One of the funniest thing about bitcoin is how its creator just hides in the shadow, like he knows bitcoin is not really something he advocates, but just a technology.
What's interesting about bitcoin is its blockchain algorithm, nothing else.
What's interesting about bitcoin is its blockchain algorithm, nothing else.
Satoshi was simply a single point of failure, some obvious element of the system that could be attacked, especially knowing how many Bitcoin this person amassed.
When Satoshi left, Bitcoin became that little bit more decentralised, as others had to take on the lead development role and the community had to allow others to take the lead.
All the decisions about Bitcoin's future with regard to technical issues is now heavily debated, if Satoshi were still here there might not be a debate, just a decision.
Most of us in the community agree that Satoshi's departure was for the good of Bitcoin.
> the lead
The lead of what ? He's certainly the most knowledgeable person about bitcoin. Anybody could invent another virtual currency algorithm now.
> Most of us in the community agree that Satoshi's departure was for the good of Bitcoin.
A majority can still be wrong though.
That's false. There are several persons who are way more knowledgeable than him now (assuming he hasn't been following the developments since he disappeared).
You know exactly WHO you are blaming, and that it was a WHO question to ask, not a WHAT. To be crystal clear, you are stating the 'creator' of Bitcoin is 'hiding' and that, because of the fact he is 'hiding', he doesn't advocate it. Frankly, that's saying a lot (i.e. a blaming statement) about somebody you don't (and can't) know. It's also technically an ad hominem argument, which is a trust hacking mechanism.
Which you know already. <--- That's a blaming statement, BTW.
> What matters?
Not asking leading questions, for one thing.