just read that adam back is denying he's satoshi nakamoto after nyt basically made the case that he's the strongest candidate yet. his response is pretty reasonable though - he's saying the overlaps between his decades of cryptography work and bitcoin's design are just shared cypherpunk ideas, not proof he created it.

the interesting part is how other people are pushing back too. joe weisenthal from bloomberg is like, the stylometry is cool but all the cypherpunks had similar thoughts on privacy and internet architecture anyway. plus back literally published hashcash under his real name, so why would he suddenly go full anonymous for bitcoin? doesn't add up.

there's also this uk bitcoin early adopter nicholas gregory saying he doesn't think back is satoshi based on personal interactions, but even if he was, you'd have to respect the effort he went to stay hidden. gregory also warns that if they actually figure out who satoshi is, it could put that person in real danger. seems like the longer people search for satoshi nakamoto's identity, the more extreme the theories get. pretty wild how many documentaries and articles have claimed to solve it and then completely fallen apart.