The only "new" bit of verifiable information is that a link to Paul Le Roux's Wikipedia page appears unredacted in a document presented by Wright in which most other specific names are redacted because he claimed their exposure could put him at risk (implication being that he helped put criminals away). Everything else just starts from "Le Roux may be Satoshi" and employs conspiracy theorist logic to get there ("He uses an alias that kind of sounds a little like Satoshi - Solotshi. This suggests that he IS Satoshi.")
Well, the TrueCrypt link (if proven) is very interesting. Both TrueCrypt and Bitcoin share similar ideologies and both are extraordinary ambitious feats of (anonymous) C++ engineering.
I'm inclined to think there aren't many people in the world who possess the skills necessary and at the same time the need to preserve absolute anonymity at all costs.
The number of (non governmental) people in the world who intersect those two things really can't be more than a handful.
To be clear, I'm not saying I believe all this - just that there is a fair amount more to it than similar aliases. I'd be interested to see some analysis of the C++ code in both projects to see if they share any idiosyncrasies.
Wouldn't it be easy to compare the TrueCrypt C++ code with Bitcoins? Programming a project of that size by a solo developer must have similar patterns and quirks.
I don't think anyone is capable of faking that for long unless they tried to make it as generic as possible`.
> Well, the TrueCrypt link (if proven) is very interesting.
The only link that the article mentions is that Satoshi used TrueCrypt. So what? TrueCrypt was the gold standard for encrypted drives which everyone in the tinfoil hat community used until it shut down.
It would be like trying to draw a link between a real person and a pseudonymous identity because both of them were known to have an iPhone.
The article (and my comment) suggests a possible link because both projects (1) are so advanced that only a very elite calibre of developer could have produced them; (2) used the same language; (3) had similar ideologies/goals; and (4) had an author who insisted on complete anonymity.
It's no smoking gun but it's certainly interesting.
>It would be like trying to draw a link between a real person and a pseudonymous identity because both of them were known to have an iPhone.
Ridiculous. Having an iPhone is exceedingly common. Having the above mentioned qualities in common, while not unheard of, is certainly rare.
