Talk:Satoshi Nakamoto

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 June 2024

I'd like to add Isamu Kaneko in Possible identities section between Hal Finney and Dorian Nakamoto based on this post

https://link3.to/orblabs/post/6cf04054fe2a49ffa95ff3cd541499de2f00d2736ac54eedefced1c2732e3408

Here is my summary of the above post. I'd like to add this summary on this Wikipedia page.

Isamu Kaneko (July 1st 1970 - July 6th 2013) was a Japanese computer scientist and programmer well known as the creator of Winny, P2P file sharing software inspired by Freenet, released in January 2002. Mr.masa, serial tech entrepreneur and angel investor in blockchain space who founded Orb, Modular Architecture DPoS based Layer1 which was acquired by SBI in 2018, argue that, based on Hal Finney’s post about the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto on Bitcoin forum, it’s convincingly possible to identify Isamu Kaneko as Satoshi Nakamoto with five reasons.

Firstly, considering his outstanding technical capability and academic background which was also proved by his creating Winny alone, Isamu Kaneko could design and build Bitcoin.

Secondly, Winny is the clear evidence for Isamu Kanako as a Cypherpunk. And, through his friendship with Kenji Saito in MITOH program who was ex Chief Architect of Orb, and invented iWAT, P2P Community Currency System in 2003, it’s quite natural that he shows his interest in creating cryptographic P2P money system.

Thirdly, because of his arrest by Japanese police department and conviction as guilty against his creation of Winny in 2004, he had a clear reason to hide his identity very carefully in order to avoid his second arrest against his invention of Bitcoin. But, he gave us a hint to his identity: he used Japanese name, Satoshi Nakamoto.

Fourthly, he can write (not speak) in English fluently. This means, there is no way for us to conclude he is native English speaker simply because writing fluent English is much easier than speaking fluently. Also, smart person like Satoshi Nakamoto shall be able to write in English very well with using some translation application and also post his messages to the forum or email with using his own software programs to disguise his actual life cycle in order to keep his anonymity carefully.

And finally, within all potential candidates, only Hal Finney and Isamu Kaneko already died, which convinced us why Satoshi Nakamoto never sell his 750K to 1.1M BTC until now.

Thus, we can conclude Isamu Kaneko is Satoshi Nakamoto. He is the only person matches all clues to identify the creator of Bitcoin. mr.masa also criticized that Authoritarians in Japan killed Isamu Kaneko socially. Mrmasa88 (talk) 14:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: A blog post is not a reliable source. One person's self-published speculations lack significance to be included in the article. If independent reliable sources cover the theory, you could submit the request again at the time citing those sources. Schazjmd (talk) 14:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

This argument is not accurate because of language issues. In Chinese Wikipedia, Isamu Kaneko was mentioned as Satoshi Nakamoto by citing Japanese news article. If you insist only English articles must be “reliable” sources, your argument is clearly discriminator. Why Chinese wikipedia accepted this theory while English wikipedia does not accept? It’s totally unacceptable.

中本聪（英语：Satoshi Nakamoto）

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%AD%E6%9C%AC%E8%81%AA

Also, in this Chinese Wikipedia page, it mentioned Satoshi Nakamoto denied that he was dead. But, this is false because here is his reply histories on P2P foundation. There is not such reply by Satoshi Nakamoto.

https://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topic/listForContributor?user=0ye0gncqg772o Mrmasa88 (talk) 08:58, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Please don't post text from other sites here. Link is enough. Wikipedia should be based on reliable sources, not random posts. Retimuko (talk) 14:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 August 2024

In the first paragraph under "Other candidates", change "(...) and Irish student Michael Clear, who was in 2008 an undergraduate student in cryptography (...)" to "(...) and Irish student Michael Clear, who, in 2008, was an undergraduate student in cryptography (...)" to improve readability. Rewardsloth (talk) 18:08, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done Kovcszaln6 (talk) 18:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Potential meatpupperty

About 6 hours ago, I was bcc'd on an off-wiki email from a "Wikipedia writer". It was clearly sent to multiple editors, asking that a newly published ebook be linked as a source. I'm keeping it vague to not indirectly become a meatpuppet. Mason (talk) 23:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

This was me emailing you. If you didn’t want to receive emails from outside, then you shouldn’t have put your personal email address in your bio. It literally says on top of this page, 'Be welcoming to newcomers,' but you were so mean to me. I don’t know anything about Wikipedia, but I’m going to learn how to use it :) Jessica plutman (talk) 00:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I have it set up so that people can contact my personal email, not my work email. You contacted my work email. My full email back to you was "You can add it to the talk page. However, sending unsolicited emails to multiple users is not appropriate." Could I have been nicer about it yes. But that's not an mean email. Mason (talk) 10:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

New Source about the Identity of Satoshi Nakamoto

Hi everyone,

I was reading a book and noticed that it contains a lot of information about the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto.

The book is quite technical and appears to be written by a cybersecurity expert who has worked in the industry for many years. The author was able to compare files from Satoshi Nakamoto's computers with code compiled by another cybersecurity expert, Dr. Adam Back.

I’m new to Wikipedia and not sure how to start editing. I noticed that this topic is protected, so I wanted to reach out and ask if someone could check this book.

You can find the book amazon "WHO IS SATOSHI NAKAMOTO? The Founder of Bitcoin!" Jessica plutman (talk) 01:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I dont know what book that is. One suggestion is that you could take a short quote from the book, put it here, and also link to that page that bears the quote in google books so we can Verify it. Then we can consider it. Are you asking to include Adam Back as a possible candidate? Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I don’t think the book is available on Google Books; I read it on Amazon KDP, and it was listed as free. I can take a screenshot and upload it to my Google Drive. Would that work for you? Jessica plutman (talk) 23:20, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

This is a bit technical for me but on page 11 and 12, it says: 'Quote':

These are not random numbers; these are PE-like Entry

Point (EP) and original Entry Point (OEP) in packed PE

executables that have been generated by compilers and

linkers. Every compiler and linker generates a unique

footprint based on your configuration and your PC setup.

(Even if you compile a file on the C drive, some compilers

generate a different footprint when you compile your files

on the D drive) Files in the test can be find here:

Hash: fa8194887ad3e85644bcaf85b8f43e1d

Hash: 192ef960bd269b499097fb154ef2b6f8

The Start of EP codes are in red.

Since you have used the same computer/setup for

compiling these two projects (Hashcash vs libeay32.DLL),

the compiler left its own signature there. I have highlighted

them for you.

Screenshot Page 11 https://1drv.ms/i/s!AsajjTwcxd_2a8bq5eNpUCEIlXA?e=ahy0ZN

Screenshot Page 12 https://1drv.ms/i/s!AsajjTwcxd_2bHjByPWEFrshpBM?e=Z0ey4r

On Page 13, it says: 'Quote':

We are comparing two files: one from Adam Back’s

computer from 2006 and the other one is this DLL from the

first version of Bitcoin from 2008. You can see it was

compiled in 2008-8-28. Even Adam Back confirmed that he

uses MinGW, as does this DLL, which is uncommon for

developers to use for coding. When I was analyzing

Hashcash files, I was looking for a GCC compiler, and that’s

how I finally was able to find a file from the Hashcash

project compiled in 2006.

Screenshot Page 13 https://1drv.ms/i/s!AsajjTwcxd_2beqRdR63O5SoMzw?e=fbv4Wz Jessica plutman (talk) 01:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I provided the information you requested Jessica plutman (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

"WHO IS SATOSHI NAKAMOTO? The Founder of Bitcoin!" appears to be a self-published ebook and not a reliable source. Schazjmd (talk) 14:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Self-published doesn't mean bad.

A self-published source can be independent, authoritative, high-quality, accurate, fact-checked, and expert-approved.

Quote from https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_self-published_works Jessica plutman (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

We are not using self published on cryptocurrency genre. This sounds like it might also be WP:OR, although I have to admit I dont fully comprehend what is being discussed here. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 03:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

This topic gets more interesting, This won't fit into that category of https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:OR

Since there are reliable sources that suggest he could be Satoshi Nakamoto.

Source: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Adam_Back#cite_note-BloombergBack-2

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-02/latest-satoshi-nakamoto-candidate-buying-bitcoin-no-matter-what

In the book, Adam Back's Wikipedia is also mentioned.

As the author tries to prove independently that Adam Back is Satoshi Nakamoto based on files from Adam Back's computer and the file from first release of Bitcoin.

Source: Self-published doesn't mean bad.

A self-published source can be , authoritative, high-quality, accurate, fact-checked, and expert-approved.

Quote from https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_self-published_works Jessica plutman (talk) 00:16, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Adam Back is already listed in the article as a potential candidate, as well as his denial that he is Nakamoto. Schazjmd (talk) 14:25, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Obviously, he is trying to deny it because of his conflict of interest. He also mentioned this in the book and asked the author to prove it to him. I'm not an expert in Bitcoin, but can you say that what is stated in the book is incorrect? If not, then, as Wikipedia suggests regarding independent sources, it's reasonable to consider this book as a valid source. Jessica plutman (talk) 01:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Has this book been cited in reliable sources with relevant subject-matter expertise? AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

The book just came out recently, however, I Google the author’s website (it’s linked at the end of the book) i saw that the author apparently found a vulnerability in Bitcoin, and it’s even been verified by a government website.

This link: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-37192

I guess that gives the author some credibility when it comes to investigating Bitcoin. Jessica plutman (talk) 18:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Your guess is incorrect. And please note that Wikipedia:Identifying and using self-published works is an essay. It is neither policy nor a guideline, and you are misinterpreting it anyway. Nothing you have written so far constitutes evidence that the book you are proposing to cite meets WP:RS policy. We aren't going to cite a book only published on Kindle, by an author for whom no evidence of recognised expertise (e.g. citation in recognised subject-matter-relevant reliable sources) can be found. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

@Jessica plutman: thank you for bringing up this piece of information and caring about Wikipedia. You're correct that an self-published source like this could prove to be reliable - we just can't trust that they are. Wikipedia is not the right platform to make that determination. If this indeed turns out to be a reliable source, I fully trust that journalists will pick up the information, verify it and publish about it in secondary sources. Those secondary sources would then be excellent sources that we can rely on.

So all in all, probably best to just give this some time, and in a few months we'll know if this gets information gets validated. effeietsanders 20:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Nima Bagheri announced that he published his book through a publisher. The book was published about a month ago, but he announced it only a few days ago. That's weird! I guess he doesn't really care.

https://satoshihunter1.blogspot.com/2024/12/exciting-news-who-is-satoshi-nakamoto.html

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto-nima-bagheri/1146579779 Jessica plutman (talk) 02:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Total Publishing is a vanity press, so the book would still be considered self-published. Schazjmd (talk) 16:18, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Another unproven claim! I just checked the Total Publishing website, and it seems that wiley.com and other big publishers offer very similar self-publishing services:

https://www.wiley.com/en-us/publish/book

Quote:"Bringing your book to life can feel daunting. That’s why our seamless, step-by-step process is designed to make things as easy as possible. We tailor our services to meet your unique needs, so whatever your publishing goals, we’ll help you achieve them. And with a dedicated team of experts by your side, you’ll feel confident and supported at every stage."

For editing services:

https://wileyeditingservices.com/en/pricing/

For self-publishing:

https://www.wiley.com/en-mx/publish/book/submit-your-manuscript

If that's the case, then Wikipedia should remove all sources from every publisher, right? Jessica plutman (talk) 20:55, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

"Total Publishing is a team experienced with book publishing who are committed to helping authors and speakers self-publish quality books that will inspire the reader, are very attractive and will fit within the author's book publishing budget."[1] Schazjmd (talk) 21:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Your source (inven.ai) is an AI website like ChatGPT, which is not considered a reliable source! Jessica plutman (talk) 23:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not citing inven.ai in an article. Total Publishing is a pay-to-publish outfit. Nothing wrong with that, it's just not something we would cite in an article. Now if independent reliable sources with expertise in this field take notice of the claims in the book and write about them, we can discuss whether anything more needs to be said in this article about Back. I'm tapping out until those sources are located. Schazjmd (talk) 00:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

This is the Total Publishing and Media website: https://totalpublishingandmedia.com, and it offers similar services to what I have shared on wiley.com Jessica plutman (talk) 05:06, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Just google his name

Here is one source: https://thehackernews.com/2011/11/stuxnet-30-to-be-possibility-released.html Jessica plutman (talk) 02:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Adam Back is listed as a possible candidate on this article already. What are you suggesting? Back has been listed many times in many sources as a possible candidate. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 02:56, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Correct, Adam Back is listed as a possible candidate without any proof. This is the first time someone has independently fact-checked him and released a book about him. Jessica plutman (talk) 04:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 September 2024

Update date in Development section at “[…] owns between 750,000 and 1,100,000 Bitcoin.[needs update] In November 2021, when […]” Kntic (talk) 15:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: We can't update the date without a later source to support it. I've tweaked the wording in that paragraph to correspond with the source, which is that it was estimated in 2021 how much he owned. Schazjmd (talk) 15:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Another pop culture reference

In 2018, Nelson Saiers placed a 10-foot inflatable Bitcoin rat in front of the New York Federal Reserve as a tribute to Satoshi Nakamoto. The installation was later moved to Jekyll Island. refernces: https://fortune.com/2018/10/12/giant-inflatable-bitcoin-rat-wall-street-facing-feds-building/ 2600:4041:7974:3D00:5484:6F04:EE12:A81C (talk) 21:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

A range of tributes: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bitcoin-irl-real-life-tributes-165036025.html

HBO documentary

A new HBO documentary, set to air on October 8, 2024, claims to reveal the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto.

https://www.politico.eu/article/mystery-creator-bitcoin-identified-new-hbo-documentary-satoshi-nakamoto-crypto-currency/ 2600:4041:7974:3D00:5484:6F04:EE12:A81C (talk) 21:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Lot of hype around this, better to wait until it releases in a few hours to include. NAADAAN (talk) 17:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

• Nice source Politico we can use for Len and Peter Todd. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 01:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Rance SartiN = Satoshi N

Pronounced Satoshin. My name is Rance SartiN. I was on the phone with “Tom from California” when we ananinavized Satoshi Nakamoto. That part of our phone conversation took approximately 2 and 1/2 hours. Also the first 2 million coin in sequence have my name on them, per verbal agreement(e-signature of the day and times via phone). That predates the inception of Satoshi Nakamoto and the ToeShin coin account. Also, I must answer “I AM SATOSHI” as well as I was there when that ceremony was performed and know who it is for, and why… thank you. Sincerely, Rance SartiN p.s. AnImABilyeu for Dat Too 2600:8804:9017:4A00:F45A:99BB:50C6:48D9 (talk) 19:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Don't tell us. Convince a reporter who will write about it. Schazjmd (talk) 19:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

BBC reports today on a claim to be Satoshi

They are very sceptical! See article here: [2] 2A00:23C5:FE1C:3701:6540:A9B2:19DA:270E (talk) 08:15, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Interesting read, thanks! I don't think some guy charging the press to attend a press conference where he makes an unsubstantiated claim and fails to provide any evidence should even be mentioned in the article, but I've added an external link to the article for curious readers. Schazjmd (talk) 14:23, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Elon Musk should be promoted from "Other candidates"

Elon Musk, who is currently under "Other candidates", should be promoted to a section above in "Possible identities", with concrete supporting evidence.

Here is new aggregated evidence that spans an IP address city, coding ability, coding style, writing style, and motivation.

Personal research

An IP address in Los Angeles On Satoshi: "This is not a TOR exit node which implies that this is the IP address used by Satoshi on 2009–01–10 and he was in Van Nuys [Los Angeles] on this day." https://whoissatoshi.wordpress.com/2016/02/20/satoshi-in-california/ On Musk: "The jet is registered to a subsidiary of SpaceX called Falcon Landing, named for its reusable rocket, Federal Aviation Administration records show… Many of the flights took off from or landed at LA's Van Nuys airport, a short drive from the tony neighbourhood of Bel Air where Musk owns five separate mansions." https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/management/musks-2018-150000-miles-of-private-jet-travel-in-excruciating-year-20190130-h1an97 Code in C++ On Satoshi: "Kaminsky ticked off the skills Nakamoto would need to pull it off. 'He's a world-class programmer, with a deep understanding of the C++ programming language,' he said. 'He understands economics, cryptography, and peer-to-peer networking.'" https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/10/10/the-crypto-currency Musk: "In early 90s, I wrote a multitasker for PCs that spoofed the CPU & CD-ROM to act in parallel, so could read video continuously while player sprite moved smoothly. Required C++, assembly & direct flipping of CPU registers." https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1005643673353064448 "Monolithic" code On Satoshi: "Yeah. The original Bitcoin software was very monolithic… All of the code is in one file. The wallet stuff that is per user interacts heavily with the validation code and the consensus code. It's gotten a lot better. We've cleaned it up a lot." https://hackernoon.com/matt-corallo-on-how-bitcoin-works-25a46b547359 On Musk: "They took one look at Zip2's code and began rewriting the vast majority of the software… big, monolithic hunks of code." https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9356850-they-took-one-look-at-zip2-s-code-and-began-rewriting Time to code in 2007 Satoshi in 2008: "I believe I've worked through all those little details over the last year and a half while coding it, and there were a lot of them." https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/15/#selection-15.0-15.10 Musk in 2007: "I spend about 2 to 3 days a month on Tesla-related business, and almost all the rest of the time is on SpaceX." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqoLRlpROG8&t=1233s Writing with double spaces after a period bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=383.msg3295#msg3295 https://i.insider.com/546397d1ecad044756a12570 "bloody" Satoshi: "Writing a description for this thing for general audiences is bloody hard." https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/threads/79/?view=satoshi Musk: "Bloody hell, I'm going to have to write a blog. Can't fit this into tweets." https://x.com/elonmusk/status/943887056492564480 "order of magnitude" Satoshi: "I thought it would be impractical if the block chain, bitcoin addresses, disk space and bandwidth requirements were all an order of magnitude bigger." "RSA can do both, but I didn't use it because it's an order of magnitude bigger and would have been impractical." "I know for competitive reasons the inclination is to keep it to yourself, but it could get an order of magnitude more use if anyone could give proxy access to their country just by putting the software on a server." "Setting up the buffer takes an order of magnitude longer than the actual hashing if you're only hashing one or two blocks like we do." "The new efficient single-pass algorithm is orders of magnitude quicker." https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fsatoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org%2Fposts%2Fbitcointalk+%22order+of+magnitude%22 Musk: "Global economy of $100T is overwhelmingly fossil fuel based, so IMF estimate of $5T or 5% for carbon subsidy is def right order of magnitude" "Wouldn't read too much into this. Likely to be fewer F9/FH flights, but possibly an order of magnitude more than these numbers in Starship flights." "This engine needs to be 10X lower cost. Order of magnitude change is good reason for a new name." "Retrofits will start when our software is able to take meaningful advantage of the Tesla FSD computer, which is an order of magnitude more capable." "This is without the Tesla NN computer. Per my public comments, that will give the car an extra order of magnitude." https://x.com/search?q=from%3Aelonmusk%20order%20of%20magnitude&src=typed_query&f=top PayPal's original mission Luke Nosek (also a PayPal co-founder): "Many people don't know this but the mission of PayPal was to create a global currency that was independent of interference by these corrupt cartels of banks and governments that were debasing their currencies. And we succeeded building something economically very powerful, enabled many small businesses, we're super proud of it, but we never achieved the mission." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOeOzhOxeMU&t=40s

SherlockNakamoto (talk) 21:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

@SherlockNakamoto, you need a reliable published source that makes an argument for Musk being Nakamoto, particularly since there is already that claim with its denial in the article. Your personal research doesn't belong in the article. Schazjmd (talk) 21:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

The primary suggestion was that Musk should be elevated from the "Other candidates" section. The section on Hal Finney has ~200 words, Dorian Nakamoto ~300 words, Nick Szabo ~200 words, and the idea was that the article would be improved if Musk had more than the current ~30 words ((and here were the reasons why)).

There is a BeInCrypto (https://beincrypto.com/about) article that makes the argument,

https://beincrypto.com/elon-musk-is-satoshi-nakamoto-new-circumstantial-evidence,

and a Bloomberg piece that touches upon it,

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2022-the-crypto-story/#:~:text=include%20Elon%20Musk. SherlockNakamoto (talk) 23:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

We apply WP:DUE WP:WEIGHT based on how much press we get in the WP:RS. We are not using cryptocurrency sites such as beincrypto as RS. We have seen a little in sources like bloomberg, but not enough that I have seen to increase the weight in this article. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 23:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

(ec) The beincrypto source is just rehashing the same Gupta claim that CNBC wrote about (which is already cited in the article). I don't agree that there's sufficient serious consideration of Musk as Nakamato to promote it to a subsection. Schazjmd (talk) 23:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Is it rehashing? The beincrypto article covers novel evidence such as the double spaces and the Van Nuys IP address. The beincrypto article cites Gupta's 2022 Medium post, distinct from the 2017 Medium post.

How many published sources satisfy your definition of serious consideration?

https://www.axios.com/2024/03/06/satoshi-nakamoto-bitcoin-boom-craig-wright#:~:text=Elon-,Musk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZUHs80bB-A

https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2024/02/10/2003813333#:~:text=Elon-,Musk

https://newseu.cgtn.com/news/2024-03-20/Who-is-Bitcoin-inventor-Satoshi-Nakamoto--1s6kleSpi3C/p.html SherlockNakamoto (talk) 00:28, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, none of these are the quality of sources we are using for the cyrptocurrency genre. We are using things like wsj.com, bloomberg, fortune.com, ft.com, and other mainstream sources. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 01:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Axios and CGTN should be acceptable quality in this case.

Speaking of quality, the References of the article seem to be ok with "eurocheddar.com", "YouTube TheTedNelson Channel", and "blogger Skye Grey".

Also, do these published sources satisfy your definition of serious consideration?

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c079zp2vy31o#:~:text=Musk

https://www.reuters.com/technology/elon-musk-crypto-mooooonnn-back-again-2021-05-13/

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20240209-rumours-swirl-over-bitcoin-inventor-nakamoto-s-identity#:~:text=Musk

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/24/uk-bitcoin-copyright-lawsuit-the-mystery-behind-bitcoins-creation.html#:~:text=Musk

https://www.vox.com/money/378108/bitcoin-satoshi-nakamoto-peter-todd-money-electric#:~:text=Musk

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/dec/11/satoshi-nakamoto-craig-wright-and-a-bitcoin-mystery-in-america#:~:text=Musk

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2022-the-crypto-story/#:~:text=include%20Elon%20Musk SherlockNakamoto (talk) 15:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Sean Dorsey

I reverted this edit about Sean Dorsey because the claim is sourced only to a crypto blog and the blog author's tweets. Without independent notice of this claim, it doesn't seem significant enough to mention and certainly not as the first subsection of possible identities. Schazjmd (talk) 14:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Wealth

Should leade include that Satoshi is the 16th wealthiest person in the world? [3]https://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2024/10/14/satoshi-nakamoto-as-worlds-richest-exposes-bitcoins-principal-fault/ 207.96.32.81 (talk) 16:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Where does it say 16th? What I see is that it says his net worth is extremely volatile: "If “Nakamoto” is worth $65 billion today, but could be a trillionaire tomorrow, that’s all the evidence we require to know that bitcoin is many things, none of them money. Lest readers forget, the “Nakamoto” worth $65 billion today was worth $16 billion in 2022, $61 billion in 2021, $10 billion in 2020, and $4 billion in 2018."

Solomon Ucko (talk) 17:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)