Hacker News Reader

Comment by Timja | Hacker News Reader

I think there is some systematic reason why people like Satoshi, Buckethead, Banksy, etc are not uncovered.

In each case, I doubt that it really is hard to figure out who they are.

Maybe it is the way the press and social media work. You get as many clicks for a wild theory as you get for a properly researched opinion.

As for Satoshi Nakamoto: The most obvious candidate seems to be Adam Back. His invention of proof of work, his biography, character, writing style and role as the CEO of the company behind the main wallet software all point to him. Also, his current communication "Bitcoin looks like something that was discovered rather than invented". That's something a creator typically says about a particularly great piece of work they did. Are there any arguments why he might not be the inventor of Bitcoin?

View on HN

> As for Satoshi Nakamoto: The most obvious candidate seems to be Adam Back. His invention of proof of work, his biography, character, writing style and role as the CEO of the company behind the main wallet software all point to him.

Adam Back is obviously not Satoshi.

His level of writing or thinking is not even close to the level of Satoshi.

When asked what people should pay with when fees were high and Lightning Network wasn't complete, he seriously suggested people should just use tabs:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DHc81OL_hk4&feature=youtu.be&t...

This and other brainfarts... No way that he's Satoshi and people need to stop suggesting it.

The question asked on that video does not mention lightning.

But his answer begins by explaining lightning.

Back early on forsaw that lightning is the way forward and not larger blocks. Which is another indication to me, that he is indeed Nakamoto.

It was a great insight very much in line with Nakamoto's thinking. Nakamoto who forsaw so many things early on like the need for a script instead of just transaction data on the chain.

Satoshi was for raising the blocksize:

> It can be phased in, like: if (blocknumber > 115000) maxblocksize = largerlimit It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don’t have it are already obsolete.

Given that lightning still has shit UX without relying on third parties should be proof enough that it was and still is a terrible idea to rely on for Bitcoins usability.

Before lightning was a thing, he anticipated the block size would increase over time. And he changed his mind when the idea of level 2 came up. Which was the right thing to do. But hard to understand at that time.

UX is a problem throughout all crypto. No matter which coin, no matter L1 or L2. It's all still like the internet before the 90s.

He sure changed his mind!

From a revolutionary new form of money, to suggesting people should develop their own app for tabs...

Meanwhile, in actual 2023, Bitcoin once again has bloated mempool and high transaction fees while big block Bitcoin cash is clearing regularly.

I think we have enough real history at this point to dismiss the notion that "lightning is the way forward" in an absolute, concrete and not theoretical way.

Entries on a blockchain are auctioned of in an auction which allow arbitrarely low bids. So it is to expected that there is a long tail of bids with a low chance to win.

If a mempool clears, that just means there is limited demand to use the chain, even for free.

> he seriously suggested people should just use tabs

Why is this a "brainfart"? It does not seem like a horrible recommendation to me, especially for someone who needed a solution "today" in 2017.

Because cryptocurrencies were already working.

"Use another cryptocurrency" would be a much better recommendation that would solve the problem much better than tabs.

The reason why Bitcoin stopped working well was because Adam Back and others were actively sabotaging it's ability to cope with demand, and instead pushing people towards other solutions.

Those solutions were nowhere near ready, so the best Adam could come up with (except admitting they were wrong) was Tabs.

So yeah, instead of a brainfart it could just be malicious behavior.

Not to mention that he is a bit of a self-promoter. I am sure he would take credit for Bitcoin if he could.

He has already tried to do that in his Twitter bio (that he removed) where he claimed that Bitcoin was just hashcash with inflation control.

And he also dismissed Bitcoin initially.

Wouldn't the real Satoshi do everything in their power to throw people off the scent?

I don't know about the others, but Banksy has been uncovered. It's Robin Gunningham. People still like to say it's "unconfirmed" and "a rumour" but if you look at the evidence there is no real doubt.

So I guess part of the reason is that people love the mystery so much, as long as the suspect doesn't come out and say "yes it's me" then they'll just hang on to the mystery. To be honest even if Gunningham said "I am Banksy" I suspect people would still say "but is he really? Nobody knows!"

Wikipedia says "Banksy is a pseudonymous England-based street artist, political activist and film director whose real name and identity remain unconfirmed and the subject of speculation."

> People still like to say it's "unconfirmed" and "a rumour"

Isn’t it mean to uncover someone who wishes to remain anonymous and is doing no harm?

Uncovering their identity is just vandalism.

You should not repeatedly present the world with a mystery and not expect to attempt to solve it,

Just seems like it would be kinder to leave them in peace. If they wanted to be known they could easily have said so.

There’s a court case banksy is fighting with some store owner and thats also confirmed his name.

Is there another Buckethead that I'm not aware of, because the one that I'm thinking of has a pretty well-established identity.

Oh, interesting. So he only keeps his face secret, not his identity?

I remember reading an interview with Ozzy Osbourne who said he refused to work with Buckethead because it spooked him that BH always kept a mask on, even when they talked in private.

You can also find some pictures of his face on Google if you just search his name. I'd say Buckethead is closer to Thomas Bangalter and Guy-Manuel de Homem-Christo than he is to Banksy.

He did an interview a while ago

it's worth remembering that interviews of a popular artist like ozzy ozbourne are almost entirely about publicity

>systematic reason why people like Satoshi, Buckethead, Banksy, etc are not uncovered.

With Satoshi and Banksy it's not so hard to figure out but given that they both want anonymity, informed people tend not to say. Meanwhile random idiots post all sorts of stuff, some right, some wrong.

All three of them are uncovered, just not officially. But many do know their identities.

Even Staoshi? I know that a lot of people know who Banksy and Buckethead are, but I don't know that people know who Satoshi is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com