Speaker 1: Okay, please introduce yourself now. For the record, my name
Speaker 1: is Andy Greenberg and I'm a senior writer for Wired.
Speaker 1: What drew you to the hunt for Setoshi Nakamodo? Well,
Speaker 1: I um, let's see. In late two thousand fifteen, Andy
Speaker 1: got an email from out of the blue. It was
Speaker 1: encrypted and the writer was using a pseudonym. Andy's mysterious
Speaker 1: correspondent made an incredible claim. He said he possessed documents
Speaker 1: that revealed conclusively the true identity of Setoshi Nakamoto, the
Speaker 1: mysterious creator of the cryptocurrency Bitcoin, one of the tech
Speaker 1: industry's biggest unsolved mysteries. It was the story of the decade,
Speaker 1: a story that could make a journalist career. Andy and
Speaker 1: his correspondent started working together. The evidence was pointing towards
Speaker 1: a little known Australian computer scientist named Craig Right. If
Speaker 1: you just took a glance at this stuff, you would
Speaker 1: very quickly to find enough evidence to convince yourself if
Speaker 1: you believe the documents were real, that this guy had
Speaker 1: created Bitcoin, this eccentric Australian genius you know, nobody had
Speaker 1: ever heard of before they collected his old blog posts.
Speaker 1: They did linguistic analysis to compare rights writing style with
Speaker 1: post written by Satoshi. And on December eight Andy published
Speaker 1: his blockbuster story and Wired titled Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto
Speaker 1: is probably this unknown Australian genius. And then it happened
Speaker 1: what always seems to happen to the Satoshi hunters, this
Speaker 1: community of bitcoin enthusiasts and cryptocurrency fanatics just went to
Speaker 1: work to methodically disprove the claim that Craig Wright was
Speaker 1: Satoshi Nakamoto, and the fallout made Andy Greenberg's life a
Speaker 1: living How. Hi, I'm Brad Stone and I'm Julie r H.
Speaker 1: And this week Undercrypted, we're asking the question whatever happened
Speaker 1: to the hunt for Satoshi Nakamoto? Now, Bratt, I know
Speaker 1: this has captivated me for some time. Julie I confess
Speaker 1: to having fruitlessly spent some time on it as well.
Speaker 1: And over the years, publications like The New Yorker, Gizmoto,
Speaker 1: Fast Company, Forbes, the London Review of Books, Vice have
Speaker 1: all tried to find sitution. It's become a kind of
Speaker 1: journalistic tarbie. The more reporters getting tangled in the mystery,
Speaker 1: the worst fever, and there's this question of whether Satoshi
Speaker 1: should even be identified. You know, Satoshi still controls about
Speaker 1: a million bitcoin, making them the largest holder of the
Speaker 1: cryptocurrency and a billionaire. In paper, a journalist would say,
Speaker 1: the world has a right to know, but maybe this
Speaker 1: genius just wants to be left alone. And if we
Speaker 1: never find out Setoci's true identity, does it even matter anyway?
Speaker 1: Stay with its first, Brad, remind us what we really
Speaker 1: know about Setoshi. All we really know about Setoshi is
Speaker 1: what he wrote. In October two tho paper appeared online
Speaker 1: describing a new kind of digital money called bitcoin. A
Speaker 1: few months later, Satoshi released the very first bitcoin software,
Speaker 1: And this was right after the financial crisis. Is your
Speaker 1: money safe? The fault of Lehman brothers, And of course
Speaker 1: it is not just Lehman's night. Bank of America sealing
Speaker 1: a deal to buy Maryland for twenty nine dollars a
Speaker 1: share that is roughly Bitcoin attracted libertarians and people who
Speaker 1: had lost faith in the global financial system. They liked
Speaker 1: this idea of an electronic currency with no central bank
Speaker 1: standing behind it. In the beginning, Bitcoin was only known
Speaker 1: within small circles of developers, and for a while Satoshi
Speaker 1: communicated with them sending emails, talking on bulletin boards, but
Speaker 1: those people say they never met Setoshi in person. In
Speaker 1: two thousand and eleven, as bitcoin was starting to become
Speaker 1: associated with shady criminal enterprises like the Silk Road, which
Speaker 1: was an illegal online drug market, Satoshi disappeared and his
Speaker 1: final post said quote, I've moved on to other things.
Speaker 1: It's in good hands. And with that the legend of
Speaker 1: Satoshi was born. So Brad together we went to interview
Speaker 1: the very first Setoshi hunter. Right, Joshua Davis is a
Speaker 1: great journalist who wrote one of the first stories about
Speaker 1: bitcoin for the New Yorker magazine all the way back
Speaker 1: in October two eleven. Yeah, and that's just a few
Speaker 1: months after Setoshi went silent. We went for to the
Speaker 1: Mission District in San Francisco for this interview, meeting josh
Speaker 1: at a small office. There was a walk up apartment
Speaker 1: with just a couple of rooms and a gate on
Speaker 1: the entry door. We sat down in a quiet room
Speaker 1: at the back. Please introduce yourself. My name is Joshua Davis,
Speaker 1: and I am the co founder of Epic magazine and
Speaker 1: a contributing editor at Wired. Josh's article cryptocurrency introduced bitcoin
Speaker 1: to a lot of readers. It also said a pattern
Speaker 1: that would be repeated over and over. Journalists would set
Speaker 1: out to understand bitcoin and then get enticed by the
Speaker 1: Satoshi mystery and end up going down the rabbit hole.
Speaker 1: You know, it's like a classic treasure hunt where you
Speaker 1: don't know exactly where the treasure is, but you could.
Speaker 1: You see one crumb, and you follow that crumb to
Speaker 1: the next crumb, and and next thing you know, you've
Speaker 1: been led down this crazy journey. One big win was
Speaker 1: only worth about three dollars at this time. Josh ended
Speaker 1: up buying some and spent them one of the only
Speaker 1: places you could find that accepted it at the time,
Speaker 1: Howard Johnson's hotel near Disneyland. Yikes, and since one bitcoin
Speaker 1: does around ten thousand dollars today, that ended up being
Speaker 1: a very expensive hotel room. Josh also attended a cryptoconference
Speaker 1: in Santa Barbara, one of the first, and became convinced
Speaker 1: that one of the attendees must be Setoshi hiding in
Speaker 1: plain sight. He scanned the attendee list and going on
Speaker 1: clues like the fact that Setoshi seemed to use some
Speaker 1: British sayings in his writing, he settled on an Irish
Speaker 1: cryptography student named Michael Clear. As Josh described it in
Speaker 1: the story, he met with Michael outside the conference and
Speaker 1: then asked him, point blank, are you Setoshi Nakamoto? We
Speaker 1: talked about bitcoin a little bit and I said to him,
Speaker 1: I'm also looking for the person who created it. And
Speaker 1: I said, I know, it happened to notice that you
Speaker 1: have a lot of the same experience, and so I
Speaker 1: just want to ask you. Are you set Toshi? And
Speaker 1: he said no, But if I was, I wouldn't tell you.
Speaker 1: From the story, it's clear Josh wasn't entirely sure if
Speaker 1: Michael was telling the truth, right, because denying it is
Speaker 1: exactly what Satoshi would do. Many years later, Josh's circumspect
Speaker 1: about the challenges of revealing Satoshi's identity. I think the
Speaker 1: biggest problem is that there's just not a lot to
Speaker 1: go on, and so you very quickly start making assumptions.
Speaker 1: This is something we heard over and over. You start
Speaker 1: finding ways to convince yourself that you're on the right track.
Speaker 1: A confirmation bias. So, you know, let's look at some
Speaker 1: of those assumptions. British English, the assumption that it's a
Speaker 1: heat because he's using the name Satoshi Nakamoto. I mean
Speaker 1: the very initial assumption that he's Japanese. Again, there's no
Speaker 1: guarantee that he's Japanese. At many points in the reporting,
Speaker 1: I was imagining Satoshi just laughing, just laughing at me,
Speaker 1: and then over the years, as other people have chased him,
Speaker 1: just laughing at everybody else. A few years later, in
Speaker 1: two thousand fourteen, the crypto community got a rather large
Speaker 1: surprise when Newsweek magazine ran a story revealing the true
Speaker 1: identity of the creator of Bitcoin. It has been one
Speaker 1: of the biggest mysteries raging across the internet and business worlds.
Speaker 1: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? The man who created bitcoin is
Speaker 1: known as the father of Bitcoin, the online currency now
Speaker 1: worth billions. Take a look at this scene last night
Speaker 1: after Newsweek published an article claiming the man in these
Speaker 1: images is the Bitcoin founder. Now, this is probably the
Speaker 1: best known attempt at un mask Satoshi. So speaking to
Speaker 1: the woman who wrote it, was at the top of
Speaker 1: our list. My name is Leah McGrath Goodman, and I
Speaker 1: was the writer of the Bitcoin story cover story for Newsweek.
Speaker 1: Back at this time, Newsweek had been temporarily out of print,
Speaker 1: Leah's article appeared on the cover of their first issue
Speaker 1: back and there was a lot of anticipation around it.
Speaker 1: Leah had identified a sixty four year old Japanese American
Speaker 1: living in southern California, and his real name, as it
Speaker 1: turned out, was Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto. When this hit on March,
Speaker 1: I was back in New York. I was online and
Speaker 1: watching from across the country. There was a huge reaction
Speaker 1: to the story, something Leah says she never could have expected.
Speaker 1: Camera crews and police cars descended on Dorian Nakamoto's home.
Speaker 1: He was hounded by reporters while trying to leave this house.
Speaker 1: I hadn't seen anything like that in California since I
Speaker 1: was a little kid with the O. J. Simpson Wake
Speaker 1: Bronco car chase. I was in complete shock. I just
Speaker 1: got up and walked across the room and people were
Speaker 1: congratulating me and shaking my hand, and I went to
Speaker 1: the ladies room and just threw up um and just panicked,
Speaker 1: had a panic attack because I realized that the theories
Speaker 1: of events that had been found in motion was um
Speaker 1: something I couldn't change or do anything about. In addition
Speaker 1: to the media surface, Leah faced an outcry from bitcoin
Speaker 1: die hards online on Twitter and read it immediately with
Speaker 1: people trying to discredit her story as well. But the
Speaker 1: biggest blow probably came from Dorian Nakamoto himself. When reporters
Speaker 1: confronted him on this driveway, he told them he had
Speaker 1: never worked on cryptography or alternative currencies. It took me
Speaker 1: a while to get Lea comfortable with talking about this
Speaker 1: moment in her life. Corresponded with her for a few
Speaker 1: months and met her for coffee when she visited New
Speaker 1: York before she agreed to speak with us. I'm not
Speaker 1: surprised she was reticent because that story was fairly discredited
Speaker 1: in the in the tech community. So I'm dying to
Speaker 1: know Julie. If she could go back again, would she
Speaker 1: still write her story? Yeah? I asked her about that.
Speaker 1: If you go back again and you knew that this
Speaker 1: whole reaction was going to happen, and I mean, it's
Speaker 1: sort of like altered your life quite a bit, would
Speaker 1: you still go back and write this story? Yeah. I
Speaker 1: have actually had this question recently put to me by
Speaker 1: a couple other people, and I said I couldn't really
Speaker 1: say if I would do it again to be honest,
Speaker 1: So does she still think that Dorian is the real
Speaker 1: said Tosi. Unlike the other people that we've talked to,
Speaker 1: Leah is still quite certain that Dorian is a guy,
Speaker 1: just perhaps as part of a group rather than by himself.
Speaker 1: And we should point out that news Week never retracted
Speaker 1: that story. That probably should have been enough to dissuade
Speaker 1: other journalists from following in Leah's footsteps. But as the
Speaker 1: price of bitcoin rose from two hundred dollars in the
Speaker 1: fall to eight hundred dollars a year later, the stakes
Speaker 1: got higher and the intrigue around the mystery of Satoshi
Speaker 1: got even more intense and irresistible. I found it really
Speaker 1: exciting that there was this unknown thing, like I've always
Speaker 1: writing about whether anonymitia is possible on the Internet, and
Speaker 1: it kind of excited me that someone had actually achieved it.
Speaker 1: Someone had done something really significant on the Internet, and
Speaker 1: we still didn't know who they were. That's Andy Greenberg,
Speaker 1: the writer for Wired magazine we met at the beginning
Speaker 1: of the episode. Brad and I traveled down to One
Speaker 1: World Trade in Manhattan, where the Wired offices are located.
Speaker 1: Andy has a bushy beard which he was stroking as
Speaker 1: he was remembering a time in his life that he
Speaker 1: had tried to forget. Andy says he was originally deflated
Speaker 1: by the Newsweek story. He couldn't believe Satoshi was hiding
Speaker 1: in plain sight. You see, Andy was a Setoshi hunter himself.
Speaker 1: When he was still at Forbes magazine. He had written
Speaker 1: a story about a man named Hal Finny. Now, How
Speaker 1: was a computer scientist and the first person to ever
Speaker 1: exchange emails and bitcoin with Setoshi. Andy suspected maybe How
Speaker 1: was Setoshi himself. Andy had visited Hal, who had advanced
Speaker 1: a LS at his home in two thousand and fourteen.
Speaker 1: At the time, he thought it was significant that Hal
Speaker 1: and Dorian Nakamoto lived only a half mile away from
Speaker 1: each other in Los Angeles. Yeah, but then he concluded
Speaker 1: it was just that confirmation bias at work. Again. There's
Speaker 1: a line in that story that I thought was resident
Speaker 1: and really applies to this entire kind of topic, which
Speaker 1: as I believe that those connections were in fact random,
Speaker 1: that Finny is telling the truth when he denies helping
Speaker 1: to an event bitcoin, and that I am only the
Speaker 1: most recent of a long string of journalists to succumb
Speaker 1: to the mirage of us Atoshi Nakamoto shaped pattern in
Speaker 1: a collection of meaningless facts. Yeah, that's it's even more
Speaker 1: painful to think about those words now because I I
Speaker 1: don't think I may have felt for it again. That's
Speaker 1: because about a year after the Newsweek story fell apart
Speaker 1: in late and he started getting encrypted emails from someone
Speaker 1: using the name weren Brandwyn Goern said he was in
Speaker 1: possession of emails, texts, accounting documents, and other evidence that
Speaker 1: conclusively revealed that an esoteric Australian computer scientist named Craig
Speaker 1: Wright was the one and only Satoshi nakamuk and he
Speaker 1: was looking for advice and a good journalist to share
Speaker 1: this document trove with. So of course I I couldn't
Speaker 1: let Gun just take this to another reporter. I mean,
Speaker 1: I would have, you know, been losing out on the
Speaker 1: biggest story. And I'm sure I'm sure that Green knew
Speaker 1: what he was doing, and so I negotiated with him
Speaker 1: that we would delve into it together. Investigated cod byeline
Speaker 1: of story, which is very strange because he's not a
Speaker 1: journalist and I don't know his real name. Andy spent
Speaker 1: three NonStop weeks working on the story, identifying Craig right
Speaker 1: as Setoshi throwing himself right back into it despite his hesitation.
Speaker 1: I dropped everything like eating and sleeping. They reported carefully
Speaker 1: worried about inadvertently tipping off their competition. So we were
Speaker 1: constantly doing these really kg interviews where we were just
Speaker 1: asking these really circumspects questions that people. They spent hours
Speaker 1: pouring over old Craig Right blog posts comparing his style
Speaker 1: to that of Setoshi's. Andy was focusing on a possible
Speaker 1: cover story for Wired, but he also was preparing a
Speaker 1: shorter piece just in case he heard that competition was
Speaker 1: working on the same story. Andy and Goren contacted Craig
Speaker 1: Right directly, but he was cag full of hints, non
Speaker 1: denials and even a little bit of menace. Right was
Speaker 1: really weird right from the beginning and just got back
Speaker 1: to us with these pseudo denials, like not really denying
Speaker 1: that he was the guy. They were kind of menacing
Speaker 1: responses that were not helpful but not not actual denials either,
Speaker 1: which is like, I feel like that's what Satoshi would
Speaker 1: do to kind of but they were meaner than Satoshi
Speaker 1: is in his um you know, original persona. A picture
Speaker 1: seemed to emerge of this eccentric Craig Right, who had
Speaker 1: worked in tandem to create bitcoin with a forensic investigator
Speaker 1: in US Army veteran named Dave Kleinman who had passed away.
Speaker 1: And so the weird tone of Craig Rights writing, which
Speaker 1: was kind of paranoid and angry and just very strange,
Speaker 1: the fact that didn't match to Toshi's persona that seemed okay,
Speaker 1: like we could explain it away. And then just as
Speaker 1: that picture was coming into focus, Andy got word that Gizmodo,
Speaker 1: the tech news site, was working on the same story.
Speaker 1: Wired rushed its story onto the web. To be clear,
Speaker 1: we did not have the opportunity to do the story
Speaker 1: we wanted to do. Instead, I heard that Gizmodo was
Speaker 1: working on a piece, and like an hour later we
Speaker 1: published hours because we were not going to like run
Speaker 1: the risk of losing what could be a big scoop.
Speaker 1: The next few days were pretty dark for Andy. They
Speaker 1: were miserable days because even if you get the rights,
Speaker 1: everyone's furious a view for having violated the privacy Setoshi Nakamoto.
Speaker 1: Members of the bigcoin community were furious at him and
Speaker 1: Wired for trying to unmask Setoshi. Many of them believe
Speaker 1: the world should never find out who Setoshi is and
Speaker 1: that the person deserves the privacy. It was like he
Speaker 1: had desecrated a temple. The blowback was as bad as
Speaker 1: anything experienced by lea newsweek. Bitcoin is, by its nature
Speaker 1: this thing that a lot of people see as a
Speaker 1: privacy tool, although it actually is very difficult to use
Speaker 1: in a private way. As you know, everybody knows. Increasingly
Speaker 1: it's it's becoming more understood that bitcoin is not actually
Speaker 1: very easy to use in a private way. But it
Speaker 1: comes from the world of cryptography, where everyone is obsessed
Speaker 1: with privacy, and so there are a lot of people
Speaker 1: who are just angry at me and gorn and wired
Speaker 1: for having even attempted to out the docs. Setoshi, Um,
Speaker 1: this poor genius who just wanted to be hidden. My
Speaker 1: Twitter mentions were just a war zone for weeks to come.
Speaker 1: So I spent you know, these just defending the decision
Speaker 1: to try to do this. As journalists. I hope you
Speaker 1: guys can see that you can't you can't not do
Speaker 1: it if the clues come to you. It's not like
Speaker 1: it's not like it's a TOCI is just a random
Speaker 1: private person. He would be a multi billionaire with immense
Speaker 1: power and money and influence, you know, and that you
Speaker 1: know that really matters, Like I do think it's completely
Speaker 1: defensible to to to say who's a toci is if
Speaker 1: you know. But then things got worse. A journalist from
Speaker 1: Forbes wrote a story suggesting that Craig Right had falsified
Speaker 1: his academic record, that he didn't in fact have multiple
Speaker 1: PhD s, and then another reporter up information showing that
Speaker 1: Craig Wright had backdated some of his blog posts to
Speaker 1: make it seem like you wrote them back at the
Speaker 1: creation of bitcoin. Yeah, and he says he knew about that,
Speaker 1: but rationalized it. He felt like Craig was leaving him
Speaker 1: these breadcrumbs that he'd previously concealed. You know a lot
Speaker 1: of people have been pointing to that and said, what
Speaker 1: were you guys thinking? You even saw that he had
Speaker 1: backdated the blog posts? How could you be so silly?
Speaker 1: And I don't know. It's a good point. It was
Speaker 1: confirmation by us, like we had other evidence that was
Speaker 1: pointing in the positive direction. So we found ways to
Speaker 1: tell ourselves that the negative stuff didn't matter as much
Speaker 1: as it should have. Andy followed up three days after
Speaker 1: the original article with a story and Wired that said
Speaker 1: that elements of craig wright story didn't add up. That
Speaker 1: later story was titled new Clues suggests Craig Wright suspected
Speaker 1: Bitcoin creator, maybe a hoaxer now, to be fair, and
Speaker 1: he had hedged his original story well. He made sure
Speaker 1: to say in that first piece that Craig could be
Speaker 1: a huckster. But that's the kind of nuance that gets
Speaker 1: lost in a media scrum, right, and almost didn't matter.
Speaker 1: The Gizmoto story that also identified Craig was less careful
Speaker 1: and together, the impression was that both publications had identified
Speaker 1: Craig as Setoshi. Now they were seemingly big, embarrassing holes
Speaker 1: in their stories. It seemed like another journalistic failure to
Speaker 1: hunt Setoshi down. About six months later, by the way,
Speaker 1: Craig Wright tried to prove publicly that he was Atoshi Nakamoto.
Speaker 1: He gave a technical demonstration that convinced Gavin Andreessen, a
Speaker 1: high profile member of the bitcoin community, But then a
Speaker 1: reputable security researcher alleged that he had faked as proof.
Speaker 1: Rights claimed to be Satoshi seems to have collapsed, at
Speaker 1: least for now, after the whole painful episode. What really
Speaker 1: shocked Andy was that readers didn't seem to care as
Speaker 1: much as he thought they would, right. He actually said
Speaker 1: readership was kind of disappointing. Craig writes story people were
Speaker 1: less interested, Like I thought that would blow up the internet,
Speaker 1: and it didn't because people had already gone through this
Speaker 1: once with the newsweek piece and they kind of didn't
Speaker 1: care as much. And then after Craig writes kind of
Speaker 1: like disappointing mysteries, you know, resolution, but then it's not
Speaker 1: a resolution, and then he comes out again and then
Speaker 1: that's disproven, and it's kind of like never resolved. Uh,
Speaker 1: it's just made the mystery much less fun. Uh, and
Speaker 1: it's it's just kind of sad. And I I know
Speaker 1: that I am part of making that mystery less fun.
Speaker 1: That it makes me. It makes me sad that like
Speaker 1: there was this kind of very pure and like super
Speaker 1: interesting question of who's a Toci Nakamoto And now I
Speaker 1: just get like nauseated thinking about it. And there's one
Speaker 1: other journalist that we talked to, though, Nathaniel Popper from
Speaker 1: the New York Times, who actually covers bitcoin but has
Speaker 1: only made a best guess at who Setosi is rather
Speaker 1: than writing this big expose meant to go on page
Speaker 1: one of the paper. It doesn't mean he hasn't been interested.
Speaker 1: He's just been extremely cautious. There's some part of me
Speaker 1: that's always on edge, waiting for the email that finally says,
Speaker 1: you know, here, I am here, here it is right.
Speaker 1: I doubt anyone could be more curious about the setoci
Speaker 1: hunt than someone like Nathan. But he says he hasn't
Speaker 1: believed the previous attempts for more than a few hours.
Speaker 1: You know, I remember when when Dorian, when that Newsweek
Speaker 1: story came out, and I remember when the Craig Rights
Speaker 1: story came out. There were certainly a few hours where
Speaker 1: it was this open question. I thought, you know, maybe
Speaker 1: this this is it. But I think this is one
Speaker 1: of these cases where the kind of online mob very quickly,
Speaker 1: uh pulls together the evidence on sized and um, you know,
Speaker 1: people reached opinions pretty quickly. But Nathan told us that
Speaker 1: he does hope we'll find out who Satoshi is, and
Speaker 1: so you know, it wouldn't surprise me if we do
Speaker 1: find out at some point. And I'll say, I'm constantly
Speaker 1: getting emails from people who claimed to be Satoshi and say,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm gonna I'm gonna bring forward the evidence
Speaker 1: when the time is right. So what do you think, bred,
Speaker 1: do you think we'll ever find out who Setoshi is?
Speaker 1: You know, unless Satoshi comes out and move some of
Speaker 1: that original block of bitcoin. I think there's gonna be
Speaker 1: some ambiguity that the challenges that we've built up Setohi
Speaker 1: into this legend. And yet people are fallible, They make mistakes,
Speaker 1: you know, they tell little lies that can get exposed.
Speaker 1: I think Andy Greenberg from Wired said of the best
Speaker 1: Julie when he told us we're going to need Setoshi's
Speaker 1: cooperation if we're ever going to settle this. What do
Speaker 1: you think, Yeah, I think you're right. I think we've
Speaker 1: just built up this character. And obviously, as a journalist,
Speaker 1: I'd love to be the one to break this story.
Speaker 1: But then as just a person watching this, this creation
Speaker 1: and seeing how someone has escaped, you know, any sort
Speaker 1: of tracking is just fascinating. And I don't really want
Speaker 1: Setoci to ever be found either. Right, there are a
Speaker 1: lot of members of the bitcoin community that want them
Speaker 1: to come back now, because there there's this division right
Speaker 1: in the community between kind of traditional bitcoin and something
Speaker 1: called bitcoin Cash, there's lots of animosity without getting too
Speaker 1: deep into the split, I mean, it's a tocy come
Speaker 1: back and establish some some order to this world. I
Speaker 1: mean there's pros and cons of that too, right, it
Speaker 1: would be nice to have someone come established order. But
Speaker 1: it was also a bitcoins, something that's supposed to be
Speaker 1: so decentralized and not really have one thing ruling it. It
Speaker 1: It was just meant to be perfect that the onset
Speaker 1: and now you know, all these divisions had happened. There's
Speaker 1: other cryptocurrencies out there that people say are going to
Speaker 1: be better than Bitcoin, and it's just going to be
Speaker 1: such an interesting story to keep following. Maybe we do
Speaker 1: keep Stoshi alone as an icon. I mean, one of
Speaker 1: the great things about this is that he you know,
Speaker 1: he establishes that there is such a thing as anonymity online. Right.
Speaker 1: That principle has been undermined so many times over the years,
Speaker 1: and yet Stocia kind of re establishes it. And that's
Speaker 1: it for this week's Decrypted. Thanks for listening. Join us
Speaker 1: next week for an even more special episode where we
Speaker 1: revealed the true identity of Satoshi Nakamotive. That's not true, folks,
Speaker 1: but do let us know what you thought of today's show.
Speaker 1: You can email us at decrypted at bloomberg dot net
Speaker 1: or reach out to me on Twitter and I'm at
Speaker 1: Julie ver H and I'm at brad Stone. If you
Speaker 1: haven't already subscribed to our show wherever you get your podcasts,
Speaker 1: and leave us a rating or a reef. It really
Speaker 1: help us reach new listeners. This episode was produced by
Speaker 1: Pia Gedkari, Magnus hand Lesen, Liz Smith and tofor Foreheaz.
Speaker 1: Francesco Levie is the head of Bloomberg Podcasts and We'll
Speaker 1: see you next week. M