16-8 Satoshi Nakamoto’s Extraordinary Respect for Wei Dai

Wu: Satoshi Nakamoto’s respect for Wei Dai is mainly manifested in three points, emails, white paper citations, and the definition of Bitcoin. What faults do you pick out from them?

One of the principles of deep thinking is to find faults and then give reasonable explanations for unreasonable things.

Regarding the definition of the invention of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto was attentive. At that time, Wikipedia wanted to delete the entry for Bitcoin, and he defined Bitcoin on the Bitcoin forum: (1)

“Bitcoin is an implementation of Wei Dai’s b-money proposal http://weidai.com/bmoney.txt on Cypherpunks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypherpunks in 1998 and Nick Szabo’s Bitgold proposal http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html.” 1)

The faults with this definition is that it devalues itself.

Wu: What do you say?

Bitcoin is not a simple realization but a creation, and it creatively solves many problems, seemingly ordinary and very ingenious. Nick said that Satoshi Nakamoto handled the Byzantine problem well, and Wei Dai said that Satoshi changed the total amount from unlimited to fixed. Satoshi Nakamoto is humble, using the word “realization” to underestimate his creative contribution. Why belittle yourself, and What’s the secret to it? Who can benefit from this devaluation? Wei Dai! The description here implies that Wei Dai is the first contributor.

Wei Dai is in front of Nick Szabo; the cypherpunks don’t recognize it. Only Nick and Hal Finney recognized it. We said earlier that Hal Finney was playing a cover. There are benefits to both Nick Szabo and Wei Dai while demeaning himself. It is unreasonable. Looking down.

In the third subsection of the second section, “Transactions” of the Bitcoin white paper, a sentence from Wei Dai is quoted: “To accomplish this without a trusted party, transactions must be publicly announced” (2)The full text only used this sentence, which became the first citation of the white paper. A big pie fell from the sky and hit Wei Dai.

Wu: Is this sentence the first quote? It’s a little strange.

The first section of the white paper, “Introduction,” mainly talks about using timestamps and honest computing power assumptions to solve the double-spending problem. It is the most crucial problem of distributed systems and is very difficult to solve. The assumption of honest computing power is the creation of Satoshi Nakamoto. Quotations 2-5 are all about timestamps. Satoshi Nakamoto arranges citations in order. In theory, the double-spending problem comes first. Therefore, old Chaum and timestamps should be listed first as citations. In the second subsection of the second section, “Transaction,” it is mentioned again that Chaum’s mint still has no citations. Perhaps Chaum’s method is the object of criticism, so it is inconvenient to arrange it. However, timestamping is a Bitcoin-adopted technology and should be listed as a citation at least one. The usual arrangement of citations is based on the order of appearance. Let’s compare the descriptions of timestamps in the first and third sections. The first section is for the purpose of timestamping, and the third section is dedicated to timestamps. Which relates to the way it works. At the beginning of the third section, the rough citation method of citation “2-5” is marked. In order to rank Wei Dai at the top, such an essential and historical contribution and major citation technology timestamps should be listed on their first appearances. It’s a little weird to write about it.

Wu: It is not a general rule, you see carefully

Wei Dai’s B money not only said that “transactions must be publicly announced”(1 but also the design idea of the plan, like Nick’s idea. Why not quote Nick’s when quoting Wei Dai’s thoughts? The main difference between Nick’s and Wei Dai’s articles is that “transactions must be publicly announced.” Nick cites Hal’s transparent centralization rather than public, apparently not better than Satoshi’s solution. Compared with the white papers of Bit Gold and B Money, Bit Gold basically includes the idea of B Money, which is clearer and more operable. It clearly feels that it is easier for Bitcoin to improve upon Bit Gold.

Wu: This is why the world suspects Nick Szabo is Satoshi Nakamoto and ranks higher in Cypherpunk than Wei Dai.

Yes, the outside world only looks at the surface, and the achievements can be directly evaluated. Who has contributed the most to Bitcoin? I’d come to the same conclusion after watching B-money and Bit Gold. But why is it impossible for Nick Szabo and Hal Finney to get it wrong? Just like family members can distinguish twins at a glance. The best informed is the most credible. The two masters have the same to sort, and their analysis is more reliable than the market.

Of course, Bit Gold is the outline of the development task book, and Satoshi Nakamoto has created specific aspects. Readers can refer to the article in this series, “15. Nick Szabo, a virtuous thinker and one of the great founders of Bitcoin,” reference(8) “Reading Notes Bit Gold.” In May 2011, Nick published ” Bitcoin, what took ye so long?” to explain the doubts about Bitcoin. He wrote very profoundly. It is not said that Bitcoin is to copy some of his things to show the demeanor of a master. Of course, although Satoshi Nakamoto did not use Bit gold as a citation, he still affirmed Nick in the definition of Bitcoin, and Satoshi was also a demeanor of master.

Wu: In this way, there is a problem. Without citations, where is Nick’s proposal contribution?

You haven’t read the white papers of Bitcoin and Bit Gold. However, they are not only similar in thinking but also writing.

In the fifth section of Satoshi Nakamoto’s white paper, “network” is very similar to Bit Gold in terms of writing. The excerpts are as follows; readers can compare.

Excerpted from Section 5 of the Bitcoin White Paper: (2)

“The steps to run the network are as follows.

  1. New transactions are broadcast to all nodes.
  2. Each node collects new transactions into a block.
  3. Each node works on finding a difficult proof-of-work for its block.
  4. When a node finds a proof-of-work, it broadcasts the block to all nodes.
  5. Nodes accept the block only if all transactions in it are valid and not already spent.
  6. Nodes express their acceptance of the block by working on creating the next block in the chain, using the hash of the accepted block as the previous hash.”

The following is an excerpt from Nick’s Bit Gold: (3)

“The following are the main steps of the Bitcoin Gold system I envision.

(1) A public string of bits, the “challenge string,” is created (see step 5).

(2) Alice on her computer generates the proof of work string from the challenge bits using a benchmark function.

(3) The proof of work is securely timestamped. This should work in a distributed fashion, with several different timestamp services so that no particular timestamp service need be substantially relied on.

(4) Alice adds the challenge string and the timestamped proof of work string to a distributed property title registry for bit gold. Here, too, no single server is substantially relied on to properly operate the registry.

(5) The last-created string of bit gold provides the challenge bits for the next-created string.

(6) To verify that Alice is the owner of a particular string of bit gold, Bob checks the unforgeable chain of title in the bit gold title registry.

(7) To assay the value of a string of bit gold, Bob checks and verifies the challenge bits, the proof of work string, and the timestamp.”(3)

The content of the two systems is different, but the writing format is the same. The earliest Wei Dai used a similar form to describe the process in B-money, but it is more like Nick’s, because it is clearer.

As I mentioned earlier, Satoshi Nakamoto is a cypherpunk who knows Adam, Old Chuam, and the failure of previous digital currencies. How could Satoshi Nakamoto not know Wei Dai and Nick? He also knew that Adam participated in the discussion of B money, and he quoted Adam’s article as a citation in the white paper. On the one hand, it was really needed; on the other hand, Satoshi had an excuse for communication. In 1998, Adam communicated with Wei Dai about B money, saying that his hash cash algorithm was a good candidate for Wei Dai’s B money. Adam can see the similarities between Bitcoin and Wei Dai’s thinking at a glance, and he will likely reply to the email. It is Satoshi Nakamoto’s careful calculation. He got his wish, and Adam did mention Wei Dai.

Wu: When writing the white paper, he knew Nick and Wei Dai, and Wei Dai said that Satoshi Nakamoto didn’t know his stuff beforehand was untenable.

From the definition of the invention of Bitcoin to the white paper citations ranking Wei Dai first, Satoshi Nakamoto could not come forward. He still hopes that his real body will come forward. It is a normal human psychology. In the P2P Foundation Forum, he denied the two fake Satoshi Nakamoto twice. He did not want his hard work to be possessed by irrelevant people.

The following statement is Satoshi Nakamoto’s superfluous

In Satoshi Nakamoto’s email to Wei Dai: Bitcoin achieves almost all the goals you intend to address in the B-money paper. Is it necessary to tell people without them asking? Afraid people don’t know about the relationship between Bitcoin and Wei Dai? Fearful that people don’t know about Wei Dai’s contributions?

Satoshi Nakamoto felt uneasy because he quoted only one sentence of Wei Dai. in the white paper, and Wei Dai was ranked first in the citations.

With Adam’s email response, Wei Dai was logically ranked as the first citation. Satoshi Nakamoto considered the details so meticulously; from the beginning, he knew what a big deal he was doing. There is an anomaly in Satoshi Nakamoto’s approach in terms of the contributions of Wei Dai and Nick, and the ranking of celebrities in the Wikipedia cypherpunk represents a different view of the market.

Wu: Satoshi Nakamoto is meticulous, and you also see it carefully. Indeed, the market does not agree with Satoshi Nakamoto’s approach.

In fact, without citing Nick’s article, Satoshi Nakamoto is apologetic, so he must affirm Nick in the definition of the invention of Bitcoin. The relationship between Wei Dai and Nick is an AND relationship, but what is given is a juxtaposition status. But if he cites Nick’s article, the possibility of anonymity being revealed is too great. For Nick, one glance at the white paper can tell who wrote it. There is not much difference between the masters. Nick understands the difficulties of Satoshi Nakamoto and keeps the secret for him, and at the same time also stands up for Bitcoin to clear up doubts. Salute Mr. Nick Szabo!

Wu: Your interpretation of Nick is the Chinese interpretation.

The Wikipedia cypherpunk entry believes that cypherpunk gave birth to Bitcoin, and Satoshi Nakamoto is also a cypherpunk. This sentence echoes Satoshi Nakamoto’s description of cypherpunks in the previous definition of Bitcoin. He consciously brought out the cypherpunks. Implicit cypherpunk community contributions to Bitcoin. It is an excellent quality of being a human being. Although Satoshi Nakamoto ranks Wei Dai first in citations, Nick is just ahead of Wei Dai in well-known ranking figures in the cypherpunk entry. It represents the industry’s view of their contribution to Bitcoin, and Nakamoto’s view is obviously inconsistent with the industry’s. Of course, Satoshi Nakamoto ranks much higher. If Wei Dai is Satoshi Nakamoto, that’s another rank.

Ultimately the Wikipedia entry on Bitcoin doesn’t use his definition. Some regrets. Because the market didn’t agree with his elevation of Wei Dai, Satoshi Nakamoto’s definition is fair, and the citation is correct, which explains why Wei Dai stood in first place in the citation because of one sentence Wei Dai is his real body. All unreasonable places can be explained. The Bitcoin entry will revise this definition to adopt Satoshi Nakamoto’s definition.

Satoshi Nakamoto’s careful calculations affirm the contributions of Cypherpunk and Nick Szabo. He has prepared for one day to come out from the beginning and can stand firm on the day when the truth comes out.

We have analyzed many unreasonable places, showing Satoshi Nakamoto’s great respect for Wei Dai but market disapproval. If Satoshi Nakamoto is a natural person, there is no problem. The problem is that he is anonymous. Whoever benefits from his actions is the natural body. Is this a reasonable explanation? The basis on Satoshi Nakamoto’s two market voices denying other people shows that Satoshi Nakamoto cares about maintaining the current situation. Respect Wei Dai and deny others.

Wu: Your analysis is detailed and convincing, and you have worked hard. Even if you can’t convince Satoshi Nakamoto, it is the most influential article I have seen in the market.

There are still many secrets. I aim to decipher as many Bitcoin and Satoshi Nakamoto’s passwords as possible; deciphering is fun, and the more I decipher, the more I feel like a mountain. Bitcoin is the most outstanding contribution of modern Chinese to the world. In the history of China, only the four major inventions can be compared.

Wu: With such a high evaluation, let’s see your thinking.

Right. The most significant contribution of the Chinese in modern times. Please see the next section.


1. BitcoinTalk

Re: They want to delete the Wikipedia article

2010-07-20 18:38:28

  • Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System

Satoshi Nakamoto

satoshin@gmx.com www.bitcoin.org

  • Bit gold

Nike Szabo


in China link

Here is our article link: https://chainless.hk/


Chinese link:


English link: https://en.bitpush.news/?s=Weisha+Zhu

Sun TV’s link is as follows:

Please follow and like us:
Follow by Email
X (Twitter)
Visit Us
Follow Me

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top