New Satoshi Text, II

So: someone created a website called "Nakamoto Family Foundation" only three days before posting there a 21 page essay that purports to be an excerpt from a forthcoming book, or series of books, to be called Duality. 

It isn't obvious why that was the chosen frame for getting the message out. There were plenty of other ways in which he/she/they could have gone about this. Contacting Wired, for example. The folks at Wired have covered the whole Who-and-where-is-Satoshi question for a long time, with some intensity. They would have published this 'excerpt' in a heartbeat.

In fact, somebody (an alleged "proxy" for the alleged Satoshi) did contact Wired around the time the publication appeared, apparently to make sure they knew about it and would spread the word. But if they had wanted Wired to publish it, then the editors might have had questions that the pseudo-Satoshi didn't want to answer.

So: what IS the message? Apparently, the message is that the early history of bitcoin is a tangled one. The old question whether Satoshi was one person or a group is answered this way: I am one person, I was part of a group, it may have a new leader now, and you may or may not prefer to regard that person as the real Satoshi. 

That italicized bit is my paraphrase. The key wording is as follows, "I will say this though, consider for a moment the distinction; as to whether I had help or was part of that help in creation, and then separate that from the person who followed, which for the most part, was very consistent.”

(Yes, I know. That's why I thought I'd start with a paraphrase.) 

The author also heaps praise on Hal Finney, a computer scientist who passed away in 2014. "To this day, I still think about how good of a person Hal was and how if it wasn’t for him, bitcoin would have not succeeded the way it did. When I had no support, when it was just me, Hal was the only one other person who believed.”

Finney's widow indicates that though she appreciates the kind words, that "doesn't make it real." 

In fact, as I mentioned yesterday, this whole thing is very unlikely to be 'real.' 

The most likely scenario is that 'Satoshi' was a collaboration between Australian Craig Stephen Wright and American Dave Kleiman. Kleiman has been dead since 2013, so 'Satoshi' as such is beyond further earthly communications. Wright is still very much with us. He came out as half of Satoshi back in December 2015. 

The fact attracted some attention for a time -- there were some doubters If the claim is true, Wright should have decisive evidence in him that he did not at that time provide. There may be any number of good (or bad) reasons why he didn't, consistent with the claim being true. 

At any rate, the real Satoshi resurfacing already happened, so there is no point waiting for it as one would for some sort of cryptocurrency Messiah. 

The early history WAS tangled, but this text won't help the historians of the field untangle it.