What does he have to gain by pretending to be Satoshi?

Satoshi hadn't heard of Szabo until Wei Dai mentioned him in an email.

sorry idk what the heck your talking about but he is satoshi... just look at his blog and how he was friends with hal finney and was obsessive over cryptocurrency decades prior

Also, please correlate the term "unforgeable costliness."

ffs sake everyone knows he is Satoshi. how is this a convo?

cypherpunks.venona.com/date/1993/10/msg00759.html

'In my limited experience creating Internet pseudonyms, I've been quite distracted by the continual need to avoid leaving pointers to my
True Name lying around -- excess mail to/from my True Name, shared files, common peculiarities (eg misspellings in written text), traceable
logins, etc. The penet.fi site explicitly maintains a list of pointers to the original address. All kinds of security controls -- crypto, access, information, inference -- have to be continually on my mind when using pseudonymous accounts. The hazards are everywhere. With our current tools it's practically impossible to maintain an active pseudonym for a long period of time against a sufficiently determined opponent, and quite a hassle to maintain even a modicum of decent security.'

From: [email protected] (Nick Szabo)
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 3:29:08 PDT

>pretending
lol

also, even if by a miracle this guy isn't satoshi, he's still the most important person in the cypherpunk space
he is an unparalleled genius

Hal contributed to the project as himself, he was not bug reporting to himself. satoshi and hal also disagreed on some subjects

kleiman isn't a cypherpunk or a C coder, he is a forensics guy, he does not have the skillset to make bitcoin

but the biggest giveaway for Szabo being Satoshi was how he modified all his bitgold blog posts to look like they came out after the bitcoin whitepaper. It's funny how those and only those papers were modified, and nothing else on his blog. The mans a genius, but even geniuses slip up sometimes, in this case he didn't think that the pages had already been archived

Mind you, Bitcoin's source was produceable by a non-expert programmer, which is perfect, because most in the cryptography space are non-expert programmers - but scientific programmers more adept at math, and Szabo himself has claimed to be an amateur (He is being slightly humble, but not by much).

Satoshi claimed also not to be an expert, and requested help on bitcointalk abstracting his mostly hardcoded WinAPI code to other operating systems.

Honestly this imo user,
I say leave the guy alone - He's happy with his science, and he aint't never hurt nobody nohow. Let him larp as a normal guy. It's the least we can do.

user, is that email real? While I agree with you, I need a source.

very cool find

All I'm saying is, he should stop lying and sign some keys if he really is Satoshi. Which he obviously isn't.

Bitgold has nothing in common with Bitcoin.

Szabo is more interested in Ethereum and alt coins than Bitcoin.

Deceptive shit.

Bitgold has everything in common with Bitcoin.
He does not want to sign.
He is more interested in Ethereum because he's been talking about Smart Contracts since the 90's. It was his original pipe dream back then.

yes it's real user. all the cyperpunk emails have been archived on that site, untampered

here's some more gold, nick talking about double spending

cypherpunks.venona.com/date/1993/11/msg00145.html

talking about 'vanishing into cyberspace' if something was built which was then used for illegal activities (ie bitcoin), this was back in 2001!

mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00080.html

It's without a doubt that SN = NS, but yes the man has produced the ultimate LARP, creates bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, then vanishes but comes back as an almost equal god-like person in the space, so he can continue to be involved, all while keeping anonymity as the creator of bitcoin

"Anyone contemplating building such a system, or entity, or cybercorporation, should think long and hard about the wisdom of ever
having an identifiable nexus of attack. Money must be collected in untraceable ways. This is what I meant about it being time to rethink
the theory of the corporation. Where once a corporation existed to both protect the rights of shareholders (against lawsuits and partners having to pay for losses) and to enable the group participation of many workers, corporations for the things Cypherpunks think are interesting is just a bad idea. And given the growing trend toward trying to prosecute the V.P of Yahoo-Europe because some bit of Nazi history was sold to some German citizen, etc., corporations are becoming a liability in cyberspace. The answer is to vanish into cyberspace. Not an easy task, maybe, given the state of today's tools, but the long term trend."

like how much more evidence do we need. The man has left breadcrumbs all over the internet dating back 20 + years. Bitcoin is the culmination of his lifes work

yes I know
still, kleiman does not 'APPEAR' to have the skillset to plan out bitcoin. I'm talking about the general game-theory, not the code.
szabo has a CS degree, so he could have coded it, granted you don't learn a specific language in most CS degrees, you learn general programming logic and math, at least in my uni it's like that.

frankly, I don't even care if Szabo is or isn't satoshi
his articles and whitepapers are a beacon of light that should guide the fundamentals of the space

>Thus, bit gold will not be fungible based on a simple function of, for example, the length of the string. Instead, to create fungible units dealers will have to combine different-valued pieces of bit gold into larger units of approximately equal value. This is analogous to what many commodity dealers do today to make commodity markets possible. Trust is still distributed because the estimated values of such bundles can be independently verified by many other parties in a largely or entirely automated fashion

LOL

Cope harder.

>stop lying
when did he lie?
link the post where he is lying and tell us what is the lie you're talking about

bitcoin followed on from bitgold ideas, however it did have a couple major fundamental differences, it essentially solved the problems that bit-gold still had. This is why Nick decided to call it something different. My theory is while he was trying to code up bit-gold in 2007 he solved some of these issues, but the end product had fundamentally changed somewhat, so he decided to call it a completely different thing...bitcoin

31st October 2005
Nick Szabo mentions bit-gold in a blog post. He says how Bit gold can be achieved if the 'unforgeable costliness of a computer' problem can be solved. Also once again mentions Hal Finney.
web.archive.org/web/20060302003906/https://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/10/antiques-time-gold-and-bit-gold.html
Take note the date in the blog title is in 2008, but take note of the URL of the blog post, also confirmed by the internet archive snapshot taken in 2006.

These are good finds - Thanks, user.

Both SN and NS rambled about the "double spending problem" consistently as well.

I'm still waiting
when did he lie, and about what?
you pajeets only make yourselves look bad shitposting like this
flags on Jow Forums soon

Kleiman doesn't have any relation to Bitcoin whatsoever.

I mean, it's good publicity, I would do the same thing if I was him. Suckers thinking you're Satoshi is never a bad thing. But it's pretty obvious he had nothing to do with it once you actually read his papers and blog posts.

Again, Bitgold is non-fungible, non-divisible, and there is no consensus or peer to peer network topology. It also does not have a supply cap.

Is that that Sergey Vitalik everyone's talking about?

Yeah that was pretty retarded from his side