Skip to main content

Significant messages

October 2008​

  • 2008-10-31:

April 2011​

Nakamoto emails Gavin Andresen with the subject 'alert key':

Subject: alert key
Satoshi Nakamoto satoshin@gmx.com
26 Apr 2011, 10:29

I wish you wouldn’t keep talking about me as a mysterious shadowy
figure, the press just turns that into a pirate currency angle. Maybe
instead make it about the open source project and give more credit to
your dev contributors; it helps motivate them.

I’ve moved on to other things and will probably be unavailable. Here’s
the CAlert key and broadcast code in case you need it. You should
probably give it to at least one or two other people. There are a few
long time users who are always around all the time.

This email is significant not only for the mention of the alert key mechanism, but also because Nakamoto was stepping away from Bitcoin during this time-frame.

November 9 2015​

Widely regarded as not originating from the 'true' Nakamoto, nonetheless this posting to the cryptography mailing list is spoofing the satoshi@vistomail.com email address:

From: satoshi at vistomail.com (Satoshi Nakamoto)
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2015 07:18:50 -0500
Subject: \[Cryptography\] Bitcoin blocksize limit can be removed
Message-ID: <56408f2a.emMJ9I+SWETaXKSu%satoshi@vistomail.com>

I have been following the recent development about the block size limit. The initial purpose of block size limit is to limit the bandwidth so that it is easy for people to record the blockchain on their computer rather than on some cloud-based center authorities. In this way, the DOS attack with an enormous fake block can also be prevented. At that time, 1M is a good number to keep the network going and, therefore, the experiment.

As Bitcoin grows, the number should grow too. I believe a number suitable for mid-term, perhaps, is around 200M, which is sufficient for a transaction rate much higher than the sum of any current center authority banks.

However, that would cause insane traffic for most people. The Lightning thing is also not a perfect solution, as it made a second level architect, it need more trust and may encourage center authority and Paypal-like companies.

The blockchain is designed so that the whole blockchain is not needed to verify itself. People only need one hash to make sure that the entire blockchain is genuine. So the limit can be removed. Any hard limits that prevent people from using Bitcoin as frequently as they want to should not exist. To solve the traffic problem, nodes can exchange the hash stream only and verify it against information provided by full nodes; the security of the whole blockchain, scalability, and speed can both be achieved. This can be a temporary solution. Network speed and storage space should be able to increase in the future so that big block is possible for all the clients(even for mobile clients) in time.

In this way, the proof-of-work should always be carefully verified before it starts the receiving process to prevent a DOS attack against the network. Moreover, the router's IP should also be checked to avoid a single user broadcasting an insane number of transactions (fees may apply in this situation).

I believe that Bitcoin is not only an experiment anymore. It is a newborn currency. Removing the limit will remove its final barrier. But still, decades are needed. The community needs to be united to bring it along, even though I can't be there anymore.

Satoshi Nakamoto