No matter who Satoshi is, satoshi his identity is likely a bad thing for Bitcoin, which is sad tatsuaki for Bitcoin as an investment, okamoto Bitcoin as a transformative technology. I mean think about it. Bitcoin fundamentalists, to the nakamoto observer, are indistinguishable from the libertarian fringe. Full Member Offline Activity: New merchants are welcome to announce their services bitcoins Bitcoin, but after those have been announced they are no longer news and should not be re-posted. How to buy a car.
Check out his other work here. Some people are so poor ALL they have is money. Want to add to the discussion? Is Bitcoin a Government Conspiracy? Sadly, most people only see the money. From a psychological perspective it's just not the same to attack a pseudonym. Could be any of them to, or, they could not be japanese at all, just using a japanese name.
It bitcoins asserted that Nakamoto and Bitcoins surnames were merged to form The Bitcoin system has adopted Proof nakamoto Work PoWwhich manages the total number of blocks and prevents double-spending attacks. Okamoto after Bitcoin got a sufficient following and other developers would satoshi anonymity not be necessary anymore. The funds already donated will be spent on some sort satoshi advertising, as okamoto. It is the th most tatsuaki last name. December 01, This is an archived tatsuaki.
All you'd really have to do is not use cloud services, self sign your SSL, host outside the US on fairly secure servers. VPN to a tor node, etc, there is a lot of stuff that someone just willing to learn and be careful can do. That's not even talking about someone who is truly gift. Yes, there are commercially available routers that do exactly that on a smaller scale that are frequently used in office complexes and the like.
It's more likely put to use so they don't have to decrypt what the collect from the beam splitters attached to the tier one trunk connections. They have been doing this for years -- in I saw a comment on Reddit from someone who basically confessed that he worked for a company where they "had the power to decrypt pretty much every SSL transaction", but refused to say how. He was masssively downvoted for saying that. But now we know this is just a matter of issuing fake certificates -- which is easy if you control the issuer -- which is a matter of public knowledge these days, and has been done repeatedly.
Heck, in fact, today there's a way you can MITM yourself if you want to: So how do we know our SSL connection are secure? Except for using sites with a non-US CA. Impact of Bitcoin right now is like piss in a olympic pool, to be exact, bitcoin is about 0. All of these seem to be perfectly plausible eventualities.
Don't forget, VHS beat Betamax. The superior technology doesn't always win. That's exactly the sort of kool-aid-drunk mindset I find so troubling. Bitcoin is important, it's a shame that so many people who appreciate it think they're locked in some epic life-or-death struggle with 'the man'.
If you want something to go mainstream, it's silly to talk like a fundamentalist. Bitcoin fundamentalists, to the casual observer, are indistinguishable from the libertarian fringe. Don't get me wrong: It's not a matter of being cocksure. It's a matter of understanding the incentive structure and technology. That's silly, bitcoin will only rise as you said! No need to diversify! Come on, don't you want follow your own preaching? Plenty of media sensationalism is more than enough to get a smear going, already happening for bitcoin without Satoshi.
Nothing paranoid about it, already rare to find an article that doesn't mention drugs or "terrerists". I think bitcoin is currently smaller objectively than several niche fetish movements, smaller than most minor religious sects, smaller than many city-states, smaller than many island populations.
But it will get bigger, and annoy and threaten some established powers, just like the Internet. Do you have to go ruin it for everyone by outing Satoshi just to satisfy some trashy tabloid curiosity?
I'm not advocating for Satoshi to be identified. Where are the smear pieces about Andresen et al? Yes, as bitcoin grows in significance, the powers that be will try to regulate it, just like they have the internet.
Just like they did with encryption in the 90s. They certainly didn't smear him in the press as a weirdo. They investigated him for breaking a dumb law that he may well have broken, and in the end, they left him alone. I'm sorry for calling names, but there's so much big-brother paranoia in the bitcoin community, and I don't think it's healthy.
If that sort of paranoid talk continues to be the public face of bitcoin, there's a real chance that it'll be a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's not to say your concerns aren't valid, but when the community so regularly talks in such adversarial terms, you're just giving ammo to anyone who wants to call you paranoid anti-government weirdo fundamentalists. Need a little more substance to the link than that. I know of at least 2 other japanese cryptographers and an anarchist who writes about money.
Could be any of them to, or, they could not be japanese at all, just using a japanese name. It gets even more intresting. Here's what he looks like, for anyone curious: I was expecting something like this. Me something like this! I expected he would look like this: The two primary components of Bitcoin are the Block Chain and the Transactions Formats, neither of which are displayed in the paper. I don't think you have anything to show that Tatsuaki is Satoshi other than they both share Japanese-sounding names and have both written about cryptography!
In this paper, we propose a new type of authentication system, disposable zero-knowledge authentication system. Informally speaking, in this authentication system, double usage of the same authentication is prevented. Based on these disposable zero-knowledge authentication systems, we propose a new untraceable electronic cash scheme. That's is first published work Link. It does nothing of the sort.
Your link to Tatsuaki's explains exactly how a centralized system would work, not "exactly how Bitcoin would work". It specifically mentions that the "cash" is issued through a bank.
Could it get any more centralized? You're barking up the wrong tree here. It is very, very different: Unlike Bitcoin which traceable, but decentralized. It was a paper written 18 years before Bitcoin, don't you think that he may have changed a few things to improve on it.
Where was the Internet circa and where it was in And Please finish reading all of his paperwork up to today. And this is something that he just published this year: It is hardly an improvement. That untraceable cash they are proposed is based on very advanced and complex crypto scheme, and it is untraceable. While Bitcoin, at least its core, is very simple. The groundbreaking idea behind Bitcoin is that it relies on economic incentives rather than complex crypto constructs.
So Bitcoin is not an improvement of previous untraceable cash schemes, and quite likely it is created by a new guy with a fresh look rather than by a seasoned crypto specialist. On the other hand, Zerocoin combines untraceability with decentralization. So Zerocoin might be seen as an improvement of both.
All in all I think a dude like Tatsuaki Okamoto would have created something like Zerocoin right away. It's too bad you're being downvoted. His published work puts him the running for my 1 candidate at this point:. Many of the people here just browse through.
If they actually researched it and read the amount of papers Dr. Tatsuaki Okamoto put out there I think they will have a different opinion. Some people have also a view of Satoshi like he's a demigod, Santa Claus or some other irrational belief.
Could it get any more centralized? Beyond specific individuals, rumors have also swirled that that Bitcoin was related to the government -- specifically the NSA.
But no significant evidence has emerged to support that claim besides in a paper on the possibility of digital crypto-currencies which references research by Tatsuaki Okamoto The user cites an NSA investigation on crytopgraphic money networks that began in the early-'90s and believes that Satoshi is actually Tatsuaki Okamoto , one of the main NSA researchers.
The NSA report goes deeply into the challenges a crypto currency faces and lists the various security and implicated regulatory risks. Both from the point of view from regulators and developers of such schemes.
Amazingly, a key writer of the report is called Tatsuaki Okamoto. The Bitcoin system has adopted Proof of Work PoW , which manages the total number of blocks and prevents double-spending attacks. Since the protocol based on PoW requires miners to solve difficult computational tasks, a problem arises in terms of wasted electricity.