Last week, Finbold‘s editorial team discussed whether we should publish a story related to the HBO documentary’s promise to reveal the identity of Bitcoin’s mysterious creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. We decided not to.
HBO made headlines in the past five days by claiming they knew who Satoshi Nakamoto was. Worldwide media outlets—crypto-focused or not—successfully jumped into this wagon because, of course, it is a hit piece. We knew it would be. People love the drama.
The question, however, is where we, as journalists, draw the line on what we should publicly speculate about for the clicks. Or which messages should we help broadcast?
Picks for you
I say this whole Satoshi Nakamoto thing is well over a line I, personally, will never cross. Finbold editorial team agreed.
This piece will explain the reasoning behind that. We want to make it a call for all journalists looking at this topic because we know that sometimes, we all may fail to see the broader picture and the direct or indirect consequences of our messages. It is an honest mistake.
Before we continue, it is important to understand that it does not matter whether HBO really discovered Satoshi Nakamoto’s identity or if the investigators got it right. The consequences we will discuss exist as a result of the mere speculation and expansion of this message.
The consequences of Satoshi Nakamoto’s identity revelation (or speculation)
Satoshi Nakamoto’s identity is connected to a wealthy individual or group. At least in the public’s perception.
Bitcoin analysts estimate Nakamoto controls approximately 1 million BTC, which translates into roughly $62 billion of arguably illiquid market value.
“Arguably illiquid” because any spending activity from Satoshi’s known addresses would likely generate panic, major sell-offs, and could even trigger safety measures from liquidity pools like centralized exchanges – which would potentially halt operations or freeze the values due to Anti-Money Laundering (AML) policies.
Ki Young Ju, founder and CEO of CryptoQuant, commented on that from an economic perspective, sending a strong message to HBO at the end of his informative thread.
In a less likely but still possible scenario, even Bitcoin miners could filter and refuse to process these transactions, effectively censoring Satoshi Nakamoto from spending his coins if enough dominating miners took similar action.
As I previously reported for Finbold, we have seen some of these filtering and censoring activities on a few occasions. Samourai Wallet accused Jack Dorsey’s Ocean mining pool of censoring Ordinals-related requests, while F2Pool admittedly filtered OFAC-sanctioned transactions.
Yet, most people will not consider these aspects until they happen. All most people will see is a multi-billion dollar net worth, which can awaken the worst in malicious creative minds.
When a reputable and popular source like HBO claims to have discovered the identity of such an individual (or group), it immediately endangers every related name it mentions in the piece.
When other media outlets or high-influence accounts help to spread this message, these broadcasters validate the original source’s “discovery,” significantly increasing the danger for the involved individuals.
If the speculated names are already from people who are no longer with us in life, the danger immediately relays to their close and loved ones, like their families. It does not matter how good the guess really is. All that matters is how fiercely people will believe the guess was good.
I think of that as putting a large target with a tasty bounty on somebody else’s back. Even worse, putting a target in the back of someone who so obviously decided they did not want to take these risks and get the spotlights.
Jameson Lopp, a prominent Bitcoin contributor and cypherpunk activist, commented on the matter, adding to a post from TheRustTwit in February—months before the HBO documentary started being promoted.
“Speculating on Satoshi’s identity is not just a way to increase someone’s risk of violent theft attempts: it also pointlessly disrespects his clear desire for privacy. Be classy: keep your fantasies to yourself.”
– TheRustTwit
Please, don’t doxx Satoshi Nakamoto
The word “doxing” or “doxxing” is derived from the term “dropping dox,” or “documents.”
In the proper context, it means searching and revealing private information of people who did not want to have this information revealed. Sources consider it a form of cyberbullying, creating undesired exposure to peaceful individuals who care about their privacy.
Interestingly, we could consider HBO’s documentary, the pre-launch promotion, or any form of speculation related to that matter as cyberbullying against Satoshi Nakamoto or each of the guessed names and their respective families and friends.
Please, don’t be a bully.
I know. You have never really considered all that, have you?
Speculating on mysterious identities is fun. I get you. It is also great for business (at least short-term) because people love the drama, and it generates a lot of clicks. We know that on Finbold, too.
But we have also considered it carefully, and we know that there are some lines we should not cross.
Joel Valenzuela commented on the matter in Finbold‘s request. Valenzuela is a known cryptocurrency advocate who closed his bank account in 2016 to truly live in a crypto-standard and promote tools like Bitcoin as a way to improve people’s lives – truthful to Satoshi Nakamoto’s vision.
“Satoshi Nakamoto was an incredible innovator, and we all owe him a huge debt of gratitude for kicking off the separation of money and state. But his work speaks for itself. Who Satoshi is, or was, is a fun historical speculation, but it shouldn’t matter. The tech either works to enable radical financial freedom, or it doesn’t. Its creator’s identity has zero bearing on the tech itself.”
– Joel Valenzuela
“Sadly, so many keep obsessing over Satoshi’s identity while paying almost no attention to his creation’s purpose,” he added. “Every single minute spent searching for the physical identity of Satoshi Nakamoto, while failing to read and understand the Bitcoin whitepaper and follow his original protocol designs, is a massive waste.”
– Joel Valenzuela
Apparently, we have already wasted a lot of time and energy on all that. There are gigantic bets on prediction markets related to the documentary – which is a weird thing to bet on, considering HBO insiders would have a massive advantage in claiming all that money.
Who will HBO doc identify as Satoshi? Source: Polymarket / Finbold
Moreover, some of the biggest crypto outlets are massively talking about that, even getting to the point of reporting clear Reddit jokes as facts in a thread on X.
We have gone too far. It is time to put an end to this speculation. Enough is enough.
Please, let’s stop wasting even more resources trying to figure out who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Let’s keep his identity to himself, respecting his desire for privacy.
Instead, let’s try to understand Bitcoin. Understand how (and if) it can change people’s lives for the better and all the fruitful innovation that surged from Satoshi Nakamoto’s creation. This is his legacy, not the man (or woman) behind his mask.
We, who keep this vision alive, are all Satoshi.
Sincerely,
Vinicius Barbosa, from Finbold‘s editorial team.
Update – HBO revealed Peter Todd as Satoshi Nakamoto, he denies
So, the documentary was aired, and HBO claimed that Peter Todd was Satoshi Nakamoto. He says he is not.
Whether true or not, it does not matter. HBO, as a mainstream media, has just put Peter Todd in great danger.
