pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @DarthCoin 21 Oct 2023 \ parent \ on: Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto bitcoin
Again, don't focus on Lopp... that's not the point.
Okay, so not Lopp.
Hal was curious about mining and carbon emissions. So he might be used as an argument against PoW..? Naa.. too weak.
Excluding Hal decreases the anonymity-set by 1 and is therefore an attack on Bitcoin. What motivated anyone to spend months attempting this, and then writing about it.. just to milk engagement?
Publishing it now instead of at least waiting a few decades does not indicate the writer coming from the best of hearts. Similarly to how Wikileaks were jeopardizing the project by accepting BTC so soon.
Whoever was behind Satoshi may still be alive, but may have been corrupted or moved on ideologically.. hence Satoshi is as good as dead, and resurrecting him through narrowing down which meatbag hosted him is facilitating attacks.
Hot or cold?
reply
No. Is just noise, to keep you busy making useless assumptions around this subject.
reply
I agree content around who Satoshi was/is is at best a distraction (noise) from moving Bitcoin forward. Is that the simple point you were trying to make all along?
Doesn't exactly match "The problem today is businesses wanting to stop Bitcoin from changing in ways that obsolete their business model."
reply
noise is also part of a manipulation... to move people attention into a specific direction.
Why now, why this "idea", why by Lopp and not some shity "news" site?
Are many questions to answer, but people instead are focusing on the garbage inside the article. people love to debate this garbage for nothing.
reply
If we can be conscious of it we can easily use noise in our favour... YES, and our adversaries are at this level, so we should surpass them with these techniques if the playing field does not change.
reply
You accused me of not paying attention to "details".. that threw me off. "Circumstances" might have helped me not get too derailed. 🙂
reply