Great article Nic. I completely agree with your thoughts. If Satoshi were indeed alive and well, then he should feel obligated and motivated to address the current quantum threat even if it is a few years out. Moreover, I would think he would address the current state of BTC in general...the fact that it is not used as a self custodial payment system but rather more of an institutionalized store of value dominated by a few large players.
Bitcoin institution? Wtf is that. I will revisit this to either cry that my coins went to zero because you were right (which you’re not). Or laugh at your alarmism into 2040 like I laugh at nocoiners who fell for China fud from 2012
Good article. BTC is going to zero. Act accordingly. I know you got rich with Bitcoin, but you should consider yourself to be extremely lucky and not extremely prescient.
Nic, thanks for another good take on this weak article in the NYT. Re your thesis, I would tend to agree. With the caveat that if there's any chance Satoshi somehow can't take any action due to simply not caring anymore. Which seems incredibly implausible to most of us. But for the sake of maximum objectivity, let's say Satoshi was a "unique" group of people? Or was a government agency? Or some other unimagined reason for ambivalence?
However Adam says he's not worried about Q-day, and so if he was Satoshi he wouldn't be moving his Bitcoin now anyway, so your theory kinda falls apart because of that.
nic, who is your best guess for satoshi? you casually mentioned you likely know who satoshi is while talking on the latest bankless podcast. i'm dying to know lol
there is a good analysis coming out later this month that fleshes it out
I think it's actually pretty straightforward when you look at the skills required and the Quisquater citation in the bitcoin WP (think: who had access to this physical journal?)
I think that, like Hoskinson said in his video recently, the persona of Satoshi is not longer with us. First, think about what would be stirred up if Satoshi was "babysitting" Bitcoin by doing such a thing as intervening against quantum attacks. I think that the person Satoshi was/is understands the concept of consequence for decisions made. He had those tools at the time and used them to the best of their ability to open Pandora's box and establish a paradigm shift. Reversing that position by acting in intervention would nullify all that. RIP Satoshi persona, and know that we thank you for what you have done.
i get it, but also, it matters for Bitcoin. and people aren't going to stop speculating.
also, there's plenty of billionaires in the world. they pay for security. it's how it works. I'm kind of sick of this whole "we're not allowed to talk about Satoshi thing". if Satoshi is alive, they can spend 1/100th of their hoard on security and be fine.
Great article Nic. I completely agree with your thoughts. If Satoshi were indeed alive and well, then he should feel obligated and motivated to address the current quantum threat even if it is a few years out. Moreover, I would think he would address the current state of BTC in general...the fact that it is not used as a self custodial payment system but rather more of an institutionalized store of value dominated by a few large players.
Yawn, you fell for a google marketing doc to help them sell google cloud subscriptions, your misplaced anxiety is not other peoples emergency.
will you revisit this when every major Bitcoin institution comes publicly and says they fully agree, and Bitcoin needs to upgrade ASAP?
cause they all agree with me.
Bitcoin institution? Wtf is that. I will revisit this to either cry that my coins went to zero because you were right (which you’re not). Or laugh at your alarmism into 2040 like I laugh at nocoiners who fell for China fud from 2012
your coins will be fine, because I (and others) catalyzed bitcoin devs into accelerating PQ efforts.
will you say thank you when your transactions are signed with PQ SPHINCS rather than schnorr? probably not. but future me says "you're welcome".
Good article. BTC is going to zero. Act accordingly. I know you got rich with Bitcoin, but you should consider yourself to be extremely lucky and not extremely prescient.
Nic, thanks for another good take on this weak article in the NYT. Re your thesis, I would tend to agree. With the caveat that if there's any chance Satoshi somehow can't take any action due to simply not caring anymore. Which seems incredibly implausible to most of us. But for the sake of maximum objectivity, let's say Satoshi was a "unique" group of people? Or was a government agency? Or some other unimagined reason for ambivalence?
However Adam says he's not worried about Q-day, and so if he was Satoshi he wouldn't be moving his Bitcoin now anyway, so your theory kinda falls apart because of that.
he's not Satoshi, so his views on it are just fanfic. consider what financial incentive he might have to make you think he's Satoshi though.
nic, who is your best guess for satoshi? you casually mentioned you likely know who satoshi is while talking on the latest bankless podcast. i'm dying to know lol
Len, or possibly Len and Hal
there is a good analysis coming out later this month that fleshes it out
I think it's actually pretty straightforward when you look at the skills required and the Quisquater citation in the bitcoin WP (think: who had access to this physical journal?)
Looks like you saw this already! https://www.theblock.co/post/398423/finding-satoshi-documentary-makes-case-hal-finney-len-sassaman-bitcoins-co-creators
thank you for answering me!
I think that, like Hoskinson said in his video recently, the persona of Satoshi is not longer with us. First, think about what would be stirred up if Satoshi was "babysitting" Bitcoin by doing such a thing as intervening against quantum attacks. I think that the person Satoshi was/is understands the concept of consequence for decisions made. He had those tools at the time and used them to the best of their ability to open Pandora's box and establish a paradigm shift. Reversing that position by acting in intervention would nullify all that. RIP Satoshi persona, and know that we thank you for what you have done.
https://sergiobtc.substack.com/p/vibe-check-with-a-byline?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
Also he could be in prison.
Isn't it plausible that he's alive but he's waiting for a signature scheme to come along that he could move the coins into?
Not only is it impolite to speculate on Satoshi's identity, more importantly, it may put that/those "exposed" individual/s at serious risk
i get it, but also, it matters for Bitcoin. and people aren't going to stop speculating.
also, there's plenty of billionaires in the world. they pay for security. it's how it works. I'm kind of sick of this whole "we're not allowed to talk about Satoshi thing". if Satoshi is alive, they can spend 1/100th of their hoard on security and be fine.