Posted on 04/08/2026 4:32:55 AM PDT by dennisw
Ever since the unveiling of Bitcoin on Halloween 2008, the true inventor behind the revolutionary digital currency has been shrouded in mystery.
Its creator adopted the mysterious pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto, but no individual had so far been decisively identified as Satoshi, now undoubtedly one of the world’s richest people.
But after an extensive investigation involving artificial intelligence and forensic linguistics experts, the New York Times has claimed to uncover the anonymous architect of Bitcoin, who has hidden his identity for 17 years.
That man is Adam Back, a 55-year-old British computer scientist who the newspaper says pioneered the decentralised digital currency, used for encrypted, peer-to-peer transactions without needing a central bank.
If true, the University of Exeter–educated cryptographer has generated a vast fortune: as per Bitcoin lore, Satoshi mined 1.1 million coins in the digital currency’s nascency, a cache that is worth $70 billion today.
On Wednesday, he took to X to deny the allegations, telling his followers decisively, 'I'm not Satoshi' before adding in a follow-up tweet: 'I also don't know who Satoshi is, and I think it is good for Bitcoin that this is the case
Nevertheless, the New York Times' conclusion was drawn from over a year of trawling through thousands of decades-old internet postings, revealing a trail of opaque clues that weaved together point towards Back.
Over the years, the encryption expert used extraordinary methods to conceal his identity - allegedly even sending emails in his own name to the mysterious Satoshi, playing both roles at once in a Mr Ripley-esque charade to cover his tracks.
But try as he might to conceal his identity, a series of extensive linguistic analyses have uncovered persuasive similarities between Back and Satoshi's writing styles, leading to the conclusion that they are, and always have been, the same man.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Rule #1 (applies to guns and money alike): Don't ask; don't tell.
Give them a million and tell them to scram. He wouldn’t even notice.
Did you know we are related by extended marriage?
I have a very cool business proposal.
I have the facts that Satoishi/Bitcoin is a false flag operation by competing Rothchild factions, within the NY Federal Reserve bank. That this will be the bank that issues our new crypto USD, that Satoishi is being consulted on. That when the USD crypto is issued, it will turn bitcoin into something worth less than Confederate States banknotes.
Nope. Dr. Back has some of the skillset (but lacked other necessary skills) and was a latecomer to the bitcoin community, as usual the NYT is wrong. For one, being in England would mean that he was consistently sleeping from ~6 AM to Noon each day based on Satoshi’s email and message posting history. There is another candidate who checks the skillset/education boxes even better than Back, lived in a more sensible timezone, has also been tagged based on writing analysis, and is strangely lacking from the bitcoin whitepaper citations despite his earlier publications being precisely what should have been cited (a “dog that didn’t bark” kind of scenario). But I no longer mention his name because it is better for Satoshi to remain anonymous.
I don’t buy it. I believe Satoshi is long dead.
Most likely Hal Finney.
It’s just not that much money in the scale of things.
That said, when bitcoin started to run past $50k the fist time, I had to do a mad scramble to find the unmarked thumb drive where it all was. I literally did this as a lark. Had visions of a kid saving memes and brain rot all over it.
Now safely backed up and locked away securely.
It’s just a computer file of no value whatsoever except it is unique, of finite supply, and easily exchanged.
The entire idea was a theoretical discussion about the nature of a fiat currency.
The fact that it became a real currency was wholly accidental.
"British nerd who could secretly be worth $70bn" - in Bitcoin I presume?
Before 2007 he was in the tulip business in Holland.
Just curious so what changed? The process shouldn’t have changed correct?
The “mining” of bitcoins was designed to get harder and harder as it went along, creating scarcity.
Early on, you could (and I did) make them with a personal computer.
Now it takes supercomputers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.