“In March of 2014 we sent Nathaniel Popper those files, documenting email exchanges between Hal and Satoshi,” Fran Finney told CoinDesk. “The files were retrieved from the computer Hal was using for personal email in 2009 and were provided with Hal’s consent.”]
Previously Unpublished Emails of Satoshi Nakamoto Present a New Puzzle.
Michael Kapilkov
Nov 26, 2020
Updated Nov 30, 2020
https://www.coindesk.com/satoshi-nakamoto-hal-finney-emails
Previously Unpublished Emails of Satoshi Nakamoto Present a New Puzzle.
Michael Kapilkov
Nov 26, 2020
Updated Nov 30, 2020
https://www.coindesk.com/satoshi-nakamoto-hal-finney-emails
Coindesk
Previously Unpublished Emails of Satoshi Nakamoto Present a New Puzzle
The emails between Satoshi and Hal Finney come from Bitcoin’s earliest days. They show how closely the cryptocurrency’s creator collaborated with early supporters at the time.
Re: minimalistic bitcoin client on D language?
2010-12-11 22:07:04 UTC - Original Post - View in Thread
Quote from: Hal on December 11, 2010, 08:08:45 PM
I'd like to hear some specific criticisms of the code. To me it looks like an impressive job, although I'd wish for more comments. Now I've mostly studied the init, main, script and a bit of net modules. This is some powerful machinery.
That means a lot coming from you, Hal. Thanks
https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/541/?s=09
2010-12-11 22:07:04 UTC - Original Post - View in Thread
Quote from: Hal on December 11, 2010, 08:08:45 PM
I'd like to hear some specific criticisms of the code. To me it looks like an impressive job, although I'd wish for more comments. Now I've mostly studied the init, main, script and a bit of net modules. This is some powerful machinery.
That means a lot coming from you, Hal. Thanks
https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/bitcointalk/541/?s=09
Forwarded from CSW - Slack Channel (@RamonQuesada 🌷)
Forwarded from CSW - Slack Channel (@RamonQuesada 🌷)
Forwarded from CSW - Slack Channel (@RamonQuesada 🌷)
It is not hard to find the ORIGINALS texts. https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2008-November/014832.html
"Recently I received some bad medical news (although not as bad as in the joke). Unfortunately I have been diagnosed with a fatal disease, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis or ALS, sometimes called Lou Gehrig's disease. ALS "
Dying Outside
by HalFinney
5th Oct 2009
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/bshZiaLefDejvPKuS/dying-outside
Dying Outside
by HalFinney
5th Oct 2009
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/bshZiaLefDejvPKuS/dying-outside
Lesswrong
Dying Outside — LessWrong
A man goes in to see his doctor, and after some tests, the doctor says, "I'm sorry, but you have a fatal disease." …
Hal Finney: Dying Outside
R.A. Hettinga rah at shipwright.com
Wed Oct 7 20:00:44 EDT 2009 https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-October/015825.html
R.A. Hettinga rah at shipwright.com
Wed Oct 7 20:00:44 EDT 2009 https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-October/015825.html
Es bastante probable que a raíz de lo que va suceder en el juzgado de la Florida, en el caso Kleiman vs Wright, la narrativa cambie completamente de:
Craig no es Satoshi o Craig es un fraude,
a:
Satoshi estaba equivocado, el White Paper no es la biblia, Satoshi y el WP forman parte del pasado y por tanto ya no tienen ninguna importancia, porqué os tomáis el WP y Satoshi como si fuera una religión?
Cualquier cosa será válida salvo mirar al pasado y comprobar que lo que dice Craig hoy, tiene los mismos valores que en el pasado 2008, 2009, y 2010
Una frase que se repite en criptoland es "Don't trust verify", o lo que es lo mismo: no confíes verifica", pero me da la impresión que ni los que dicen esto han verificado si, lo que dice Craig hoy, tiene los mismos valores que en el pasado 2008, 2009, y 2010.
Eso es algo que he estado haciendo últimamente y para ello me he tenido que leer muchos de los documentos originales de la época:
Satoshi Nakamoto Emails
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails?s=09
CONTENTS
Wei Dai
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/wei-dai/?s=09
Cryptography Mailing List
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/cryptography/?s=09
[bitcoin-list]
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/bitcoin-list/?s=09
Gavin Andresen
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/gavin-andresen/?s=09
Mike Hearn
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/mike-hearn/?s=09
Laszlo Hanec
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/laszlo-hanec/?s=09
[p2p-research]
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/p2p-research/?s=09
Jon Matonis
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/jon-matonis/?s=09
Hal Finney
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/hal-finney/?s=09
Dustin Trammel
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/dustin-trammel/?s=09
Craig no es Satoshi o Craig es un fraude,
a:
Satoshi estaba equivocado, el White Paper no es la biblia, Satoshi y el WP forman parte del pasado y por tanto ya no tienen ninguna importancia, porqué os tomáis el WP y Satoshi como si fuera una religión?
Cualquier cosa será válida salvo mirar al pasado y comprobar que lo que dice Craig hoy, tiene los mismos valores que en el pasado 2008, 2009, y 2010
Una frase que se repite en criptoland es "Don't trust verify", o lo que es lo mismo: no confíes verifica", pero me da la impresión que ni los que dicen esto han verificado si, lo que dice Craig hoy, tiene los mismos valores que en el pasado 2008, 2009, y 2010.
Eso es algo que he estado haciendo últimamente y para ello me he tenido que leer muchos de los documentos originales de la época:
Satoshi Nakamoto Emails
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails?s=09
CONTENTS
Wei Dai
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/wei-dai/?s=09
Cryptography Mailing List
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/cryptography/?s=09
[bitcoin-list]
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/bitcoin-list/?s=09
Gavin Andresen
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/gavin-andresen/?s=09
Mike Hearn
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/mike-hearn/?s=09
Laszlo Hanec
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/laszlo-hanec/?s=09
[p2p-research]
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/p2p-research/?s=09
Jon Matonis
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/jon-matonis/?s=09
Hal Finney
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/hal-finney/?s=09
Dustin Trammel
https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/dustin-trammel/?s=09
Satoshi’s Archive
Emails from Satoshi Nakamoto
Collection of emails from Satoshi Nakamoto
Forwarded from 2008 361 Ray Dillinger - Bear 400 (@RamonQuesada 🌷)
Satoshi didn't have a 1MB limit in it. The limit was originally Hal Finney's idea. Both Satoshi and I objected that it wouldn't scale at 1MB. Hal was concerned about a potential DoS attack though, and after discussion, Satoshi agreed. The 1MB limit was there by the time Bitcoin launched. But all 3 of us agreed that 1MB had to be temporary because it would never scale."
Re: Permanently keeping the 1MB (anti-spam) restriction is a great idea ...
February 07, 2015
Cryddit / @RayDillinger
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=946236.msg10388435#msg10388435
Re: Permanently keeping the 1MB (anti-spam) restriction is a great idea ...
February 07, 2015
Cryddit / @RayDillinger
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=946236.msg10388435#msg10388435
Forwarded from 2008 361 Ray Dillinger - Bear 400 (@RamonQuesada 🌷)
If anyone can falsify my claims, I go to prison. I have sworn in testimony that I am Satoshi Nakamoto, and I created bitcoin. To journalists, there is no way to prove. Anything can be taken and twisted in social media. You can't do that in court if you twist the narrative and you lie you face the consequences.
Others who claim to be Satoshi so that they can gain fame have to prove their point. Each point of evidence needs to be falsifiable. If it can be falsified, they face prison time. There is nothing from any of these people that I cannot falsify. I can demonstrate categorically in court with evidence that all of these people have created a false narrative to either defraud people or engage in other scams.
Those like Gizmodo and Wired were not interested in the real story. It's the same as that author who wanted to paint me in the same light Julian Assage. But of course, is the false narrative we get to take part. The way that that story was written was to sell a populist idea of what bitcoin and Satoshi mean, and it is not what I intended. It is not why I invented bitcoin, and it is not the story that needs to be told.
What I expect to happen is that people like Roger and Vitelik will oppose me because they know their scams require that I do not get a voice. They will seek to censor me and will be seen to do such. Then, everything that there claiming will be shown to be false and malicious. Next, we would expect many of the other scammers who have to double down to attack, and they can claim that they worked with me and that they were part of this and this is why we need to keep some things close. If everything is out there, I cannot discredit others who seek to say that they were part of the Satoshi group.
That idiot in BCH, David and others he worked with planned Jihan and wanted me to be a part of a larger group early on which gives them power. People like Bear, Hal and Dave, helped me, but they did not create bitcoin. They didn't even really know what bitcoin was. Even Dave wrote not a single line of code. He gave me a few grammatical suggestions on the Whitepaper and his real role was keeping me psychologically sane as I dealt with these people. He was a sounding board and a friend.
What we are going to find is the narrative changes to say that these were part of my group. We already see this. If they know the full story, these people can twist and become seemingly part of it and lie, it becomes hard for us to weed them out.
But going forward, I have things they don't know. And they won't be able to give them before we get them in court and tear them apart. Once we have a few people torn apart, preferably people who are under oath and then demonstrated to have perjured themselves we can ensure that others know that if they do this if they seek to add themselves to my story, I always have something that will ruin them.
This is why we need court because otherwise other people are going to twist the story and continue their scams.
CSW
May 25, 2019
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1558795610306000?thread_ts=1558795604.305900&cid=C5131HKFX
Others who claim to be Satoshi so that they can gain fame have to prove their point. Each point of evidence needs to be falsifiable. If it can be falsified, they face prison time. There is nothing from any of these people that I cannot falsify. I can demonstrate categorically in court with evidence that all of these people have created a false narrative to either defraud people or engage in other scams.
Those like Gizmodo and Wired were not interested in the real story. It's the same as that author who wanted to paint me in the same light Julian Assage. But of course, is the false narrative we get to take part. The way that that story was written was to sell a populist idea of what bitcoin and Satoshi mean, and it is not what I intended. It is not why I invented bitcoin, and it is not the story that needs to be told.
What I expect to happen is that people like Roger and Vitelik will oppose me because they know their scams require that I do not get a voice. They will seek to censor me and will be seen to do such. Then, everything that there claiming will be shown to be false and malicious. Next, we would expect many of the other scammers who have to double down to attack, and they can claim that they worked with me and that they were part of this and this is why we need to keep some things close. If everything is out there, I cannot discredit others who seek to say that they were part of the Satoshi group.
That idiot in BCH, David and others he worked with planned Jihan and wanted me to be a part of a larger group early on which gives them power. People like Bear, Hal and Dave, helped me, but they did not create bitcoin. They didn't even really know what bitcoin was. Even Dave wrote not a single line of code. He gave me a few grammatical suggestions on the Whitepaper and his real role was keeping me psychologically sane as I dealt with these people. He was a sounding board and a friend.
What we are going to find is the narrative changes to say that these were part of my group. We already see this. If they know the full story, these people can twist and become seemingly part of it and lie, it becomes hard for us to weed them out.
But going forward, I have things they don't know. And they won't be able to give them before we get them in court and tear them apart. Once we have a few people torn apart, preferably people who are under oath and then demonstrated to have perjured themselves we can ensure that others know that if they do this if they seek to add themselves to my story, I always have something that will ruin them.
This is why we need court because otherwise other people are going to twist the story and continue their scams.
CSW
May 25, 2019
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1558795610306000?thread_ts=1558795604.305900&cid=C5131HKFX