Satoshi supported big blocks in his writings and empowered the pro-big block Gavin when he disappeared. Adam is a well known supporter of small blocks, ultimately the "winning" side of the debate. They are not the same person.

▲

cloche 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I haven't read the article yet but I remember this as well. IIRC Adam went the route of more towards a centralized group controlling Bitcoin's future during the BTC/BCH debates/fork. It seemed against what Satoshi would have pushed for. Plus Adam's group seemed like a catalyst for Gavin stepping back as a result of the political in-fighting and mud-slinging. It would be a huge surprise if Satoshi were Adam.

Personally, I think Satoshi was Hal Finney.

▲

cloche 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Adding on now that I've read the article and this situation is covered:

> The following year, in 2015, the Bitcoin community fractured over a proposal to increase Bitcoin’s block size. A faction led by two Bitcoin developers, Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn, wanted to make the blocks much bigger to accommodate more transactions. But this was controversial...

> Mr. Back fiercely opposed increasing the block size. In a series of posts on the Bitcoin-dev list, he warned against Mr. Andresen and Mr. Hearn’s proposal in increasingly strident tones.

> Then, out of the blue, Satoshi appeared on the list with an email that neatly dovetailed with Mr. Back’s position. It was the first time Satoshi had been heard from in more than four years, other than a five-word post the previous year denying a Newsweek article’s claim to have unmasked him.

> Many in the Bitcoin community questioned the new email’s authenticity since another of Satoshi’s email accounts had been hacked. But Mr. Back argued that the email sounded real. In a series of tweets, he called Satoshi’s observations “spot on” and “consistent with Satoshi views IMO” and took to quoting from the email.

I now realize that the Satoshi email was after Hal Finney's death so that changes my opinion.

From OP:

> Satoshi supported big blocks in his writings and empowered the pro-big block Gavin when he disappeared

This isn't correct. In fact, the linked email in the article says the opposite https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/6EC9DDF352DC4838AE9B088AB37...

▲

irishcoffee 28 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

I think Back reacts the way he does when being asked if he is the creator of BTC is that he knows it was Finney, and the key is gone.

	▲	alchemist1e9 21 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It can’t be Finney because there was an entire send reply send reply sequence that was while Finney was in a marathon race between Satoshi and others which could not have been scripted. The case for Jack Dorsey is much stronger than the Back claim.

▲

danso 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Doesn’t this fierce debate exist because people cannot agree what Satoshi would have written had he known Bitcoin would take off in such a massive way, versus what Satoshi believed back when bitcoin was just a paper? If it actually is the case that Adam Back is Satoshi, we shouldn’t find it surprising that Back’s views on bitcoin changed as bitcoin’s viability and real world impact changed

▲

kinakomochidayo 41 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Exactly. Adam is also very emotional when he writes, and Satoshi was nothing like it.

▲

lateforwork 26 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Did you miss the part where Satoshi came to Adam's rescue, to thwart big blocks?

https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/6EC9DDF352DC4838AE9B088AB37...