Thank you to my YouTube subscribers! Another milestone!
If you haven't subscribed, help me get to 5,000 subs by subscribing here: https://t.co/h2okKbkSgM
The @nytimes published an article by @JohnCarreyrou that declared @adam3us is #SatoshiNakamoto.
I used the book by @benjwallace (& my interview with him) to explain why Adam Back is probably NOT Satoshi.
Watch & share the video premiere now:
https://t.co/0Cfm0RdHHX
Tomorrow's WanderLearn Show will discuss the NYT article and what @benjwallace would probably say about the NYT article. I'll be basing my conjecture on my interview with Ben a few months ago and his excellent book.
Hi. Professional C/C++ programmer here. The open-source code I can find written by Adam Back and Satoshi Nakamoto don't look remotely similar.
Back's code looks typical of academic Unix programmers who also hack their code to run on Windows.
Satoshi code was written by a professional Windows programmer who also wrote for Unix.
Stylistically, they look nothing alike. There's not enough time between 2005 when I can find the newest Adam Back and January 2009 when Satoshi published Bitcoin/0.1 to account for the change. Both are perfectly competent programmers, but stylistically, they are completely different.
The NYTimes tried to compare their English language in posts/emails. I'm compare their C/C++ language in their open-source code. The NYTimes merely points out they both use C++ as if that's another corroborating detail, when the actual code seems to disqualify Adam Back.
Corporations are often seen as evil, selfish entities. We overlook that they allow billions of parents to feed, educate, and heal their kids.
Watch this episode with Sawyer CEO Kurt Avery https://t.co/mO2oDENX04