Hal Finney is likely Satoshi Nakamoto

1. Satoshi disappeared right around the time Hal Finney got diagnosed with ALS, which is a pretty big coincidence. I mean, what other reason would Satoshi have to step away from the project then? 2. Hal proved he could take a solid idea and make it a reality with the PGP project. Plus, his work with the remailer showed he really cared about privacy, which is a big part of why Bitcoin was created in the first place. 3. Finney had a deep understanding of hiding one’s identity. When he denied being Satoshi, he shared an email thread with his so-called "sockpuppet" Satoshi. I mean, that’s exactly what you’d expect him to do. Given his past with PGP and the risk of government backlash, he’d definitely want to stay under the radar. Also, with him predicting Bitcoin hitting $10 million back in January 2009, he had to know that attracting attention could be dangerous for his wealth. 4. Anyone who’s clever enough to create Bitcoin would’ve definitely known about RPOW back in 2008. Not mentioning it in the whitepaper is a clear hint that he was trying to keep his true identity secret. 5. Hal claimed he was more used to coding in C and not the style Satoshi used. That just doesn’t add up. Guess which language is featured in the coding part of the whitepaper? Yep, it’s C. 6. Hal had the exact same chance to mine those early bitcoins as his "sockpuppet" Satoshi. His story just doesn’t hold water.

Here we go again, I urge you to read this blog, Hal Finney Was Not Satoshi Nakamoto. You mentioned RPOW, so here is a comparison between the two codes, I guess it's better to rest this case, Bitcoin and me (Hal Finney).

You gave me a link to a ridiculous statement that points to proof of sending emails and bitcoins from Satoshi to Mike Hearn while Hal was running a marathon. I think anyone can send emails at their own time and emails can be sent while doing other things if the goal is to disguise their identity. If we are talking about RPOW and Bitcoin code, can you tell me where the significant differences are?

Don't just work by some of your fake theories in confusing the public about the real state of things here, Satoshi is not Hal Finney, maybe you have forgotten that the same Satoshi made the first ever bitcoin transaction to Hal Finney in testing on how bitcoin transaction could be, secondly they both left the forum doesn't mean they are one single entity, each has his own separate account on Bitcointalk and you can't confirm your claim by any of them signing a message, so if this can't be established, then disregard any assumptions that may cause confusion for you, Satoshi is not Hal Finney.

I think everybody only able to make an assumption about who is Satoshi, what makes you think there will be legit proofs? Do you have any counter to my assumption above? You've mentioned "fake theories", can you quote one with proof? Otherwise you can stop cause confusion for yourself in the public

This is probably the 80th time this comparison has been made, just here, on this forum. But I'd like to address this claim in particular as its the one that is unfamiliar: He wasn't necessarily worried about "overheating", he said it made his "computer run hot" and the fan noise bothered him. He had accrued at least several thousand BTC during his time as a miner... wouldn't that be enough to call it quits on something that really didn't have a lot of utility while he was alive and active? Regardless, of course overheating was a problem, and it couldn't easily be solved by code changes.

My point on that statement is: Hal said he reported bugs to Satoshi and Satoshi fixed them, why Hal never mentioned this problem to Satoshi? Instead, he is trying to fix this by himself, https://i.ibb.co/dwLYGrxQ/Capture.jpg HalFinney discovered this problem as early as January 2009, and you cite reports from others about "overheating" in May 2010.

It's been speculated that satoshi disappeared around the time the CIA became interested in Bitcoin. Gavin Andresen wrote that he was invited to present Bitcoin to the CIA. Satoshi stopped being active around that time I think. One might say that he wasn't comfortable having the CIA look more closely into his work so he handed over control to other developers and left. Whatever his reasons for disappearing were, I guess we will never find out.

"Uncomfortable" is a common excuse to hide something. He handed over control of Bitcoin to another developer because he knew ALS was not a disease that would allow him to live more than 5 years.

There are many different things. 1. Hal used multi line comments "/**/", while Satoshi used single line comments "//". 2. Hal added a new line after function return type, while Satoshi put it in the same line. 3. Hal used pointers "*" from C, while Satoshi used references "&" from C++. 4. Hal used Apple preprocessor macros, while Satoshi used Windows preprocessor defines. 5. Hal wrote it in C, while Satoshi used many features from C++ standard library, for example std::pair and std::map. And so on, and so forth. The code is written in a completely different style, using completely different tools, and even different Operating Systems. Even if you compare Satoshi's code in C, from the whitepaper, then it is formatted in a completely different way, than Hal's code in C.

With the differences you mentioned, is it impossible for someone like HalFinney who has experience with the concept to do it? HalFinney developed RPOW in 2004, is 4-5 years not enough time for someone like HalFinney to implement it in another way?

If you read all of that blog post, you would see that there are more proofs than just a Bitcoin transaction and the marathon participation. Your reply makes me feeling like you only scroll down a little bit from a blog post title and skip remaining parts of the blog post with more proofs as follow. Singularity Summit 2010 The IP Address Satoshi's Email to Martti Malmi (Sirius) Inconsistencies in Coding Styles Inconsistencies in Personas Inconsistencies in Activity Gaps

This. Gavin will visit the CIA Archives of emails from Satoshi to Gavin Andresen. https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/emails/gavin-andresen/ https://gavinandresen.ninja/eleven-years-ago-today We will never know the real reasons of his disappearance.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2813.msg39045#msg39045 I read all of Hal's posts and one of them really caught my attention. On January 15, 2011, he suggested to raise bitcoins to send Satoshi to the Financial Cryptography conference. Right after, one of the participants said that Satoshi would hardly accept because he wanted to remain anonymous. This was obvious to everyone on the forum. Why would Hal suggest this? He was an experient cypherpunk who communicated with Satoshi in early days of the project, and obviously knew that Satoshi was a pseudonym. This sounds really strange.

I was quite surprised because it turns out there are people who respond like this  I was only responding that marathon "incident" because probably that is the most arguably things 1. Singularity Summit 2010? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2436;sa=showPosts I suggest you to see for yourself how active HalFinney is until 2013. 2. Satoshi's Email to Martti Malmi (Sirius) Anyone can do the same camouflage, right? 3. Inconsistencies in Coding Styles Answered above my post (Your reply makes me feeling like you only scroll down a little bit from this post and doing instant reply skipping the facts above.) 4. Inconsistencies in Personas Everybody has a private world, guess what about Hal Finney? Satoshi Nakamoto is his private world. 5. Inconsistencies in Activity Gaps Answered above my post (Your reply makes me feeling like you only scroll down a little bit from this post and doing instant reply skipping the facts above.) No reason at all, except his health issue. Won't you recognize the sign?

Sorry to say why has this been repeating itself over the time, sincerely if I am not mistakenly this topics and comparison has been raised several times now and yet no meaningful arguments was made from it and yet they still kept repeating this same post and comparison. Hal finney is not Satoshi nakamoto the better we have peace over the time.

Just giving a little respect to the creator in a forum dedicated to what he created, is that too much? There are some mental disorders in someone who wants to be recognized but doesn't want to be known.

OP, seems to be very knowledgeable about a lot of things he has said here, putting out some facts as a good defence for his claims and like you said, this comparison  has came up many times on the forum in different threads, but what I just want to clearly understand is that, after we have finally proven that Hal Finney was Satoshi and now that he is late, what should we do with the discovery? Just curious to know what we are going to do with the discovery after several evidence beyond no doubt has be brought to light to proof the claim, what next @flatt?

Here we go again... OP it's not like you are the first guy in the world making this speculation claims   There have been a bunch of people who claimed Hal was Satoshi, but I also remember reading all the reasons why he isn't Satoshi. On top of that there are many other candidates for Satoshi, and I prefer that his real identity remains unknown.

Possible, but very inconvenient, costly, and against Occam's Razor. Not only "in another way", but also with a different Operating System (Hal used MacOS, and Satoshi used Windows), under different IDEs (Hal used tools from MacOS, while Satoshi used Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0 SP6), and with different file types (Satoshi released specifically Windows-only version, with DLLs, EXEs, and Windows-based bitmaps and icons, using Windows-based resource files, and with Windows-based file encodings). And there is more: you have different tools for making PDFs for different Operating Systems, you have slightly different C++ compiler bugs (like std::min bug, which was immediately detected and solved by non-Windows users, but was not fixed by Satoshi, because it worked fine on his machine). Also, if you assume, that Hal used MacOS in the past, but switched into Windows somehow, then tell me, why Satoshi tested his binaries only under Windows, and never even tried making any MacOS version? Imagine using MacOS in the past for some years, and never releasing a single Bitcoin client binary for that system, and waiting until version 0.3.13, when another user did it. In October 2010. Almost two years after Bitcoin started. Edit: See? Hal wrote that sentence in December 2010, when Satoshi developed Windows-based Bitcoin client for at least two years. And he couldn't just check that on Windows, but he knew, that it can be done on MacOS? Why?