Todd’s urgent dismissal of the documentary reads to Hoback like an attempt to throw Satoshi-hunters off the scent. “It doesn’t surprise me at all that Peter would go on the offense. He’s a master of game theory—it’s what he does. He has spent a lot of years now muddying the waters,” says Hoback. “He’s an unbelievable genius.”

I haven’t seen the docu, but I did like his (Hoback’s) docu about Qanon, Q: Into the Storm.

  • SelfProgrammed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    1 month ago

    Unless somebody can “predict” (e.g. announce before executing) movement of coins from verified Satoshi wallets, I won’t believe any of these unmaskings.

    I would love to know who Satoshi is, but that level of proof would require a willing Satoshi and they (singular or plural) appear to not be up for that.

    • RatherBeMTB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      There is an easier way, just sign something with Satoshi’s private key and no one will have a doubt that you are Satoshi. No need for all this ridiculous drama.

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Technically that’s the same thing. Both are signatures with a private key.

        • RatherBeMTB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Agreed, except that moving coins costs money while signing something with the private key doesn’t.

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Both actions would cost billions more than any amount they would move or a signed transaction.

            The price would crash knowing those coins were back in play.

            It’d be a huge influx of potential coins considered to be lost.

            • olympicyes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              That’s not accurate. Any serious investor would assume the coins still exist and could be moved. Selling the coins would roil the markets but that’s no different than if someone with a majority stake in a stock (eg DJT) were to dump their shares.

              • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Any serious investor would be estimating how many other people are not serious investors, and understand that those unserious people would swing the price.

                There’s no value to bitcoin except people’s expectations.

                • olympicyes@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  You’re not wrong but in general prices are moved by market makers who are trading large quantities. I can imagine assuming that the guy who invented bitcoin and went to such lengths to conceal his identity would not have access to his coins.

    • Modva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      Has there been any movement from those wallets in the years since Satoshi went dark?