The New York Times published an investigation on Tuesday explaining this Adam Bucka British crypto expert and long-time figure in the Bitcoin community, is the most credible candidate so far for Satoshi Nakamoto – the pseudonymous inventor of Bitcoin.
Buck denied the allegation before the story was published, denied it within the story, and denied it again in a public post on X after publication.
“I’m not Satoshi, but I was early on in focusing on the positive societal impacts of cryptography, online privacy and e-cash, hence my active interest from 1992 onwards in applied research on e-money, privacy technology in cypherpunks that led to hashcash and other ideas,” Back wrote on X.
The times investigation It is based on textual analysis of old emails and forum posts. The methodology focuses on writing styles, including the use of double hyphens and British spelling conventions. The Times noted that early researchers had explored concepts like peer-to-peer systems, proof-of-work, and routing models that sound like prototypes of Bitcoin, and that Buck’s archived writings contain a high density of those overlaps.
Back, which sophisticated Hashcash in 1997—the proof-of-work system that was later incorporated into Bitcoin’s design—acknowledged the similarities on a superficial level but introduced a skeletal counter.
Because he wrote extensively on the cypherpunks mailing list about electronic cash and privacy from about 1992 onward, he says his older writings are simply easier to match with Satoshi’s than those of contributors who have published much less.
“The rest is a combination of coincidence and similar statements from people with similar experience and interests.” books On X.
He also addressed a specific passage in the Times story that treated one of his statements in an interview with a reporter as a potential gaffe. Buck said the comment was about confirmation bias in the research process, not casual self-disclosure.
Adam Back, Satoshi’s identity claim faces doubts
The report provided no documentary evidence – no private key view, no verified direct connection from Satoshi’s wallet address, and no corroborating witness on record. The case relies on stylometric analysis and pattern matching, tools that carry real analytical weight but which, in Satoshi’s previous investigations, did not reach conclusions accepted by the broader Bitcoin community.
Several credible voices expressed their doubts. Joe Wiesenthal, Bloomberg columnist and co-host of the Odd Lots podcast, He said he was “Not 100% convinced by the evidence or conclusion.” He noted that shared political views on privacy and Internet architecture were common across the cypherpunk group and not specific to any particular person. He also noted that hyphenation habits vary and form a fragile basis for attribution.
Nicholas Gregory, one of the early Bitcoin participants in the UK, said he did not believe Buck was Satoshi based on personal interactions, according to Insider. CoinDesk Preparing reports. It also raised practical concerns: publicly identifying the person behind the alias, whoever it may be, could put that person and their family in physical danger. According to cryptocurrency exchange Arkham, Satoshi’s Bitcoin holdings are worth around $73 billion.
This is not the first time a major media outlet has thought it has solved the mystery. A 2024 documentary pointed to developer Peter Todd, who also denied the allegation and whose case ultimately failed to convince.
