New HBO Documentary Claims Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Is Len Sassaman(blockhead.co)
blockhead.co
New HBO Documentary Claims Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Is Len Sassaman
https://www.blockhead.co/2024/10/05/new-bitcoin-documentary-to-sheds-more-light-on-satoshi-nakamotos-identity/
68 comments
The article doesn't mention this, but presumably analysis of the quite large and available codebases Len is known to have worked on could be done vs the Satoshi code? In the past I've tried to write code that doesn't look like I wrote it, but it's exhausting and probably won't defeat modern AI methods.
To me the most appealing hypothesis was this comment https://web.archive.org/web/20240407013631/https://www.reddi...
The commenter deleted it for whatever reason after a while...
The commenter deleted it for whatever reason after a while...
Some very interesting and applicable work happening among Japanese scientists in the late 1990s. "Satoshi" is either dead or Japanese, no one else could keep quiet.
I agree it sounds really compelling that those three names are involved, but as mentioned they could just be influences that motivated that particular pseudonym. It would be hard for three people to keep such a secret.
It would also be hard for three people to stay alive and in each other's good graces with the amount of money on the table. There's no way it was multiple people.
I don't get the "HBO claims BTC creator is Len".
I saw that the internet is betting on him, but there's no evidence whatsoever that HBO will claim this. (And yes, I almost think Len's quite the right candidate, cf Evan "Leung" Hatch's article on Medium).
They'll probably just list the usual suspects and say it's likely one of them.
I read that Len was a heavy linux user with no Windows experience. Meanwhile, the first bitcoin implementation is done on Windows for Windows.
Some people may remember better this aspect.
Some people may remember better this aspect.
I'm skeptical about this. Although I have been a Linux user since 1992, in my (fairly wide) experience Linux was not used in commercial settings until around 2000. Len was a professional developer working for SV companies during that period. So was I. I did have colleagues with no Windows experience, but they would have been Solaris users (or HPUX or...). Anyone writing code to be used by regular end-users would have had to have targeted Windows because there simply wasn't much of any installed base for any other OS at the time. Plus, according to the Medium article, Len worked on the PGP codebase. PGP ran on Windows (Win32, not sure about Win16).
Yep, I make this point often.
The only two that match up with the Windows piece of the puzzle are Dave Kleiman and Paul Le Roux. Of those two, Paul Le Roux had a interest in online gambling. Guess what the first Bitcoin release had references to.
The only two that match up with the Windows piece of the puzzle are Dave Kleiman and Paul Le Roux. Of those two, Paul Le Roux had a interest in online gambling. Guess what the first Bitcoin release had references to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Le_Roux
I was unfamiliar and that was the wildest Wikipedia article I've read in a long time.
I was unfamiliar and that was the wildest Wikipedia article I've read in a long time.
There’s one more man you are missing that fits better with the Windows piece that is more likely than those two. A man that was obsessed with anonymity (with no real picture of him on the net), an active writer still today, and with the coding and cryptography chops to have actually built it.
Who are you referring too? I am really curious.
[deleted]
That would be exactly the kind of thing to do to obfuscate your identity.
You guys are overthinking or just having fun claiming such stuff. Satoshi covered his tracks at communication and distribution layer e.g. using fake name, using TOR, using anon email, anon host etc.
I'm almost certain from everything I've seen about Bitcoin over the years that he wasn't a Linux developer who learnt Windows and C++ just to "obfuscate" his identity, he wasn't a non-native English speaker who learnt perfect English just to "obfuscate" his origin. He wasn't a professional cryptographer or even up to date with the latest cryptographic research according to Gavin Andresen[0]. It's most likely that he was indeed a native English speaker and a C++ Windows programmer who happened to be very passionate about digital cash payment solutions.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uWigVKslYg
I'm almost certain from everything I've seen about Bitcoin over the years that he wasn't a Linux developer who learnt Windows and C++ just to "obfuscate" his identity, he wasn't a non-native English speaker who learnt perfect English just to "obfuscate" his origin. He wasn't a professional cryptographer or even up to date with the latest cryptographic research according to Gavin Andresen[0]. It's most likely that he was indeed a native English speaker and a C++ Windows programmer who happened to be very passionate about digital cash payment solutions.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uWigVKslYg
You're right. I am just wondering about the [email protected] email. Anyways, he must have it all covered.
Gmx.com addresses (assuming no use of VPN or Tor exit node) excluded people in Germany, Austria and Switzerland at the time. You would always have been redirected to the country TLD options. GMX.com was a new spin off around 2009. There’s an interesting archived page here that discussed exactly this:
http://www.emaildiscussions.com/showthread.php?t=57794
Gmx is popular in Germany but I think it was always a bit niche outside Germany speaking countries it was relatively unheard of at the time.
Notably, you might of heard of GMX when visiting Germany for the CCC convention. Both Len Sassaman and Dan Kaminsky presented at CCC in the same year (2007) at 24C3 for example. Dan presented for several years in a row and fiercely opposed Craig Wright’s claims to be Satoshi.
Kaminsky, Finney and Sassaman all died rather young.
http://www.emaildiscussions.com/showthread.php?t=57794
Gmx is popular in Germany but I think it was always a bit niche outside Germany speaking countries it was relatively unheard of at the time.
Notably, you might of heard of GMX when visiting Germany for the CCC convention. Both Len Sassaman and Dan Kaminsky presented at CCC in the same year (2007) at 24C3 for example. Dan presented for several years in a row and fiercely opposed Craig Wright’s claims to be Satoshi.
Kaminsky, Finney and Sassaman all died rather young.
>Gmx is popular in Germany but I think it was always a bit niche outside Germany speaking countries it was relatively unheard of at the time.
He also used upload.ae to share draft of Bitcoin whitepaper[0] and upload.ae was literally unheard of. I didn't see anybody saying they used it or knowing who owned it. My assumption is that it was run by Satoshi's friend or somebody that he trusted.
[0] https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/wei-dai/1/
He also used upload.ae to share draft of Bitcoin whitepaper[0] and upload.ae was literally unheard of. I didn't see anybody saying they used it or knowing who owned it. My assumption is that it was run by Satoshi's friend or somebody that he trusted.
[0] https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/wei-dai/1/
He always used TOR but he also used anon emails like [email protected] and [email protected].
And maybe he didn't cover all tracks....how did he purchase bitcoin.org domain in August of 2008? Some say via cash in mail but I'm not so sure.
And maybe he didn't cover all tracks....how did he purchase bitcoin.org domain in August of 2008? Some say via cash in mail but I'm not so sure.
Opsec is never perfect. Let's leave it at that
That would be done because the user base of windows at the time dwarfed that of Linux. There are other better ways to cover your identity.
That seems possible. But this kind of explanation is also indistinguishable from “it’s just part of the conspiracy” type of logical track.
New HBO Documentary makes unfounded sensational claim to call attention to new mediocre documentary by HBO. *fixed it
It’s not really unfounded. Several commenters in this thread have already linked a well-researched piece from a few years ago which (convincingly) compiles all the evidence. So it seems blatantly wrong to say it’s unfounded…
For what it’s worth, this is the histogram of Satoshi’s bitcointalk post times in GMT https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F5...
Assuming he didn’t post from work (for opsec reasons), this is most consistent with living/working in central/eastern europe/africa. Len Sassaman lived and worked in SV.
Assuming he didn’t post from work (for opsec reasons), this is most consistent with living/working in central/eastern europe/africa. Len Sassaman lived and worked in SV.
I always found it interesting to read the initial announcement and follow up emails on the Cryptography Mailing List by Satoshi in 2009.
Hal Finney responds relatively quickly to Satoshi’s email, whilst the rest of the mailing list is embroiled in a hash algorithm discussion (TLS/MD5/SHA1/SHA256).
Finney goes into some detail suggesting to me that he already knew beforehand what Bitcoin was about and how it could work and change the world. Of course parts of Bitcoin were based on his RPOW paper as well as building on much of the developments in digital cash up to then.
Much of the feedback was negative (without it seems testing it) and based on the concept of digital cash in general and POW. Ironically it was also pointed out by another member that Bitcoin’s proof of work would require a lot of energy and have negative effects on the environment if successful. But most of the discussion and pro-side was promoted by both Finney and Satoshi. It almost seems “sock-puppet-esque”, or at a minimum Finney was already invested in the idea.
https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-January...
Hal Finney responds relatively quickly to Satoshi’s email, whilst the rest of the mailing list is embroiled in a hash algorithm discussion (TLS/MD5/SHA1/SHA256).
Finney goes into some detail suggesting to me that he already knew beforehand what Bitcoin was about and how it could work and change the world. Of course parts of Bitcoin were based on his RPOW paper as well as building on much of the developments in digital cash up to then.
Much of the feedback was negative (without it seems testing it) and based on the concept of digital cash in general and POW. Ironically it was also pointed out by another member that Bitcoin’s proof of work would require a lot of energy and have negative effects on the environment if successful. But most of the discussion and pro-side was promoted by both Finney and Satoshi. It almost seems “sock-puppet-esque”, or at a minimum Finney was already invested in the idea.
https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-January...
This article shows how his Tweet times match well with Satoshi's posts: https://evanhatch.medium.com/len-sassaman-and-satoshi-e483c8...
From the comments under your link
>If those times are UTC, then he was mostly sleeping between 00:00 and 08:00 EST
Which suggests US east coast?
>If those times are UTC, then he was mostly sleeping between 00:00 and 08:00 EST
Which suggests US east coast?
Between
1) occasionally posted between midnight and 8 am and never posted from work (US based)
2) never post between midnight and 8am and post 80% of your posts during work hours (EU based)
I think number 2 makes a lot more sense for someone trying his best to cover his tracks
1) occasionally posted between midnight and 8 am and never posted from work (US based)
2) never post between midnight and 8am and post 80% of your posts during work hours (EU based)
I think number 2 makes a lot more sense for someone trying his best to cover his tracks
And Belgium
...and Belgium apparently.
This article is not great. You can see from a link that somebody else had previously named Sassaman, but there's no discussion of that. No discussion of why Hoback suspects Sassaman (although, probably too early for that). No mention of Hoback pretty convincingly naming Q in QAnon: Into the Storm.
Also it uses "cyberpunk" in place of "cypherpunk" at one point
Also it uses "cyberpunk" in place of "cypherpunk" at one point
I'd categorize a cypherpunk as a very specific form a cyberpunk, so to me that's normal journalistic form to use both terms at some point in an article.
Cypherpunk and cyberpunk are totally unrelated.
This is not a new theory: https://news.bitcoin.com/the-many-facts-pointing-to-cypherpu...
There are several good much older articles and posts digging into Sassaman and Finley and the sort of cyberpunk scene from that region of the country. Hard to search it up right now due to article spam about this documentary.
There are several good much older articles and posts digging into Sassaman and Finley and the sort of cyberpunk scene from that region of the country. Hard to search it up right now due to article spam about this documentary.
> due to article spam about this documentary.
Such as this one by "Blockhead", all very low quality
Such as this one by "Blockhead", all very low quality
This [1] is the canonical article you're looking for.
[1] - https://evanhatch.medium.com/len-sassaman-and-satoshi-e483c8...
[1] - https://evanhatch.medium.com/len-sassaman-and-satoshi-e483c8...
Thanks. If you are reading and got this far, my link was probably a blog spam of the parent’s link and was the actual link I tried to find.
Then we can reasonably conclude that Len Sassaman was NOT Satoshi Nakamoto.
BTW, Satoshi Nakamoto translated to English = Central Intelligence. (Family name first in formal Japanese.) Fun coincidence.
BTW, Satoshi Nakamoto translated to English = Central Intelligence. (Family name first in formal Japanese.) Fun coincidence.
Nakamoto Satoshi is more like "guy with a lot of wisdom and lives inland".
This is exactly the picture I'd expect from a guy who read a Gibson novel and gave himself a Japanese name:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Sassaman#/media/File:Len_S...
This is exactly the picture I'd expect from a guy who read a Gibson novel and gave himself a Japanese name:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Sassaman#/media/File:Len_S...
Another funny coincidence is the email that Satoshi chose to use in the whitepaper: [email protected]. Observe that `SatoshiN' can be interpreted as `Sat(4 chars)N', or equivalently: `Sat4N'! Meaning each time you send someone sats, you're actually sending them little satans. :)
What an excellent sense of humor Satoshi had.
What an excellent sense of humor Satoshi had.
> Observe that `SatoshiN' can be interpreted as `Sat(4 chars)N'
No, i can not observe that.
No, i can not observe that.
Whatever you think of cryptocurrencies, the mystery is alluring and endlessly fascinating.
Len isn't Satoshi. Len may have been employed by Satoshi at one point though.
this is a valid comment, there are counterpoints to the Len theory
There's no reason to theorize about anything. Maybe HBO should've hunted through all of the crypto-related US patents filed in the 10-15-20 years before Bitcoin was released. Happy hunting!
Oh so you know do you? But you're just going to leave a little breadcrumb?
Asymmetric information about Bitcoin is worth up to +infinity dollars. Worthwhile to do your research.
Ah, I see. But I guess you did have fun pretending.
Hmm? You think it's impossible for someone to go through 10-20 years worth of crypto patents, only to find that one of them contains the exact system architecture that was released as Bitcoin? I guess it's too much work for lazy boys like you :)
There is probably no single "Satoshi" individual, but that was their avatar "API boundary" with which to interface with the rest of the world. It was probably a scheme to financialize fintech (with an emphasis on tech) by 2-4 people who then held large amounts of the value they printed, making them covert decabillionaires able to escape press, kidnapping, pitch schemes, and taxation.
does the documentary bring new elements?
They're wrong. It's me
If I then said "it's me," that would be an obvious echo.
Or if I instead said "it's not me", that would a contrarian echo.
So I'm just going to say: it's probably not me, the last time I checked, but I'd be happy to be wrong.
Or if I instead said "it's not me", that would a contrarian echo.
So I'm just going to say: it's probably not me, the last time I checked, but I'd be happy to be wrong.
[deleted]
And this will no doubt be good for bitcoin, especially in the long run. Pyramids never fall.
Don't underestimate the possibility of Satoshi being an anti-West nation state. They tend to have brainpower lying around, and have an enormous interest in currency systems they cannot be excluded from (see e.g. Russia's Swift ban.)
By retaining the large initial chunk, they keep the origin and rationale secret. They also retain the ability to cherrybomb it as needed. Lastly, if the origin was known, there might be a push to get everyone to agree to invalidate their holdings via a special case.
By retaining the large initial chunk, they keep the origin and rationale secret. They also retain the ability to cherrybomb it as needed. Lastly, if the origin was known, there might be a push to get everyone to agree to invalidate their holdings via a special case.
I like the theory of Steve Jobs being Satoshi better:
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/apple-bi...
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/apple-bi...
The guy that died of actually curable cancer because he believed in some alternative nonsense cure? I cannot think of a single other reason why Apple would be "hiding a bitcoin manifesto in Macs [...] fueling theories that Steve Jobs was Satoshi Nakamoto".
It was a joke, sir
How dare you use creative, nonlinear play in such a stuffy, formal crowd. Off with your head.
> there was a good write-up of this theory by @evan_worlds in 2021
The detailed writeup from 2021 is easily accessible[1]; Len’s Wikipedia page mentions that theory too[2].
[1]: https://evanhatch.medium.com/len-sassaman-and-satoshi-e483c8...
[2]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Sassaman