[andy800]

> a heated debate ... exposed his ignorance

Didnt follow everything here, but wouldn't that make for a perfect cover story? If you're Satoshi, and people are getting close to verifying (or at least nominating you as "most likely candidate"), what better way to throw people off than to engage in a public conversation in which you (creatively) get all kinds of technical details wrong and make yourself look too ignorant or dumb to ever have been Satoshi?

[idopmstuff]

The funny thing is that the author uses your exact logic when he finds evidence that goes against his hypothesis. He made posts that asked questions about things that Satoshi definitely would've known? Misdirection! Somebody else does it? Strong evidence against them!

[ufmace]

The interesting thing to me is, it seems likely that whichever individual or small group actually is Satoshi must have planted at least a few misdirection false flags like that at some point. But how in the world would you ever tell which ones are that sort of misdirection and which are real?

[surianfb]

Well not quite. The author uses that logic for Satoshi and Adam back in the early 2000s but not for present day misdirection. The misdirection play would make more sense in real time (eg 2008) vs randomly in the 2020s.

Adam could have released the email metadata and that would have absolved him, but he didn’t.

[orsenthil]

> Adam could have released the email metadata and that would have absolved him, but he didn’t.

What if he gives an metadata that doesn't reveal anything? Then, you'd argue that he did that metadata.

[dmix]

This is why I stopped reading these Bitcoin creator stories. It's usually more about the journalist and their 'process' than the story.

[thakoppno]

There’s no bottom to this line of reasoning, however.

One can always suppose the identified individual is a double, triple, quadruple agent.

[Barrin92]

>One can always suppose the identified individual is a double, triple, quadruple agent.

yes in general it's not good reasoning but given that in this case we know that we're talking about someone who tried to stay anonymous and comes out of the cypherpunk culture we can pretty much assume that if they've been interviewed they've denied it.

It's not like that accusation is random, it's that this is what the real Nakamoto, whoever it is, would have said

[aftbit]

What level do you play at?

One level higher than you.

[psychoslave]

Higher than the demiurge which generates the game creators? Ω!

[arcbyte]

I play an odd number of levels in either direction of you.