I recently released a 7-hour long interview with Phil "Scronty" Wilson, the author of the Bitcoin Origins story. In the coming weeks and months, I intend to write several articles explaining why I find his story most plausible.
From the beginning, I am not approaching this like a journalist. I am less persuaded, and less interested, in historical claims. Though they are important, they're also incredibly hard to confirm, disconfirm, or even remember. They can be forged, and even the real thing might look forged after enough time. The world is messy and complex, and so are human recollections.
If you know anybody who has real-world experience with journalists and journalism, you know the truth is never found, nor is it ever cared about. Stories misrepresent everything, are poorly-thought-out, poorly investigated, with the simple goal of generating traffic. Journalism, in the real world, is theater.
I do not expect great minds to have detailed memories about their interactions with the world. I do expect a great mind to have a fantastic thought-process. I expect them to be able to synthesize huge amounts of knowledge and intuition based on their past experiences. I expect them to be able to explain their ideas in a way that an intelligent high-schooler could understand, regardless of how sophisticated.
Anybody can claim historical knowledge. But few can fake a thought-process.
My judgement of Phil does not come from hearing his historical claims and believing they are all true. He doesn't even believe they are all true. My judgement comes from listening to his ideas and observing his mind - letting him talk, and working through the ideas as he presents them. The ideas are brilliant. I don't believe everything Phil says is true, but I see a mind capable of being the brains behind Bitcoin, and it just so happens that this mind does have a bunch of historical knowledge, is interested in the subject, has a background as a computer developer, and claims he was part of the Satoshi team.
He is either part of Satoshi or a genius-level fraud - like a Frank Abagnale. Far beyond Craig Wright, if he turns out to be a fraud. Phil isn't simply making up stories. He's explaining the structure of Bitcoin through his knowledge and experience in other areas of computer programming. He's doing so in a way that literally nobody else has ever done, and the ideas make sense and can be understood by anyone.
Incredible, even if fraudulent. (Or, perhaps especially if fraudulent).
In the next article, I'll analyze one of these ideas: how a blockchain is like a strip of triangles.


2 of 2 reviewers say it's worth paying for

0 of 2 reviewers say it's not worth paying for