If it’s not Hal Finney, could it be Len Sasasman as Satoshi?

I started this thread out of sheer curiosity. It's fascinating how mysterious Satoshi is, and it seems like the whole world is trying to crack the code. Some folks even compare Satoshi's cryptographic skills to that of aliens. While many see Satoshi as just one person, there's still no solid evidence to back up any claims about his identity. Sure, Hal Finney comes to mind when discussing Satoshi, but honestly, most arguments against him weigh heavier. He and Satoshi might've had that first Bitcoin transaction together, but that alone doesn’t prove anything. Now, Len Sasasman is another name that pops up in the conversation around Satoshi. One interesting fact is that Satoshi vanished from any online presence (like here) on December 12, 2010. Since then, there’s been no contact or updates from him. Last time Satoshi was seen online was on April 23, 2011, and he's been MIA ever since. On the flip side, Len Sasasman tragically took his own life on July 3, 2011, which makes the timeline pretty chilling when you think about it. The way Satoshi disappeared and the timing of Len’s death raises a lot of questions. This whole topic feels pretty delicate to me. What do you all think? Who seems more likely in your opinion?

Two years ago, a HBO Documentary film released and there was discussion about it. Satoshi Identity Revealed LOL Two years later, people still talk about Sassaman as Satoshi Nakamoto LOL. If Satoshi Nakamoto is an individual person, I believe only Hal Finney can be Satoshi as if Satoshi wanted to play two roles, it's clear that Hal is Satoshi as a receiver of first bitcoin transaction from Satoshi.

Seems kinda forced to me. I mean there're a few months of gap between them, it just sounds too convenience to conclude that "okay, this must be something". Especially when your image said there's no evidence he even contributed anything. Beside, if the subject is that sensitive, why do we even continue to look for it? It's their life to begin with. I've probably mentioned this on other threads before, but I don't think searching for satoshi is really a useful endeavor.

I never think much about this subject and I don't even try to find Satoshi anywhere. I always focus on Satoshi sir's invention, he has created a decentralized financial system for us, I am more focused on this invention. The time I will waste to find Satoshi sir, I will gain knowledge about holding or how to protect our assets or other things. So don't worry about it and focus on buying. I have not seen any aliens found anywhere, so I will never believe that aliens are behind the creation of Bitcoin. I believe one thing Satoshi is a human being like all of us, a person or a few people

I think the search for the identity, personality or personalities of the created or bitcoin Satoshi will be something some people will decide to carry on as their life’s work. They won’t rest until either to find results or die trying. Therefore folks like us who tell them to get it break or that we have moved past that stage of curiosity will not be able to convince them otherwise. Personally, I wish them good luck on their quest. To add to the OP Hal is no Satoshi. I know this because there are past conversations between them in the early stages of bitcoin which shows that they are two different people.

Honestly I enjoys reading posts about fingers pointing at who Satoshi truly is but I bet it is exorbitant seeing the trolls about who is Satoshi. On that piece of information Finney and Sasasman are all dead for more than decades now so there is no way to still prove this claim even though as it is likely to be convince able according to the data scripts. Moreover it has been further investigated and no linkage of both enthusiasts behind the scene proves the speculation that they or any of them is Satoshi. If the US with their intensifietechnologists and professional security and intelligent personnels could not hold up to anyone to be Satoshi then I think we should just stop bothering ourselves and just focus on the technology being provided for us to be in used.

We are talking here about two absolutely brilliant minds, and whilst the person who created Bitcoin was brilliant, it’s hard to believe it was just one person. If it were just one person, they would have to be an expert in cryptography, computer science, programming, economics, macroeconomics, social sciences, mathematics… in short, an absolute genius. It’s more likely that there were several people involved. One thing remains constant throughout all this: the theories point to people who are now dead, perhaps because it is impossible to ask them, or because it adds to the aura of mystery surrounding them.

If you showed me these 2 faces and asked me to pick one... I'd bet it's Len, he literally looks like what Satoshi looks like in my imagination the likely truth is that neither are Satoshi..

At different times, different people have tried to introduce themselves as Satoshi but no one could survive and prove themselves as Satoshi. Craig Wright even filed several lawsuits to prove himself as Satoshi but he could not prove himself as Satoshi. Many may have wanted to assume Hal Finney as Satoshi but there is no Satoshi compatibility with him. Again today Len Sasasman is being compared to Satoshi but here too he has no compatibility with Satoshi. In fact, we will not be able to identify Satoshi until Satoshi himself becomes public. No one should unnecessarily create chaos by introducing himself as Satoshi.

What is the whole point of trying to speculate who Satoshi is if no one can conclusively prove who he is/was? Every passing year, we have documentaries trying to crack the mystery, and I know all they care about is just viewership. Satoshi being mysterious is probably a good thing for Bitcoin, and it has been strong for so many years now. Let Satoshi rest and let's not give the wannabes too much attention.

From what I’ve concluded by reading the mailing list, and other sources, Nick Szabo seems to me like the strongest candidate for Satoshi Nakamoto. I wouldn’t say there is definitive proof, but based on his writing style, ideas, earlier work on Bit Gold, and deep understanding of money, he is by far the closest match to that profile in my view. Satoshi Nakamoto is  Nick Szabo Nick Szabo designed a concept called Bit Gold back in 1998. Although Bit Gold never became a functional system, it already contained many of the elements that would later appear in Bitcoin: Proof of Work, or mining, cryptographic linking of records, and the idea of digital scarcity. The main thing Bit Gold did not solve was the problem of consensus without a central authority. That is exactly what Bitcoin later managed to solve in an elegant way. One of the more interesting arguments in favor of the theory that Szabo could be Satoshi is linguistic analysis. A team of forensic linguists from Aston University in Birmingham compared Satoshi’s white paper with the writings of several possible candidates. According to their findings, Szabo’s writing style, choice of phrases, and technical precision were the closest match to Satoshi’s way of writing.Of course, this is not definitive proof, but it is a detail that is difficult to completely ignore. It is also interesting that Szabo had been writing about Bit Gold for years, but when Bitcoin appeared in 2008 and 2009, he became unusually quiet. Some researchers claim that he later changed the dates or content of his Bit Gold posts, which some people interpreted as a possible attempt to cover his tracks. Perhaps the strongest connection between Szabo and Satoshi is not only technical, but also philosophical. Szabo deeply understood the history of money and the way people throughout history developed forms of value that could be stored and exchanged. Most programmers tend to look at money as a database or blockchain software. They may have strong technical knowledge, but they often lack a deeper economic and historical understanding of what money actually is. His famous essay “Shelling Out: The Origins of Money” is practically required reading for anyone who wants to understand why Bitcoin exists in the first place. In that essay, you can see the same way of thinking that later appears in Bitcoin

Let's say you've managed to discover that the real Satoshi is Sasasman. Okay. What next? How will this information change anything, really? Even if your guess turns out to be true, no one (not even Sasasman or anyone else) will be able to confirm or deny it. I understand that the mystery of Satoshi's origin excites minds (and will always do so), but I think this is an ineffective waste of "energy". Even if the BTC-community finds out who the real Satoshi is (if he's already dead), it won't affect the bitcoin at all. In fact, the BTC-network and cryptocurrency have long been functioning autonomously without him (in principle, this is how it was intended and should be with decentralization). The only danger of revealing Satoshi's identity is if he's alive, has access keys to old wallets, and is a weak link that can be used to pressure bitcoin. But if you're a bitcoiner (an investor or user interested in the stable operation of bitcoin), why bother finding out who Satoshi really is if it could negatively impact bitcoin (and on him, as a person)? In that case, it's best to keep Satoshi's identity unknown (for the benefit of bitcoin).