Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, spoke about Bitcoin and Satoshi Nakamoto
April 26, 2011 marked the disappearance of Bitcoin’s legendary Satoshi Nakamoto. Centralized financial systems have led Nakamoto to develop an alternative “self-sustaining” financial landscape. However, if Nakamoto had continued to exist in the crypto ecosystem, would Bitcoin be as decentralized as it is today? Or the “Dictator” Satoshi would you have taken full command and made a version 2.0 of the existing financial system?
Speaking on similar lines in a recent podcast, Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, said that if Nakamoto existed and occupied the “central role”, there would definitely have come a time when the desire to move to a decentralized structure would have arisen.
According to the executive, some aspects of Bitcoin, such as its design, have been worked on since 1997-98 itself, with Back arguing how the “missing pieces” triggered and allowed Satoshi to fill the gap and create Bitcoin.
Shedding light on Satoshi’s relevance today, Back also highlighted how “dangerous” it can be for someone to claim centralized control. After Satoshi’s departure, Bitcoin was seen more as a “commodity and discovery”, rather than a “technology project with a leader,” he added.
Back continued to say:
“I think his intention was clear – he decided to leave. We shouldn’t try to undo that. ”
It was necessary for Nakamoto to step back and intentionally hide his identity, Back said, with the executive believing that even if Satoshi was still around, Bitcoin would be Bitcoin. That said, the media would probably project him as a celebrity and amplify every little thing he did.
Affirming why it is not necessary for developers to read Satoshi’s writings, Back also expanded on how he “was not a fan of quoting Satoshi”. He added:
“There is probably more condensed and accessible information now. I think it is important for people to form an opinion about what is important, about what is different and valuable about Bitcoin. ”
Highlighting the three main mistakes that Satoshi made, Back attested how the malleability of the transaction became a major problem for the implementation of smart contracts. He went on to state how some of Satoshi’s incomplete ideas, like the rudimentary “lightning channel” concept with sequence numbers, did not work very well. Satoshi’s code bugs also fueled some security issues, he concluded.
“You can improve the system in some ways, but it will make it worse in other ways and that’s where it gets interesting.”
According to Back:
“The system is extremely well optimized and there is little prospect of a sudden advance.”
The Blockstream executive finally concluded by arguing that Bitcoin developers have been involved in different periods of time and therefore the overall defense tests, the level of quality assurance, the review of changes and the number of tests have gone up a notch over time. of time.