I had originally thought that Hal Finney was Satoshi, though after reading all of this information recently as well from other sources (and now seeing this one pop up too), there is quite a lot of compelling information to support that Jack just might be Satoshi - though on the other side, a lot of this information needs more proof. It seems like a lot of coincidences, and majority of them could be fabricated.

I find this one particularly interesting (they all are though this one specifically)

Are there any threads about this?


There's no harm in wanting to know or understand who created the very thing that has bought us all together. It's not pointless, it's discovery.

Floating the idea that Jack Dorsey could be Satoshi Nakamoto is the Dunning-Kreuger effect at work. Meaning, you would only think Jack Dorsey could possibly be Satoshi if you didn't understand enough about cryptography to know that you know almost nothing about cryptography.

Its true Dorsey guided teams that did cryptography-related things, but there's no way he's Satoshi, who demonstrated a thoroughly profound knowledge of the subject, probably shared by less than a hundred people in the entire world at the time.

As far as I know these emails address Satoshi leaving, but they don't actually address the reappearance I quoted:

Where is the source that in 2015, Satoshi reappeared "on the bitcoin mailing list to address the bitcoin block size debates"?

This is probably one of the the most important facts which I can't find any source on, as it debunks that Hal was Satoshi, as he passed in 2014 (rest in peace).

It'd be very good for the audience (and myself) if the OP was sourced to whatever source is possible. That'd make this thread a whole lot more credible and interesting. Not to mention, it would help to distinguish from what is fact from what is created commentary, as it's hard to distinguish between the two currently.

Any help appreciated as I'm somewhat well informed on these topics and would personally like to be able to measure the legitimacy of what is (to me) a bunch of dot points with hardly any sources that is being pushed on mainstream media by a social media conglomerate...

It's a search that won't end till Bitcoin exists 

Nitpicks are what theories are being built on.
Just like with any other mystery that cannot be proven by more foolproof facts.

Whether it's true or not, we will never know. It's most likely to become a puzzle to be talked about, and what I like about this is it can bring exposure to Bitcoin again, and it's a positive thing, in my opinion. There's no end goal to this, even if it's true or not; the matter of it is that Bitcoin is here. There are a lot of controversies about being Satoshi, and I don't think you want to be him and expose yourself.

On the contrary, Satoshi's going into the shadows only made BTC truly decentralized, and whether he left because he had the intention to do so from the beginning or just listened to what some of his associates thought about him pulling all the strings is up to question. I think an accidental or intentional return would have bad consequences for BTC, especially since many are afraid of what Satoshi might do with all those coins he mined.

I personally dislike Satoshi Nakamoto identity hunts because I see them as useless for Bitcoin and even harmful. I think it's better if identity of Satoshi Nakamoto will be in secret forever, and I don't have need to know the identity at all.

I guess they are not Bitcoin investors, miners or traders and they are very likely Bitcoin outsiders and they dislike, even hate Bitcoin and want Bitcoin to fall down, collapse or die.

They are people who made many "Bitcoin is dead" fuds.
https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/

Jack Dorsey is a beast if he really is Satoshi and walks around with a shirt that says Satoshi all day. I mean I guess he fits a lot of these time slots but honestly there's no way he is Satoshi. Satoshi was probably Hal Finney and passed away and never got to see his Brian child grow up, which is very sad indeed if that is the case, maybe the likliest possibility and I think a lot of people would agree...

Thanks for that. I remember reading discussions about the vistomail email being hijacked at some stage, though I was not aware of official emalis from Satoshi himself, re-appearing to chime in on the block debate. If the sender was the same Satoshi, that debunks the theory that Hal Finney was Satoshi. Our bs aside, do you think the vistomail email was the original Satoshi? Honestly would like to know your opinion as I have always been convinced on Hal being the most likely satoshi.


I actually appreciate this post.

You're a roller coaster of emotions for me nutildah...lol.