- Is Satoshi Nakamoto a person or a team? Part 2
Leave a comment / Author: Zhu Weisha / 23 January 2023
Contents
7.1 Design and programming by one person
7.2 A tragic way to leave
7.2.1 WikiLeaks triggers Satoshi Nakamoto’s unhurried departure
The reason Satoshi Nakamoto disappeared was because of the WikiLeaks incident. The United States wanted Assange, and in early December 2010, financial institutions MasterCard, Visa credit card, and PayPal cut off payments for donations to WikiLeaks. On December 10, ”PC World “published an article suggesting that it could be payments in Bitcoin. It caused a strong backlash from Satoshi Nakamoto. (4)
Satoshi Nakamoto wrote: (5)
“It would have been nice to get this attention in any other context. WikiLeaks has kicked the hornet’s nest, and the swarm is headed towards us.”
Why did legitimate financial institutions shut off payments? Because WikiLeaks is allegedly illegal. The U.S. government can’t regulate WikiLeaks and can regulate financial institutions. For the same reason, the U.S. government can’t control the Bitcoin network; it can control Satoshi Nakamoto. Satoshi Nakamoto’s overreaction goes to show that he is an American. “It would be nice to get this kind of attention in other contexts” is a sign of Satoshi Nakamoto’s psychological activity, which was not reflected on May 22, 2010, Pizza Day, which was what he called “other contexts,” i.e., in a typical business environment use, can not be suspected of funding illegal projects. He felt things had gone too far, and Satoshi Nakamoto was well aware of the cases of “free dollars” and “e-gold.” He considered the legal problems that might ensue and published his last post after only 19 hours of consideration. (6)
“There’s more work to do on DoS(Denial of Service), but I’m doing a quick build of what I have so far in case it’s needed, before venturing into more complex ideas. The build for this is version 0.3.19.”
Note: “so far in case,” that is, Satoshi Nakamoto implemented precautions for denial of service attacks.
“- Added some DoS controls.”
”As Gavin and I have said clearly before, the software is not at all resistant to DoS attack. This is one improvement, but there are still more ways to attack than I can count. “
”I’m leaving the -limitfreerelay part as a switch for now and it’s there if you need it.”
Note: All of the above is pre-done to resist denial of service attacks.
“- Removed ‘safe mode’ alerts.”
“safe mode” alerts was a temporary measure after the 0.3.9 overflow bug. We can say all we want that users can just run with ‘-disablesafemode,’ but it’s better just not to have it for the sake of appearances. It was never intended as a long term feature. Safe mode can still be triggered by seeing a longer (greater total PoW) invalid block chain.”
Note: This safe mode can be triggered and has not been triggered until today, which means that a normal fork will not trigger.
“Builds:
”~http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.3.19/~”
Note: The latest version was published.
Issued the two posts only 19 hours apart. It’s been a busy day. What did he do first?
-
added precautions for program security,
-
removed security alert programs that Satoshi Nakamoto himself could control.
He also removed his copyright claim; whether he removed it then or later is unknown (note: I did not find the source about it). And then gave the Bitcoin program upload rights to Gavin Andresen via email. So the first thing He did was to hope that the Bitcoin system would work safely, and The next thing was to clear the relationship, not even the copyright, and that the Bitcoin system had nothing to do with him.
After this happened, there was a lot of speculation in the market, most of which was unreliable. In terms of the facts, it was an unexpected event, and what Satoshi Nakamoto did was to avoid the consequences of that event to his detriment. That is uncertain legal consequences. He doesn’t even show up today and probably believes the legal risk still exists. Satoshi Nakamoto is sensitive to the law, and everyone is hurt differently by their legal background, and he understands the caprice of power better because he moved the government’s cheese. Suppose Satoshi Nakamoto in China may have been arrested early, at least to restrictions on exit and all Chinese blockchain bigwigs’ treatment. He is the head treatment should only be higher.
What would be the consequences of his departure? Below is my analysis, somewhat from the perspective of Satoshi Nakamoto.
The bitcoin program has been improved and is safe to run; no matter whether he is in or out, no one can shut it down.
The resistance to attacks could be better and needs to be maintained by someone. After this outburst, Satoshi handed over the maintenance to Gavin Andresen.
No comments:
Post a Comment