When HBO’s documentary “Money Electric” hit the airwaves, the filmmakers didn’t shy away from boldly naming Peter Todd as the mysterious Satoshi Nakamoto. Todd, a well-known software developer, quickly shot down the accusation, denying any involvement in Bitcoin’s creation. The broader crypto community also seemed to shrug off the claim. Then, on Wednesday, Amir Taaki, a former Bitcoin developer and founder of the Darkfi project, weighed in on Nakamoto’s unique coding style.
Taaki made an appearance in the documentary, where he didn’t hold back in criticizing the way the codebase was structured. On Oct. 9, he took to X to dive even deeper. “Satoshi Nakamoto wrote code that was not usual,” Taaki said. “He had many quirks. We can find him by comparing his code with others, but no one did that yet,” he added.
Taaki, never one to mince words, continued his thoughts on the matter:
When I first saw their code, I thought “Satoshi is not a programmer” because of how weird it was. He didn’t follow normal code practices that were modern at that time. He made big use of locks when it was out of fashion. He used Hungarian notation which was no longer used. He made spaghetti function recursion and never used objects to encapsulate processes. He also targeted Windows.
Specifically, Amir points out several peculiarities in Satoshi’s coding: extensive use of locks (which was outdated), Hungarian notation (an older naming convention), complex function recursion, lack of object-oriented programming, and a focus on Windows as a target platform. These characteristics, according to Amir, hint at an older programmer, possibly from an engineering or physics background rather than a dedicated software developer.
Amir emphasizes the consistency of Satoshi’s coding style from 2008 to 2010, suggesting it could be used as a fingerprint to identify Satoshi. He proposes that whenever someone claims to be Satoshi, the first response should be to examine their coding style for comparison. “But no Bitcoin coder (including myself) cares enough to do this,” Taaki remarked. “We’re all so busy with real work. And I guess we also respect Satoshi-kun’s wishes. Even writing this post showing how we can find him feels almost like a betrayal.”
There is a stylometry-inspired technique for identifying how people code is known as “code stylometry” or “software forensics.” This approach zeroes in on the unique traits and patterns in a developer’s coding style, potentially revealing or verifying their identity through their code. Much like traditional stylometry dissects writing habits, code stylometry homes in on a programmer’s personal coding quirks, habits, and preferences.
Amir concludes his X post by mentioning Peter Todd, in reference to the incident, by commending him for handling a situation appropriately without claiming undue credit. The ongoing mystery of Satoshi Nakamoto’s identity continues to fuel debate, with each theory offering unique insights into the mind behind Bitcoin’s creation. Amir Taaki’s observations on Satoshi’s coding quirks raise intriguing questions about the creator’s background, but the lack of serious investigation from the crypto community suggests an unspoken respect for preserving the enigma.
