Satoshi matters

I’m sick of hearing people say that they don’t care who Satoshi is, or that it doesn’t matter.

I care who Satoshi is because it does matter, a lot. There are a couple of reasons:

  • Satoshi is the genius inventor of a protocol that beautifully combines economics with cryptography. There was no precedent for bitcoin prior to bitcoin. The invention was not simply a trivial adjustment of existing ideas, but an enormous leap. The invention of Bitcoin is a paradigm shift.
    • The implication is, if Satoshi were talking today, I would be listening. Satoshi’s ideas would influence me today, more than anyone else’s.
  • Satoshi likely has control of approximately one million bitcoins or 5.5% of the total supply.
    • The implication is, Satoshi could exert enormous influence on the market prices of BSV, BCH and BTC. The key driver of security in all of these coins (currently at least) is coin price, as hash power is BSV, BCH, BTC agnostic.

Who is Satoshi?

The key premise I’m working with is:

Dr Craig Wright (CSW) has control of the private keys relating to the earliest bitcoin blocks, mined by Satoshi.

I can say this with close to 100% confidence. If you don’t have the same level of confidence please read the below links:

Are we on the same page? Good.

If we work with my core premise, we can form some reasonable conjectures based on the common themes. Here are my opinions, given the balance of probabilities:

  • CSW and Dave Kleiman (sadly deceased) and probably one other person are together Satoshi Nakamoto. They are responsible for inventing bitcoin.
    • CSW has mentioned that David Rees was involved. I can find no evidence to back this claim.
    • Special mention to early contributors to the codebase, Hal Finney and Ray Dillinger (Bear/Cryddit).
  • It is unclear what proportional claim CSW has over Satoshi’s assumed one million bitcoins. It is also unclear how these assets are structured and whether CSW has free access at this point. I assume Dave Kleiman’s estate is entitled a proportion of the total.
  • There is a substantial amount of evidence that points to holdings being locked in a trust, to be unlocked January 2020.
  • It’s worth touching on that I am aware that Phil Wilson (scronty) has claimed to be the main part of Satoshi. I have read his bitcoin origins story and I have watched his 7 hour interview with Steve Patterson. I don’t find his claim to be convincing or relevant.
    • The claim is not convincing because I don’t think he has a good grasp of the economics. I believe the creator of bitcoin is an economist first and foremost. Scronty doesn’t appear to have a firm grasp of the economic implications of bitcoin at scale as made apparent by his comments on brownouts in his interview. I don’t think bitcoin at scale can result in brownouts, the economic model simply does not steer the system towards that end. I would further elaborate if it were not for the next point.
    • The claim is not relevant because scronty has no supporting evidence and likely never will. It’s not relevant in the formation of my conclusions numbered 1 through 3 below.

I won’t try to draw further conclusions. I have answers on what I consider to be material:

  1. It’s very likely that CSW is the only surviving member of Satoshi. CSW now controls the narrative and can wholly represent the ideals of the creator. This is incredibly important when you consider the influence this status will have on most people, particularly those who will be new to the space.
  2. It’s very likely that CSW has the access to a large amount of bitcoin. The influence CSW could exert on market prices is substantial, as is the amount of capital he could presumably deploy towards projects that advance his goals.
  3. It’s very likely that CSW is a large part of the brains behind bitcoin. Any project he sides with would benefit greatly from his unparalleled understanding of the technology. If you don’t think CSW understands Bitcoin, I don’t know how you reconcile this belief against nChain’s growing patent portfolio.

If you have dismissed CSW, it’s clear to me that you haven’t done your research.

You simply have not done your research.

Commentary on CSW

Don’t think I haven’t considered both sides of the argument when it comes to CSW. This is probably the most robust anti CSW template response.

I get it. The Satoshi issue isn’t clear cut. The context likely goes far deeper than what appears on the surface. CSW’s behaviour is odd to say the least.

However, the fact of the matter is that I haven’t come across any information that has altered my key premise:

“Dr Craig Wright (CSW) has control of the private keys relating to the earliest bitcoin blocks, mined by Satoshi”

I haven’t come across any information that has altered my conjectures based on this premise. I also haven’t come across any information that has put the authenticity of the supporting evidence I have used into question. If you can provide me with any, please do, because:

  • I can trust myself to assess information objectively
  • I am willing to change my opinions given new information

Interestingly, many people appear to lack this skill. In many ways this is desirable as it allows for the mispricing of assets in the short term. Short term mispricing is a profit opportunity for those using their brains.

To close the CSW issue, it is unfortunate that I see a number of arguments boil down to:

“CSW is a bit of a cunt”

This argument isn’t convincing to me. As a Kiwi it comes as no surprise that CSW is a bit of a cunt, he’s Australian.

8 replies on “Satoshi matters”

Well said. Puts alot of floating ideas together in my head. CSW has my attention more and more these days. Thanks. The question is, how did I ever find this blog in the first place? A notification of this post popped up in my inbox and I’m glad it did. I must have signed up five years ago when researching MAID. But hey, thanks again! If you have any other online presences you can share here then please do!

Thanks for your reply! Yes, I’ve been lurking for five years and now I have some thoughts to share. More posts to come. I will become more active in the future on Twitter – @Deadlochcom. See you around

I would never make this assumption without seeing any proof… Craig is a compulsive liar.

You started out with a premise without a proof, the you couldn’t find a way to disprove your (again: originally unproven) premise, so you conclude your premise is now correct. That’s not how proofs work, mate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.