We are talking about the anonymous person behind Bitcoin. I would put absolutely NOTHING past the original architect. Honestly, I would expect nothing else.
Would you expect him to not even be able to afford internet service or suffer financially while recovering from cancer and a stroke despite having an estimated 400MM worth of BTC?
My girlfriend works at a bakery. She swears that one day an elderly Elvis and Tupac came in together, bought some pastries with bitcoin, then told her they invented the entire thing.
You would expect the original architect to confess to being involved and then deny it hours later. Is there something about the original whitepaper that makes you think this person is mentally ill?
You don't have to be mentally ill to act mentally ill. The charade has pretty much removed all credence to the idea that he is the creator of bitcoin. Perhaps that's what he wants.
> We are talking about the anonymous person behind Bitcoin.
If they wanted to be anonymous, wouldn't they use a pseudonym?To create a decentralized identity protecting project as an anonymous individual using your real name (because you don't want to be found) seems... poorly thought out.
Hindsight is 20/20. By this I mean: the name was linked when the white paper was written. Do you think Satoshi anticipated that everyone would ignore the white paper and that he would have to spend two years building it by himself?
My point is: he didn't choose his alias aided by the benefit of knowing what bitcoin would become. So it's suspect to deduce that his actions had been perfectly targeted to the facts of the present.
