcoin private keys and addresses, and not keeping them on a computer at all.) Hackers can also target Bitcoin exchanges, gaining access to thousands of accounts and digital wallets where bitcoins are stored. One especially notorious hacking incident took place in 2014, when Mt. Gox, a Bitcoin exchange in Japan, was forced to close down after millions of dollars worth of bitcoins were stolen.
This is particularly problematic once you remember that all Bitcoin transactions are permanent and irreversible. It's like dealing with cash: Any transaction carried out with bitcoins can only be reversed if the person who has received them refunds them. There is no third party or a payment processor, as in the case of a debit or credit card – hence, no source of protection or appeal if there is a problem.
Insurance Risk
Some investments are insured through the Securities Investor Protection Corporation. Normal bank accounts are insured through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) up to a certain amount depending on the jurisdiction. Bitcoin exchanges and Bitcoin accounts are not insured by any type of federal or government program.
Risk of Bitcoin Fraud
While Bitcoin uses private key encryption to verify owners and register transactions, fraudsters and scammers may attempt to sell false bitcoins. For instance, in July 2013, the SEC brought legal action against an operator of a Bitcoin-related Ponzi scheme.
Market Risk
Like with any investment, Bitcoin values can fluctuate. Indeed, the value of the currency has seen wild swings in price over its short existence. Subject to high volume buying and selling on exchanges, it has a high sensitivity to “news." According to the CFPB, the price of bitcoins fell by 61% in a single day in 2013, while the one-day price drop in 2014 has been as big as 80%.
If fewer people begin to accept Bitcoin as a currency, these digital units may lose value and could become worthless. There is already plenty of competition, and though Bitcoin has a huge lead over the other 100-odd digital currencies that have sprung up, thanks to its brand recognition and venture capital money, a technological break-through in the form of a better virtual coin is always a threat.
Bitcoin's Tax Risk
As bitcoin is ineligible to be included in any tax-advantaged retirement accounts, there are no good, legal options to shield investments from taxation.
SPONSORED
Start with ¥3000 trading bonus
Trade forex and CFDs on stock indices, commodities, metals and energies with alicensed and regulated broker. For all clients who open their first real account, XM offers a¥3000 trading bonus to test the XM products and services without any initial deposit needed. Learn more about how you can trade from your PC and Mac, or from a variety of mobile devices.
Compare Investment Accounts
Advertiser Disclosure
Related Terms
Satoshi
The satoshi is the smallest unit of the bitcoin cryptocurrency. It is named after Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of the protocol used in block chains and the bitcoin cryptocurrency.
Chartalism Chartalism is a non-mainstream theory of money that emphasizes the impact of government policies and activities on the value of money.
Satoshi Nakamoto The name used by the unknown creator of the protocol used in the bitcoin cryptocurrency. Satoshi Nakamoto is closely-associated with blockchain technology.
Bitcoin Mining, Explained Breaking down everything you need to know about Bitcoin Mining, from Blockchain and Block Rewards to Proof-of-Work and Mining Pools.
Understanding Bitcoin Unlimited Bitcoin Unlimited is a proposed upgrade to Bitcoin Core that allows larger block sizes. The upgrade is designed to improve transaction speed through scale.
Blockchain Explained
A guide to help you understand what blockchain is and how it can be used by industries. You've probably encountered a definition like this: “blockchain is a distributed, decentralized, public ledger." But blockchain is easier to understand than it sounds.
Top 6 Books to Learn About Bitcoin About UsAdvertiseContactPrivacy PolicyTerms of UseCareers Investopedia is part of the Dotdash publishing family.The Balance Lifewire TripSavvy The Spruceand more
By Satoshi Nakamoto
Read it once, go read other crypto stuff, read it again… keep doing this until the whole document makes sense. It’ll take a while, but you’ll get there. This is the original whitepaper introducing and explaining Bitcoin, and there’s really nothing better out there to understand on the subject.
“What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party

submitted by adrian_morrison to BlockchainNews [link] [comments]

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto and where is he now?

Where does Satoshi Nakamoto come from?

Any person that has been doing some research on cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, probably has heard of this name before. Satoshi Nakamoto. Who is this mysterious man and why does no one know who he is? This goes back to October 2008, when an unknown user by the name of Nakamoto sent out the whitepaper for Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System to a cryptographic newsletter. After the announcement had been done and the manifesto describing the revolution Nakamoto was aiming to start, in January the software was released. He was the person to mine the Genesis block encrypted with the headline of the New York Times of that day. Nakamoto has stopped using his Bitcoin since mid-January 2009, with nowadays having Bitcoin that is worth over 19 Billion dollars. Unclear is to say if Nakamoto still has access to these coins. If so, he could just be the 44th richest person in the world. The problem is, nobody knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Besides a couple of posts on the forums about Bitcoin, there has been no personal messages or activities shared by Nakamoto.

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

There are many different stories including many different answers to these questions. Let’s have a look at some of the most known speculations out there and see why they might be or might not be Satoshi, the creator of Bitcoin.
Hal Finney This man was one of the pioneers in the field of cryptography prior to Bitcoin being created. Back in 2009, Finney was the first person to ever do a Bitcoin transaction and besides Nakamoto himself, he was the only person to use the software. Many analysts have compared Finney’s writing to the published work of Nakamoto and found many similar techniques and styles. Years later, Finney denied all the claims as he showed correspondence between him and Nakamoto pointing at someone else being Nakamoto. Finney has died in 2014 and his family chose to freeze his body.
Dorian Nakamoto This man is the only person who actually has the same name. Dorian Nakamoto has the birth name ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, but this is not the only evidence. An article published in Newsweek showed an interview with Dorian confirming his affiliation with Bitcoin and confirming being the founder. The following interview, however, implicated Dorian had never heard of any virtual currency named Bitcoin nor does he have had anything to do with it. After the interview, the account used by Satoshi five years ago weirdly posted ‘I am not Dorian Nakamoto’. Whether this was the real Satoshi or a hacker, is unclear.
Craight Wright Probably the most known example is ‘Faketoshi’, better known as Craight Wright. Anyone that has known Bitcoin for a while knows it’s decentralized and the power is that no one is in charge. Anyone associated with Bitcoin confirms the identity of Nakamoto has to remain anonymous, except for Craig Wright. Ever since 2015, Wright has been claiming to be the inventor of Bitcoin. The fact that he has been affiliated with the project for years is clear, but being the inventor is false as confirmed by many Bitcoin pioneers. A couple weeks ago, the court has officially stated Craight Wright could not prove to be the inventor of Bitcoin.
In reality, nobody knows the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. The only way to confirm this is bringing all the old accounts back to live, moving the coins in the wallet that has been idle since 2009 and confirming the identity. This can be tough, Nakamoto might not even be alive nowadays. The beauty is, he does not have to be alive for Bitcoin to survive!
SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email about your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook The best rates on https://swapspace.co/ Why is SwapSpace https://blog.swapspace.co/2019/09/17/why-is-swapspace/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CryptoCurrencyTrading [link] [comments]

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto and where is he now?

Where does Satoshi Nakamoto come from?

Any person that has been doing some research on cryptocurrencies, especially Bitcoin, probably has heard of this name before. Satoshi Nakamoto. Who is this mysterious man and why does no one know who he is? This goes back to October 2008, when an unknown user by the name of Nakamoto sent out the whitepaper for Bitcoin, a peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System to a cryptographic newsletter. After the announcement had been done and the manifesto describing the revolution Nakamoto was aiming to start, in January the software was released. He was the person to mine the Genesis block encrypted with the headline of the New York Times of that day. Nakamoto has stopped using his Bitcoin since mid-January 2009, with nowadays having Bitcoin that is worth over 19 Billion dollars. Unclear is to say if Nakamoto still has access to these coins. If so, he could just be the 44th richest person in the world. The problem is, nobody knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Besides a couple of posts on the forums about Bitcoin, there has been no personal messages or activities shared by Nakamoto.

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

There are many different stories including many different answers to these questions. Let’s have a look at some of the most known speculations out there and see why they might be or might not be Satoshi, the creator of Bitcoin.
Hal Finney This man was one of the pioneers in the field of cryptography prior to Bitcoin being created. Back in 2009, Finney was the first person to ever do a Bitcoin transaction and besides Nakamoto himself, he was the only person to use the software. Many analysts have compared Finney’s writing to the published work of Nakamoto and found many similar techniques and styles. Years later, Finney denied all the claims as he showed correspondence between him and Nakamoto pointing at someone else being Nakamoto. Finney has died in 2014 and his family chose to freeze his body.
Dorian Nakamoto This man is the only person who actually has the same name. Dorian Nakamoto has the birth name ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, but this is not the only evidence. An article published in Newsweek showed an interview with Dorian confirming his affiliation with Bitcoin and confirming being the founder. The following interview, however, implicated Dorian had never heard of any virtual currency named Bitcoin nor does he have had anything to do with it. After the interview, the account used by Satoshi five years ago weirdly posted ‘I am not Dorian Nakamoto’. Whether this was the real Satoshi or a hacker, is unclear.
Craight Wright Probably the most known example is ‘Faketoshi’, better known as Craight Wright. Anyone that has known Bitcoin for a while knows it’s decentralized and the power is that no one is in charge. Anyone associated with Bitcoin confirms the identity of Nakamoto has to remain anonymous, except for Craig Wright. Ever since 2015, Wright has been claiming to be the inventor of Bitcoin. The fact that he has been affiliated with the project for years is clear, but being the inventor is false as confirmed by many Bitcoin pioneers. A couple weeks ago, the court has officially stated Craight Wright could not prove to be the inventor of Bitcoin.
In reality, nobody knows the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. The only way to confirm this is bringing all the old accounts back to live, moving the coins in the wallet that has been idle since 2009 and confirming the identity. This can be tough, Nakamoto might not even be alive nowadays. The beauty is, he does not have to be alive for Bitcoin to survive!
SwapSpace team is always ready for discussion. You can drop an email about your suggestions and questions to [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Join our social networks: Twitter, Medium, Facebook The best rates on https://swapspace.co/ Why is SwapSpace https://blog.swapspace.co/2019/09/17/why-is-swapspace/
submitted by SwapSpace_co to CoinTelegraph [link] [comments]

Is anyone else freaked out by this whole blocksize debate? Does anyone else find themself often agreeing with *both* sides - depending on whichever argument you happen to be reading at the moment? And do we need some better algorithms and data structures?

Why do both sides of the debate seem “right” to me?
I know, I know, a healthy debate is healthy and all - and maybe I'm just not used to the tumult and jostling which would be inevitable in a real live open major debate about something as vital as Bitcoin.
And I really do agree with the starry-eyed idealists who say Bitcoin is vital. Imperfect as it may be, it certainly does seem to represent the first real chance we've had in the past few hundred years to try to steer our civilization and our planet away from the dead-ends and disasters which our government-issued debt-based currencies keep dragging us into.
But this particular debate, about the blocksize, doesn't seem to be getting resolved at all.
Pretty much every time I read one of the long-form major arguments contributed by Bitcoin "thinkers" who I've come to respect over the past few years, this weird thing happens: I usually end up finding myself nodding my head and agreeing with whatever particular piece I'm reading!
But that should be impossible - because a lot of these people vehemently disagree!
So how can both sides sound so convincing to me, simply depending on whichever piece I currently happen to be reading?
Does anyone else feel this way? Or am I just a gullible idiot?
Just Do It?
When you first look at it or hear about it, increasing the size seems almost like a no-brainer: The "big-block" supporters say just increase the blocksize to 20 MB or 8 MB, or do some kind of scheduled or calculated regular increment which tries to take into account the capabilities of the infrastructure and the needs of the users. We do have the bandwidth and the memory to at least increase the blocksize now, they say - and we're probably gonna continue to have more bandwidth and memory in order to be able to keep increasing the blocksize for another couple decades - pretty much like everything else computer-based we've seen over the years (some of this stuff is called by names such as "Moore's Law").
On the other hand, whenever the "small-block" supporters warn about the utter catastrophe that a failed hard-fork would mean, I get totally freaked by their possible doomsday scenarios, which seem totally plausible and terrifying - so I end up feeling that the only way I'd want to go with a hard-fork would be if there was some pre-agreed "triggering" mechanism where the fork itself would only actually "switch on" and take effect provided that some "supermajority" of the network (of who? the miners? the full nodes?) had signaled (presumably via some kind of totally reliable p2p trustless software-based voting system?) that they do indeed "pre-agree" to actually adopt the pre-scheduled fork (and thereby avoid any possibility whatsoever of the precious blockchain somehow tragically splitting into two and pretty much killing this cryptocurrency off in its infancy).
So in this "conservative" scenario, I'm talking about wanting at least 95% pre-adoption agreement - not the mere 75% which I recall some proposals call for, which seems like it could easily lead to a 75/25 blockchain split.
But this time, with this long drawn-out blocksize debate, the core devs, and several other important voices who have become prominent opinion shapers over the past few years, can't seem to come to any real agreement on this.
Weird split among the devs
As far as I can see, there's this weird split: Gavin and Mike seem to be the only people among the devs who really want a major blocksize increase - and all the other devs seem to be vehemently against them.
But then on the other hand, the users seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of a major increase.
And there are meta-questions about governance, about about why this didn't come out as a BIP, and what the availability of Bitcoin XT means.
And today or yesterday there was this really cool big-blockian exponential graph based on doubling the blocksize every two years for twenty years, reminding us of the pure mathematical fact that 210 is indeed about 1000 - but not really addressing any of the game-theoretic points raised by the small-blockians. So a lot of the users seem to like it, but when so few devs say anything positive about it, I worry: is this just yet more exponential chart porn?
On the one hand, Gavin's and Mike's blocksize increase proposal initially seemed like a no-brainer to me.
And on the other hand, all the other devs seem to be against them. Which is weird - not what I'd initially expected at all (but maybe I'm just a fool who's seduced by exponential chart porn?).
Look, I don't mean to be rude to any of the core devs, and I don't want to come off like someone wearing a tinfoil hat - but it has to cross people's minds that the powers that be (the Fed and the other central banks and the governments that use their debt-issued money to run this world into a ditch) could very well be much more scared shitless than they're letting on. If we assume that the powers that be are using their usual playbook and tactics, then it could be worth looking at the book "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins, to get an idea of how they might try to attack Bitcoin. So, what I'm saying is, they do have a track record of sending in "experts" to try to derail projects and keep everyone enslaved to the Creature from Jekyll Island. I'm just saying. So, without getting ad hominem - let's just make sure that our ideas can really stand scrutiny on their own - as Nick Szabo says, we need to make sure there is "more computer science, less noise" in this debate.
When Gavin Andresen first came out with the 20 MB thing - I sat back and tried to imagine if I could download 20 MB in 10 minutes (which seems to be one of the basic mathematical and technological constraints here - right?)
I figured, "Yeah, I could download that" - even with my crappy internet connection.
And I guess the telecoms might be nice enough to continue to double our bandwidth every two years for the next couple decades – if we ask them politely?
On the other hand - I think we should be careful about entrusting the financial freedom of the world into the greedy hands of the telecoms companies - given all their shady shenanigans over the past few years in many countries. After decades of the MPAA and the FBI trying to chip away at BitTorrent, lately PirateBay has been hard to access. I would say it's quite likely that certain persons at institutions like JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs and the Fed might be very, very motivated to see Bitcoin fail - so we shouldn't be too sure about scaling plans which depend on the willingness of companies Verizon and AT&T to double our bandwith every two years.
Maybe the real important hardware buildout challenge for a company like 21 (and its allies such as Qualcomm) to take on now would not be "a miner in every toaster" but rather "Google Fiber Download and Upload Speeds in every Country, including China".
I think I've read all the major stuff on the blocksize debate from Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn, Greg Maxwell, Peter Todd, Adam Back, and Jeff Garzick and several other major contributors - and, oddly enough, all their arguments seem reasonable - heck even Luke-Jr seems reasonable to me on the blocksize debate, and I always thought he was a whackjob overly influenced by superstition and numerology - and now today I'm reading the article by Bram Cohen - the inventor of BitTorrent - and I find myself agreeing with him too!
I say to myself: What's going on with me? How can I possibly agree with all of these guys, if they all have such vehemently opposing viewpoints?
I mean, think back to the glory days of a couple of years ago, when all we were hearing was how this amazing unprecedented grassroots innovation called Bitcoin was going to benefit everyone from all walks of life, all around the world:
...basically the entire human race transacting everything into the blockchain.
(Although let me say that I think that people's focus on ideas like driverless cabs creating realtime fare markets based on supply and demand seems to be setting our sights a bit low as far as Bitcoin's abilities to correct the financial world's capital-misallocation problems which seem to have been made possible by infinite debt-based fiat. I would have hoped that a Bitcoin-based economy would solve much more noble, much more urgent capital-allocation problems than driverless taxicabs creating fare markets or refrigerators ordering milk on the internet of things. I was thinking more along the lines that Bitcoin would finally strangle dead-end debt-based deadly-toxic energy industries like fossil fuels and let profitable clean energy industries like Thorium LFTRs take over - but that's another topic. :=)
Paradoxes in the blocksize debate
Let me summarize the major paradoxes I see here:
(1) Regarding the people (the majority of the core devs) who are against a blocksize increase: Well, the small-blocks arguments do seem kinda weird, and certainly not very "populist", in the sense that: When on earth have end-users ever heard of a computer technology whose capacity didn't grow pretty much exponentially year-on-year? All the cool new technology we've had - from hard drives to RAM to bandwidth - started out pathetically tiny and grew to unimaginably huge over the past few decades - and all our software has in turn gotten massively powerful and big and complex (sometimes bloated) to take advantage of the enormous new capacity available.
But now suddenly, for the first time in the history of technology, we seem to have a majority of the devs, on a major p2p project - saying: "Let's not scale the system up. It could be dangerous. It might break the whole system (if the hard-fork fails)."
I don't know, maybe I'm missing something here, maybe someone else could enlighten me, but I don't think I've ever seen this sort of thing happen in the last few decades of the history of technology - devs arguing against scaling up p2p technology to take advantage of expected growth in infrastructure capacity.
(2) But... on the other hand... the dire warnings of the small-blockians about what could happen if a hard-fork were to fail - wow, they do seem really dire! And these guys are pretty much all heavyweight, experienced programmers and/or game theorists and/or p2p open-source project managers.
I must say, that nearly all of the long-form arguments I've read - as well as many, many of the shorter comments I've read from many users in the threads, whose names I at least have come to more-or-less recognize over the past few months and years on reddit and bitcointalk - have been amazingly impressive in their ability to analyze all aspects of the lifecycle and management of open-source software projects, bringing up lots of serious points which I could never have come up with, and which seem to come from long experience with programming and project management - as well as dealing with economics and human nature (eg, greed - the game-theory stuff).
So a lot of really smart and experienced people with major expertise in various areas ranging from programming to management to game theory to politics to economics have been making some serious, mature, compelling arguments.
But, as I've been saying, the only problem to me is: in many of these cases, these arguments are vehemently in opposition to each other! So I find myself agreeing with pretty much all of them, one by one - which means the end result is just a giant contradiction.
I mean, today we have Bram Cohen, the inventor of BitTorrent, arguing (quite cogently and convincingly to me), that it would be dangerous to increase the blocksize. And this seems to be a guy who would know a few things about scaling out a massive global p2p network - since the protocol which he invented, BitTorrent, is now apparently responsible for like a third of the traffic on the internet (and this despite the long-term concerted efforts of major evil players such as the MPAA and the FBI to shut the whole thing down).
Was the BitTorrent analogy too "glib"?
By the way - I would like to go on a slight tangent here and say that one of the main reasons why I felt so "comfortable" jumping on the Bitcoin train back a few years ago, when I first heard about it and got into it, was the whole rough analogy I saw with BitTorrent.
I remembered the perhaps paradoxical fact that when a torrent is more popular (eg, a major movie release that just came out last week), then it actually becomes faster to download. More people want it, so more people have a few pieces of it, so more people are able to get it from each other. A kind of self-correcting economic feedback loop, where more demand directly leads to more supply.
(BitTorrent manages to pull this off by essentially adding a certain structure to the file being shared, so that it's not simply like an append-only list of 1 MB blocks, but rather more like an random-access or indexed array of 1 MB chunks. Say you're downloading a film which is 700 MB. As soon as your "client" program has downloaded a single 1-MB chunk - say chunk #99 - your "client" program instantly turns into a "server" program as well - offering that chunk #99 to other clients. From my simplistic understanding, I believe the Bitcoin protocol does something similar, to provide a p2p architecture. Hence my - perhaps naïve - assumption that Bitcoin already had the right algorithms / architecture / data structure to scale.)
The efficiency of the BitTorrent network seemed to jive with that "network law" (Metcalfe's Law?) about fax machines. This law states that the more fax machines there are, the more valuable the network of fax machines becomes. Or the value of the network grows on the order of the square of the number of nodes.
This is in contrast with other technology like cars, where the more you have, the worse things get. The more cars there are, the more traffic jams you have, so things start going downhill. I guess this is because highway space is limited - after all, we can't pave over the entire countryside, and we never did get those flying cars we were promised, as David Graeber laments in a recent essay in The Baffler magazine :-)
And regarding the "stress test" supposedly happening right now in the middle of this ongoing blocksize debate, I don't know what worries me more: the fact that it apparently is taking only $5,000 to do a simple kind of DoS on the blockchain - or the fact that there are a few rumors swirling around saying that the unknown company doing the stress test shares the same physical mailing address with a "scam" company?
Or maybe we should just be worried that so much of this debate is happening on a handful of forums which are controlled by some guy named theymos who's already engaged in some pretty "contentious" or "controversial" behavior like blowing a million dollars on writing forum software (I guess he never heard that reddit.com software is open-source)?
So I worry that the great promise of "decentralization" might be more fragile than we originally thought.
Scaling
Anyways, back to Metcalfe's Law: with virtual stuff, like torrents and fax machines, the more the merrier. The more people downloading a given movie, the faster it arrives - and the more people own fax machines, the more valuable the overall fax network.
So I kindof (naïvely?) assumed that Bitcoin, being "virtual" and p2p, would somehow scale up the same magical way BitTorrrent did. I just figured that more people using it would somehow automatically make it stronger and faster.
But now a lot of devs have started talking in terms of the old "scarcity" paradigm, talking about blockspace being a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" - which seems kinda scary, and antithetical to much of the earlier rhetoric we heard about Bitcoin (the stuff about supporting our favorite creators with micropayments, and the stuff about Africans using SMS to send around payments).
Look, when some asshole is in line in front of you at the cash register and he's holding up the line so they can run his credit card to buy a bag of Cheeto's, we tend to get pissed off at the guy - clogging up our expensive global electronic payment infrastructure to make a two-dollar purchase. And that's on a fairly efficient centralized system - and presumably after a year or so, VISA and the guy's bank can delete or compress the transaction in their SQL databases.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but if some guy buys a coffee on the blockchain, or if somebody pays an online artist $1.99 for their work - then that transaction, a few bytes or so, has to live on the blockchain forever?
Or is there some "pruning" thing that gets rid of it after a while?
And this could lead to another question: Viewed from the perspective of double-entry bookkeeping, is the blockchain "world-wide ledger" more like the "balance sheet" part of accounting, i.e. a snapshot showing current assets and liabilities? Or is it more like the "cash flow" part of accounting, i.e. a journal showing historical revenues and expenses?
When I think of thousands of machines around the globe having to lug around multiple identical copies of a multi-gigabyte file containing some asshole's coffee purchase forever and ever... I feel like I'm ideologically drifting in one direction (where I'd end up also being against really cool stuff like online micropayments and Africans banking via SMS)... so I don't want to go there.
But on the other hand, when really experienced and battle-tested veterans with major experience in the world of open-souce programming and project management (the "small-blockians") warn of the catastrophic consequences of a possible failed hard-fork, I get freaked out and I wonder if Bitcoin really was destined to be a settlement layer for big transactions.
Could the original programmer(s) possibly weigh in?
And I don't mean to appeal to authority - but heck, where the hell is Satoshi Nakamoto in all this? I do understand that he/she/they would want to maintain absolute anonymity - but on the other hand, I assume SN wants Bitcoin to succeed (both for the future of humanity - or at least for all the bitcoins SN allegedly holds :-) - and I understand there is a way that SN can cryptographically sign a message - and I understand that as the original developer of Bitcoin, SN had some very specific opinions about the blocksize... So I'm kinda wondering of Satoshi could weigh in from time to time. Just to help out a bit. I'm not saying "Show us a sign" like a deity or something - but damn it sure would be fascinating and possibly very helpful if Satoshi gave us his/hetheir 2 satoshis worth at this really confusing juncture.
Are we using our capacity wisely?
I'm not a programming or game-theory whiz, I'm just a casual user who has tried to keep up with technology over the years.
It just seems weird to me that here we have this massive supercomputer (500 times more powerful than the all the supercomputers in the world combined) doing fairly straightforward "embarassingly parallel" number-crunching operations to secure a p2p world-wide ledger called the blockchain to keep track of a measly 2.1 quadrillion tokens spread out among a few billion addresses - and a couple of years ago you had people like Rick Falkvinge saying the blockchain would someday be supporting multi-million-dollar letters of credit for international trade and you had people like Andreas Antonopoulos saying the blockchain would someday allow billions of "unbanked" people to send remittances around the village or around the world dirt-cheap - and now suddenly in June 2015 we're talking about blockspace as a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" and partially centralized, corporate-sponsored "Level 2" vaporware like Lightning Network and some mysterious company is "stess testing" or "DoS-ing" the system by throwing away a measly $5,000 and suddenly it sounds like the whole system could eventually head right back into PayPal and Western Union territory again, in terms of expensive fees.
When I got into Bitcoin, I really was heavily influenced by vague analogies with BitTorrent: I figured everyone would just have tiny little like utorrent-type program running on their machine (ie, Bitcoin-QT or Armory or Mycelium etc.).
I figured that just like anyone can host a their own blog or webserver, anyone would be able to host their own bank.
Yeah, Google and and Mozilla and Twitter and Facebook and WhatsApp did come along and build stuff on top of TCP/IP, so I did expect a bunch of companies to build layers on top of the Bitcoin protocol as well. But I still figured the basic unit of bitcoin client software powering the overall system would be small and personal and affordable and p2p - like a bittorrent client - or at the most, like a cheap server hosting a blog or email server.
And I figured there would be a way at the software level, at the architecture level, at the algorithmic level, at the data structure level - to let the thing scale - if not infinitely, at least fairly massively and gracefully - the same way the BitTorrent network has.
Of course, I do also understand that with BitTorrent, you're sharing a read-only object (eg, a movie) - whereas with Bitcoin, you're achieving distributed trustless consensus and appending it to a write-only (or append-only) database.
So I do understand that the problem which BitTorrent solves is much simpler than the problem which Bitcoin sets out to solve.
But still, it seems that there's got to be a way to make this thing scale. It's p2p and it's got 500 times more computing power than all the supercomputers in the world combined - and so many brilliant and motivated and inspired people want this thing to succeed! And Bitcoin could be our civilization's last chance to steer away from the oncoming debt-based ditch of disaster we seem to be driving into!
It just seems that Bitcoin has got to be able to scale somehow - and all these smart people working together should be able to come up with a solution which pretty much everyone can agree - in advance - will work.
Right? Right?
A (probably irrelevant) tangent on algorithms and architecture and data structures
I'll finally weigh with my personal perspective - although I might be biased due to my background (which is more on the theoretical side of computer science).
My own modest - or perhaps radical - suggestion would be to ask whether we're really looking at all the best possible algorithms and architectures and data structures out there.
From this perspective, I sometimes worry that the overwhelming majority of the great minds working on the programming and game-theory stuff might come from a rather specific, shall we say "von Neumann" or "procedural" or "imperative" school of programming (ie, C and Python and Java programmers).
It seems strange to me that such a cutting-edge and important computer project would have so little participation from the great minds at the other end of the spectrum of programming paradigms - namely, the "functional" and "declarative" and "algebraic" (and co-algebraic!) worlds.
For example, I was struck in particular by statements I've seen here and there (which seemed rather hubristic or lackadaisical to me - for something as important as Bitcoin), that the specification of Bitcoin and the blockchain doesn't really exist in any form other than the reference implementation(s) (in procedural languages such as C or Python?).
Curry-Howard anyone?
I mean, many computer scientists are aware of the Curry-Howard isomorophism, which basically says that the relationship between a theorem and its proof is equivalent to the relationship between a specification and its implementation. In other words, there is a long tradition in mathematics (and in computer programming) of:
And it's not exactly "turtles all the way down" either: a specification is generally simple and compact enough that a good programmer can usually simply visually inspect it to determine if it is indeed "correct" - something which is very difficult, if not impossible, to do with a program written in a procedural, implementation-oriented language such as C or Python or Java.
So I worry that we've got this tradition, from the open-source github C/Java programming tradition, of never actually writing our "specification", and only writing the "implementation". In mission-critical military-grade programming projects (which often use languages like Ada or Maude) this is simply not allowed. It would seem that a project as mission-critical as Bitcoin - which could literally be crucial for humanity's continued survival - should also use this kind of military-grade software development approach.
And I'm not saying rewrite the implementations in these kind of theoretical languages. But it might be helpful if the C/Python/Java programmers in the Bitcoin imperative programming world could build some bridges to the Maude/Haskell/ML programmers of the functional and algebraic programming worlds to see if any kind of useful cross-pollination might take place - between specifications and implementations.
For example, the JavaFAN formal analyzer for multi-threaded Java programs (developed using tools based on the Maude language) was applied to the Remote Agent AI program aboard NASA's Deep Space 1 shuttle, written in Java - and it took only a few minutes using formal mathematical reasoning to detect a potential deadlock which would have occurred years later during the space mission when the damn spacecraft was already way out around Pluto.
And "the Maude-NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) Protocol Analyzer (Maude-NPA) is a tool used to provide security proofs of cryptographic protocols and to search for protocol flaws and cryptosystem attacks."
These are open-source formal reasoning tools developed by DARPA and used by NASA and the US Navy to ensure that program implementations satisfy their specifications. It would be great if some of the people involved in these kinds of projects could contribute to help ensure the security and scalability of Bitcoin.
But there is a wide abyss between the kinds of programmers who use languages like Maude and the kinds of programmers who use languages like C/Python/Java - and it can be really hard to get the two worlds to meet. There is a bit of rapprochement between these language communities in languages which might be considered as being somewhere in the middle, such as Haskell and ML. I just worry that Bitcoin might be turning into being an exclusively C/Python/Java project (with the algorithms and practitioners traditionally of that community), when it could be more advantageous if it also had some people from the functional and algebraic-specification and program-verification community involved as well. The thing is, though: the theoretical practitioners are big on "semantics" - I've heard them say stuff like "Yes but a C / C++ program has no easily identifiable semantics". So to get them involved, you really have to first be able to talk about what your program does (specification) - before proceeding to describe how it does it (implementation). And writing high-level specifications is typically very hard using the syntax and semantics of languages like C and Java and Python - whereas specs are fairly easy to write in Maude - and not only that, they're executable, and you state and verify properties about them - which provides for the kind of debate Nick Szabo was advocating ("more computer science, less noise").
Imagine if we had an executable algebraic specification of Bitcoin in Maude, where we could formally reason about and verify certain crucial game-theoretical properties - rather than merely hand-waving and arguing and deploying and praying.
And so in the theoretical programming community you've got major research on various logics such as Girard's Linear Logic (which is resource-conscious) and Bruni and Montanari's Tile Logic (which enables "pasting" bigger systems together from smaller ones in space and time), and executable algebraic specification languages such as Meseguer's Maude (which would be perfect for game theory modeling, with its functional modules for specifying the deterministic parts of systems and its system modules for specifiying non-deterministic parts of systems, and its parameterized skeletons for sketching out the typical architectures of mobile systems, and its formal reasoning and verification tools and libraries which have been specifically applied to testing and breaking - and fixing - cryptographic protocols).
And somewhat closer to the practical hands-on world, you've got stuff like Google's MapReduce and lots of Big Data database languages developed by Google as well. And yet here we are with a mempool growing dangerously big for RAM on a single machine, and a 20-GB append-only list as our database - and not much debate on practical results from Google's Big Data databases.
(And by the way: maybe I'm totally ignorant for asking this, but I'll ask anyways: why the hell does the mempool have to stay in RAM? Couldn't it work just as well if it were stored temporarily on the hard drive?)
And you've got CalvinDB out of Yale which apparently provides an ACID layer on top of a massively distributed database.
Look, I'm just an armchair follower cheering on these projects. I can barely manage to write a query in SQL, or read through a C or Python or Java program. But I would argue two points here: (1) these languages may be too low-level and "non-formal" for writing and modeling and formally reasoning about and proving properties of mission-critical specifications - and (2) there seem to be some Big Data tools already deployed by institutions such as Google and Yale which support global petabyte-size databases on commodity boxes with nice properties such as near-real-time and ACID - and I sometimes worry that the "core devs" might be failing to review the literature (and reach out to fellow programmers) out there to see if there might be some formal program-verification and practical Big Data tools out there which could be applied to coming up with rock-solid, 100% consensus proposals to handle an issue such as blocksize scaling, which seems to have become much more intractable than many people might have expected.
I mean, the protocol solved the hard stuff: the elliptical-curve stuff and the Byzantine General stuff. How the heck can we be falling down on the comparatively "easier" stuff - like scaling the blocksize?
It just seems like defeatism to say "Well, the blockchain is already 20-30 GB and it's gonna be 20-30 TB ten years from now - and we need 10 Mbs bandwidth now and 10,000 Mbs bandwidth 20 years from - assuming the evil Verizon and AT&T actually give us that - so let's just become a settlement platform and give up on buying coffee or banking the unbanked or doing micropayments, and let's push all that stuff into some corporate-controlled vaporware without even a whitepaper yet."
So you've got Peter Todd doing some possibly brilliant theorizing and extrapolating on the idea of "treechains" - there is a Let's Talk Bitcoin podcast from about a year ago where he sketches the rough outlines of this idea out in a very inspiring, high-level way - although the specifics have yet to be hammered out. And we've got Blockstream also doing some hopeful hand-waving about the Lightning Network.
Things like Peter Todd's treechains - which may be similar to the spark in some devs' eyes called Lightning Network - are examples of the kind of algorithm or architecture which might manage to harness the massive computing power of miners and nodes in such a way that certain kinds of massive and graceful scaling become possible.
It just seems like a kindof tiny dev community working on this stuff.
Being a C or Python or Java programmer should not be a pre-req to being able to help contribute to the specification (and formal reasoning and program verification) for Bitcoin and the blockchain.
XML and UML are crap modeling and specification languages, and C and Java and Python are even worse (as specification languages - although as implementation languages, they are of course fine).
But there are serious modeling and specification languages out there, and they could be very helpful at times like this - where what we're dealing with is questions of modeling and specification (ie, "needs and requirements").
One just doesn't often see the practical, hands-on world of open-source github implementation-level programmers and the academic, theoretical world of specification-level programmers meeting very often. I wish there were some way to get these two worlds to collaborate on Bitcoin.
Maybe a good first step to reach out to the theoretical people would be to provide a modular executable algebraic specification of the Bitcoin protocol in a recognized, military/NASA-grade specification language such as Maude - because that's something the theoretical community can actually wrap their heads around, whereas it's very hard to get them to pay attention to something written only as a C / Python / Java implementation (without an accompanying specification in a formal language).
They can't check whether the program does what it's supposed to do - if you don't provide a formal mathematical definition of what the program is supposed to do.
Specification : Implementation :: Theorem : Proof
You have to remember: the theoretical community is very aware of the Curry-Howard isomorphism. Just like it would be hard to get a mathematician's attention by merely showing them a proof without telling also telling them what theorem the proof is proving - by the same token, it's hard to get the attention of a theoretical computer scientist by merely showing them an implementation without showing them the specification that it implements.
Bitcoin is currently confronted with a mathematical or "computer science" problem: how to secure the network while getting high enough transactional throughput, while staying within the limited RAM, bandwidth and hard drive space limitations of current and future infrastructure.
The problem only becomes a political and economic problem if we give up on trying to solve it as a mathematical and "theoretical computer science" problem.
There should be a plethora of whitepapers out now proposing algorithmic solutions to these scaling issues. Remember, all we have to do is apply the Byzantine General consensus-reaching procedure to a worldwide database which shuffles 2.1 quadrillion tokens among a few billion addresses. The 21 company has emphatically pointed out that racing to compute a hash to add a block is an "embarrassingly parallel" problem - very easy to decompose among cheap, fault-prone, commodity boxes, and recompose into an overall solution - along the lines of Google's highly successful MapReduce.
I guess what I'm really saying is (and I don't mean to be rude here), is that C and Python and Java programmers might not be the best qualified people to develop and formally prove the correctness of (note I do not say: "test", I say "formally prove the correctness of") these kinds of algorithms.
I really believe in the importance of getting the algorithms and architectures right - look at Google Search itself, it uses some pretty brilliant algorithms and architectures (eg, MapReduce, Paxos) which enable it to achieve amazing performance - on pretty crappy commodity hardware. And look at BitTorrent, which is truly p2p, where more demand leads to more supply.
So, in this vein, I will close this lengthy rant with an oddly specific link - which may or may not be able to make some interesting contributions to finding suitable algorithms, architectures and data structures which might help Bitcoin scale massively. I have no idea if this link could be helpful - but given the near-total lack of people from the Haskell and ML and functional worlds in these Bitcoin specification debates, I thought I'd be remiss if I didn't throw this out - just in case there might be something here which could help us channel the massive computing power of the Bitcoin network in such a way as to enable us simply sidestep this kind of desperate debate where both sides seem right because the other side seems wrong.
https://personal.cis.strath.ac.uk/neil.ghani/papers/ghani-calco07
The above paper is about "higher dimensional trees". It uses a bit of category theory (not a whole lot) and a bit of Haskell (again not a lot - just a simple data structure called a Rose tree, which has a wikipedia page) to develop a very expressive and efficient data structure which generalizes from lists to trees to higher dimensions.
I have no idea if this kind of data structure could be applicable to the current scaling mess we apparently are getting bogged down in - I don't have the game-theory skills to figure it out.
I just thought that since the blockchain is like a list, and since there are some tree-like structures which have been grafted on for efficiency (eg Merkle trees) and since many of the futuristic scaling proposals seem to also involve generalizing from list-like structures (eg, the blockchain) to tree-like structures (eg, side-chains and tree-chains)... well, who knows, there might be some nugget of algorithmic or architectural or data-structure inspiration there.
So... TL;DR:
(1) I'm freaked out that this blocksize debate has splintered the community so badly and dragged on so long, with no resolution in sight, and both sides seeming so right (because the other side seems so wrong).
(2) I think Bitcoin could gain immensely by using high-level formal, algebraic and co-algebraic program specification and verification languages (such as Maude including Maude-NPA, Mobile Maude parameterized skeletons, etc.) to specify (and possibly also, to some degree, verify) what Bitcoin does - before translating to low-level implementation languages such as C and Python and Java saying how Bitcoin does it. This would help to communicate and reason about programs with much more mathematical certitude - and possibly obviate the need for many political and economic tradeoffs which currently seem dismally inevitable - and possibly widen the collaboration on this project.
(3) I wonder if there are some Big Data approaches out there (eg, along the lines of Google's MapReduce and BigTable, or Yale's CalvinDB), which could be implemented to allow Bitcoin to scale massively and painlessly - and to satisfy all stakeholders, ranging from millionaires to micropayments, coffee drinkers to the great "unbanked".
submitted by BeYourOwnBank to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The story of bitcoin and mystery of its inventor How I am Become Millionaire With Bitcoin Adder Cryptocurrency Revolution Bitcoin Explained Bitcoin ... World's largest exchange CME launches Bitcoin futures trading Mystery Founder Of Bitcoin: Uncovering Satoshi Nakamoto's ...

Cryptocurrency: The Hail Mary Pass for People Who Missed the Tech Boom. By Anna Wiene r. February 21, 2018 Save this story for later. ... Bitcoin and its mysterious inventor. By Joshua Davi s ... The Tesla boss responded to a ‘not true’ Medium post claiming he is the creator of the cryptocurrency who has never been conclusively identified Bitcoin has become the most famous and most valuable cryptocurrency in the world and curiosity about its inventor has exploded. ... but they clash with the revolutionary spirit behind Bitcoin and its principles of freedom and decentralization. Craig Steven Wright: “I am Satoshi Nakamoto!” Craig Steven Wright is an Australian entrepreneur, active in the field of technological research, who ... Bitcoin and its mysterious inventor. By Joshua Davi s. October 3, 2011. Save this story for later. Save this story for later. There are lots of ways to make money: You can earn it, find it ... Everything you need to know about Bitcoin, its mysterious origins, and the many alleged identities of its creator Zoë Bernard 2018-11-10T13:00:00Z

[index] [13811] [45544] [39358] [39533] [6154] [29743] [44133] [20028] [49241] [2738]

The story of bitcoin and mystery of its inventor

"60 Minutes producer" Andy Court talks about the mystery of bitcoin's inventor, Satoshi Nakamoto, and the challenges of reporting on cryptocurrency. Subscribe to the "60 Minutes" Channel HERE ... Bitcoin was invented in 2008 by a person or group calling themselves Satoshi Nakamoto, and the identity of the mysterious inventor is still not yet known. Park Ji-won, Arirang News. Cryptocurrency Revolution Bitcoin Explained Bitcoin Phenomenon Explained Documentary by Joker Israr Cryptocurrency Revolution Bitcoin Explained Bitcoin Pheno... There is no better place to start than the mysterious inventor of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto. Nakamoto has, against all odds, managed to keep his identity a mystery. Some say that it could be an ... Experts agree that uncovering Satoshi Nakamoto's identity could have an immense impact on bitcoin's economics and internal politics. » Subscribe to CNBC: htt...

#