Why did Satoshi Nakamoto never want to reveal his identity?

If there is one thing that can surprise a person who discovers Bitcoin, it is learning that the identity of its creator, Satoshi Nakamoto, is unknown. Indeed, we know very little about him, and we don't even know for sure whether it was a man, a woman, a group, or a single person.

We know so little that we often speak of the 'Satoshi mystery', as his identity is surrounded by doubts and questions. Like a modern-day Socrates, he took care, with rigorous attention to detail, never to broadcast a single clue about his person. Even more disturbing: he has never given any sign of life since 2011, letting his 'mystery' thicken ever more.

But why did Satoshi Nakamoto deliberately choose to be and remain anonymous? Has this had an impact on Bitcoin and its development? Isn't this a constituent element of the protocol itself?

If you have such questions, which are perfectly legitimate (and it's a good thing to be curious), then this article was written for you.

We will try to answer this question that is bothering you as to why the creator of Bitcoin chose to remain anonymous, in order to better understand its importance in the subsequent development of Bitcoin.

Satoshi Nakamoto: A mystery cultivated in spite of himself?

Satoshi Nakamoto brought Bitcoin into the public domain in October 2008 by publishing a document titled " Bitcoin: A Peer-To-Peer Electronic Cash System " to a cypherpunk mailing list. He signed his document with his pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto and has always been careful to use the email address linked to his online identity for all correspondence.

On the forum he created, bitcointalk , to discuss Bitcoin publicly, he stated in his profile that he was Japanese. However, this statement is questionable because he has never posted in Japanese, and the quality of his English suggests he is British.

In 2008, he registered the domain name bitcoin.org and published the white paper to the mailing list on October 31, 2008. Then, he communicated on the Bitcointalk forum until December 2010 without ever writing on the forum again afterwards.

It is important to note that no programmer by the name Satoshi Nakamoto was recorded before 2008. Additionally, the email address and website used by Nakamoto could not be traced back to a single source .

Regarding the name Satoshi Nakamoto, there is no known person with that legal identity. The person suspected by the American press (including Newsweek ) of being the real Satoshi Nakamoto was the Japanese engineer Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto, who at the time shared the same surname.

However, the latter refuted Newsweek's investigation by writing, "I did not create, invent, or otherwise work on Bitcoin. I unconditionally deny Newsweek's report. 'The first time I heard the term 'bitcoin' was from my son in mid-February 2011.'

Since then, the photo of Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto is often used in the media to represent the creator of Bitcoin. It is more of an awkwardness or a wink which should not obscure the fact that the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto is anonymous and that it seems that it always will be.

Satoshi Nakamoto's latest messages

Satoshi Nakamoto's last public message on the Bitcointalk forum dates back to December 12, 2010, where he wrote, " There's still work to be done on DOS [denial-of-service] ." He subsequently corresponded with early Bitcoin developers, including Gavin Anderson and Mike Hearn . Hearn received a final email from Satoshi on April 23, 2011, in which he stated that he had confidence in the project and that Bitcoin "was in good hands with Gavin and the others."

A few days later, Gavin Andresen received an email in which Satoshi expressed his frustration with the negative image of Bitcoin circulating in the press, which denounced it as a "pirate" currency. He wrote, "I would like you to stop referring to me as some mysterious, obscure figure." He added that it would be "perhaps better to talk about the open-source project and give more credit to your development contributors."

In 2011, he communicated one last time with a Bitcoin contributor " Martti Malmi " to whom he wrote "I have moved on to other things and I probably won't be around in the future."

These words are considered to be the last published by Satoshi Nakamoto.

The desire to focus more on the work than on the person

We can note the fact that Satoshi Nakamoto refused the idea of ​​cultivating a mystery around his personality. Rather, he seemed to indicate that he wanted to step aside in front of his work and that we should be more interested in Bitcoin rather than its creator.

This is in fact, here, a first reason which reveals to us the reasons for the anonymity of Satoshi Nakamoto. Anonymity is considered here as a humble gesture from a scientist who would like us to focus more on his work rather than his person. If some people have made the link with ancient philosophies such as that of the Tao for example which teaches discretion and humility, we can remember that although this is very rare, certain inventors have chosen the path of anonymity voluntarily. This is the case, for example, of the inventors of the Tor web browser (The Onion Router), a decentralized network designed to improve confidentiality and security on the Internet.

Although we can think that humility and greatness of soul alone explain the anonymity of Satoshi Nakamoto, we must also take into account that it is also a coherent and rational decision for the sustainability of the Bitcoin project.

Other possible reasons for Nakamoto's anonymity

At first glance, and in a rather simplistic reading of the thing, we could stop at the fact that Satoshi Nakamoto is a man of great value who did not seek glory. We can also say, without being mistaken, that he wanted the light to be shed on his invention rather than on himself. An attitude worthy of the greatest sages, it is a fact that cannot be denied.

However, there are other, more trivial reasons (which in no way detract from Satoshi's humility) which must be considered when questioning the anonymity of the creator of Bitcoin.

Let's now see the different reasons that can explain its anonymity.

1/ A community project

By not revealing his identity, Nakamoto allowed Bitcoin to truly be seen as a community project. It is not insignificant that the project is open source, free and accessible to everyone.

Attention has therefore been focused on the decentralized nature of the technology itself, rather than on the personality or notoriety of the creator of Bitcoin. Nakamoto wanted Bitcoin to be a community-run project where decisions would be made by consensus among participants rather than being influenced by a single authority figure.

Obviously, we can say that Satoshi Nakamoto does not have ego problems and does not suffer from megalomania either. What motivated him was the success of Bitcoin and not himself.

Remaining anonymous allowed Nakamoto to step back from the spotlight with dignity while encouraging others to take charge of the development and direction of the project. Thus, today hundreds of developers are actively working to maintain and develop Bitcoin.

By dissociating himself from the project, Nakamoto affirms the fundamentally community aspect of Bitcoin. This is a project that belongs to no one and everyone at the same time.

2/ Reduce your influence

Nakamoto seemed to know that if Bitcoin was to succeed as a decentralized currency, it would have to grow organically and horizontally. For greater adoption, Bitcoin needed to grow without a leader or guru.

Nakamoto seems to have understood that by revealing his identity, it would have impacted the history and development of Bitcoin. His every move would have been interpreted. The project would have been judged even by the actions of Satoshi Nakamoto. By not having a personality associated with Bitcoin, it becomes easier to consider it as a technological innovation, inherently neutral.

Clearly, by preserving his anonymity, he indirectly ensured that no individual or group could exercise improper influence or control over Bitcoin. If the founder himself has no influence on the protocol, who the hell could claim the right to it?

Faith in technology had to be based on objective assessment, not on the pronouncements of a charismatic leader or organization.

3/ Sustainability in time and space

However, by not associating an individual with Bitcoin, it naturally becomes more objective and neutral and can transcend times and generations. By preserving its anonymity, Bitcoin could be understood by different generations and different peoples.

Thus, the adoption of bitcoin affects all regions of the world, without any distinction. Both the countries of the North and the South, the most developed and the least developed countries, see bitcoin as a monetary alternative.

It's the same thing on an individual level, everyone can be interested in bitcoin because no personality is visually linked to it. The profoundly democratic character of bitcoin is then made possible by the very absence of its creator.

Even more, when a project is associated with an individual, it quickly becomes problematic when the individual in question dies. The project can then lose its enthusiasm over time. By having made Bitcoin a project without a known creator, this allows us to envisage greater sustainability of the network over time.

In fact, by remaining anonymous, Satoshi Nakamoto immediately becomes immortal, if not timeless. This is a masterstroke for an innovation he himself called " timechain "...

4/ Legal considerations

Here is one of the most basic yet important reasons to consider. By remaining anonymous, Nakamoto likely wanted to avoid the legal and regulatory complications of creating a disruptive technology like Bitcoin.

Indeed, by protecting his personal privacy, he has drastically reduced the risk of being targeted by criminals, hackers or government authorities.

In this regard, it's important to remember that while Bitcoin is now a mainstream financial institution, in its early days it was viewed with suspicion by governments. Let's not forget that even today, Ross Ulbricht , the creator of the Silk Road platform which accepted Bitcoin as a payment method, is still in prison…

Read the article: The terrible story of Ross Ulrich, Silk Road and the rise of Bitcoin

The creators of alternative currencies are often the target of legal investigations. For example, Bernard Von NotHaus, who created the Freedom Dollar in 1998, had his home raided by the FBI in 2007 before being indicted for conspiracy against the state and counterfeiting. Another example is Douglas Jackson, who was also investigated by the FBI and ultimately sentenced to prison for his e-gold digital currency project.

These different examples show that governments closely monitor the initiators of non-state currencies. Although these examples involve illicit uses, it is not incongruous to think that Satoshi Nakamoto could have been the target of institutional investigations of this kind.

In fact, we can honestly doubt it...

Final word: Voluntary, justified and rational anonymity

In this article, we explored the reasons that likely led the creator of Bitcoin to preserve his anonymity. The conclusion is that anonymity was, in fact, essential for Bitcoin's development. In hindsight , considering Bitcoin with a founder would be tantamount to stripping it of a significant part of its core principles.

However, now that bitcoin is accepted by the global financial establishment (see Blackrock and its ETF), we could imagine a future revelation of its identity.

His is the fame and fortune, right?

Yes, we could think like that naively without thinking that this would endanger the Bitcoin project itself which, as we have seen, needs, in essence, not to have a leader at its head in order to function according to its objectives. principles.

Thus, it seems that Satoshi Nakamoto, far from the desires of this world, has chosen to remain anonymous and not to take more credit than necessary so that we can focus more on Bitcoin.

Beyond the technological innovation it brought, it also elegantly reminds us to what extent we have this unfortunate tendency to look for idols when we should simply be content with works.