Dai/Nakamoto emails
the b-money paper is very well worth reading even today. appendix A hints at what we call today proof of stake. the property club in b-money is more of a political organization than the participants in the Bitcoin network:
"community is defined by the cooperation of its participants, and efficient cooperation requires a medium of exchange"
"I hope this is a step toward making crypto-anarchy a practical as well as theoretical possibility." http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt
amazing how mute Wei's reaction was and still is. b-money was a nice idea, but it seems he was never too much interested in impelementation. the request is obviously fake. Nakamoto was clearly well versed in the history of this topic and was very likely to be around in 1998.
other than that, gwern is still the authority on Bitcoin. "What’s wrong with Bitcoin is that it’s ugly."
To me, the argument from silence is compelling. Bit gold is not just similar to BitCoin - it is virtually identical. The only thing BitCoin has that BitGold doesn't is that concensus is formed by the holders of a majority of the computational power, rather than the majority of nodes. This is what makes BTC byzantine resilient. And the question Wei Dai asks - why would he cite b-money and not bit gold - is precisely why I'm inclined to think it is Szabo. For him to not mention Bit Gold in light of the similarity is highly suspicious indeed.
Unfortunately, I don't follow Bitcoin a whole lot, but could someone please tell me what is the point of all this and why are people so 'excited' to find out more about Satoshi.
(the font of the website is fine @stephen)
What is the reason for Satoshi wanting to remain anonymous? The others (hashcash, bitgold, b-money creators) didn't seem to bother with anonymity. This is why I highly doubt Satoshi is actually a pseudonym.
just me or was that page barely readable due to font, color, spacing, and width?
What is the fascination with finding out the real identity of Satoshi? Mere curiosity or ... ?
I wonder if someone actually considered the possibility that Satoshi Nakamoto might not even be a single person?