In this interview, I talk with computer scientist, cryptographer,
cypherpunk and Bit Gold designer, Nick Szabo. We discuss the cypherpunk
movement and its achievements, what money is, Bitcoin and why trusted third
parties are security holes.
Great interview. I really liked the questions you asked. At first I was afraid you were a bit too star struck, but I think you asked most of the questions that people would like to have answered. Well done!
When did “grumpy” become the euphemism for asshole? This space lacks people who can communicate and debate properly. Instead, the smartest guys behave online like children in a playground. Hurling memes at each other and blocking anyone who disagrees with them.
This space needs the likes of Hitchins. Even Dawkins. Sam Harris. People who are erudite and knowledgeable but also polite, articulate and yet brutal and unflinching in their debates.
Satoshi came off as one of the nicest people to communicate with online. Read Book of Satoshi if you haven’t already. Could not be Szabo, unless he deserves also an Oscar for playing an asshole so perfectly.
Twitter is flawed. It lacks context.
In the interview Szabo sounded polite enough, articulate and was fairly brutal with his opinions.
Peter tried to stir the pot a little.. but didn't get much of a response from Szabo.
I agree he was way more polite than his typical online self. However he’s still no where the caliber of the aforementioned intellectuals in terms of discourse ability. Just imagine Chris Hitchins shilling bitcoin... how epic would that be. Then think back at “number go up” and what passes around here for memology or pomp vs. schiff as what passes for debate. Depressing.
Ironically, Satoshi himself was a great explainer and argued very pointedly with those around at the time. He would have probably made a great public face/educator. If it weren’t for the security risk...
Sounds cultish. I don't need a curated version of what is already available on Bitcointalk.
Dawkins, Hitchens. I agree these names are titans of intellect. These guys are/were discussing the humanities. Fiat, crypto, PoW... most people just don't find these topics as intriguing as politics, sex and god.
Btw I love this video of Hitchens -
If you're read through all Satoshi wrote on Bitcointalk and consider the infamous "if you don't believe me" quote to be representative of his online demeanor then I guess we'll have to just disagree.
Satoshi's niceness score online is basically 99.9%
Szabo's score is like 30%, well into asshole territory.
It really could be either, or both. I definitely think it's between these two.
[This is what makes me think it's Szabo](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Szabo)
> In 2008, prior to the release of bitcoin, Szabo wrote a comment on his blog about the intent of creating a live version of his hypothetical currency
And I think Hal living in the same town as that Nakamoto dude and him receiving the first transaction are both red herrings
Ironclad reasoning. He said he’s not him. Case closed, no further evidence needed, nothing to see here.
And besides, CSW already confessed he is Satoshi. So that’s extra not even needed evidence. Like super bonus proof. And Craig would never lie. It’s not in his DNA. He’s an honest man. Mistery solved.
The opposite of fake satoshi: one is trying hard and get 'everyone is satoshi except craigh wright', the other is trying to deny and keep low profile but is number 1 on the list of possible satoshi... Life is funny :)
Hi Peter! Big fan. Sorry I thought I should clarify, it was meant to be a post hinting whether Nick Szabo is Satoshi Nakamoto or if a collective group made up Satoshi Nakamoto. I didn’t finish the entire podcast and hope to finish it soon, but 30 minutes into the podcast there was no speculation on who Satoshi Nakamoto is, that’s all.
Whenever Nick speaks, people listen. I remember quite clearly during the Segwit2x attack, the day Nick changed his Twitter handle to include "no2x" was the day the centralized actors behind it backed down and the 2x movement died.
> I remember quite clearly during the Segwit2x attack, the day Nick changed his Twitter handle to include "no2x" was the day the centralized actors behind it backed down and the 2x movement died.
With all due respect to Nick and his contributions, his adding "no2x" to his Twitter handle is absolutely not what made the actors behind SW2X back down (and it would be scary if it was, as it would imply too much influential power in the hands of one single person).