Did a Canadian developer really invent bitcoin? A new HBO show explores an intriguing
theory
In 2008, someone using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto published the design of the cryptocurrency
bitcoin, proposed the initial code and was active online for just under two years. In this time, they
helped develop the code, answer questions and promote the project. Then, claiming to busy with new
things, Nakamoto left working on bitcoin and was probably never heard from again.
HBO’s 2024 documentary Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery finds director Cullen Hoback looking for the
real Nakamoto, motivated by bitcoin being “embraced by nation states” and “incorporated into 401(k)s.”
Read more:
Bitcoin turns ten – here's how it all started and what the future might hold
The real Nakamoto?
Several attempts to unmask Nakamoto have been made before. Previous theories suggest that the elusive
developer is Irish graduate student Michael Clear, Japanese-American systems engineer Dorian Nakamoto or
one of several cypherpunks who worked on predecessors to bitcoin: Hal Finney, Nick Szabo or Adam Back.
Hoback confronts the man he suspects of being Nakamoto on camera in the film’s climax: Peter Todd, a
software developer from Toronto. On film, Todd alternates between joking about being Nakamoto and
calling the theory ludicrous, perhaps necessitating him to make an unequivocal denial in the press after
it aired.
The documentary is entertaining, but does it play it fast and loose? I would draw attention to three
things that deserve further thought.
Online breadcrumb trail
While stopping short of claiming to have conclusively identified bitcoin’s creator, Hoback suggests
something Todd once said to Nakamoto online was a slip up.
The background is this: with bitcoin, users leave tips to have their transactions processed. If the tip
is too low, the computers running bitcoin will refuse to process it and the transaction will sit in
bitcoin purgatory. Worse, bitcoin users who make this mistake cannot increase the fee without it looking
like an attack on the system.
In an online post, Nakamoto posts that transactions could be declared safe if they only changed the
amount of the fee.
Not long after, Todd chimes in that this is impossible with how bitcoin transactions work. The increased
fee has to come from somewhere, namely a decrease in the amount paid out, which changes the transaction.
Todd’s message is short: “Of course, to be specific, the inputs and outputs can’t match *exactly* if the
second transaction has a transaction fee.”
Hoback ponders if maybe Nakamoto meant to correct himself, but somehow accidentally used his real
account.
As the documentary recounts, Todd is smart, has developer experience and had been discussing digital
cash online since he was a teenager. Todd would eventually be the one to implement the feature Nakamoto
described, albeit with a fix to the issue he pointed out.
The theory plays out well on film but leaves out a few considerations.
Early bitcoin enthusiasts were a self-selecting group, and most were as technically minded as Nakamoto
or Todd. This technical background is niche but not rare: more than 100,000 computer science students
graduate annually in the United States, while there are over 500,000 certified security experts. And
there are many equally capable people who are neither of these things.
Given Hoback’s evidence for Todd is circumstantial, the weight shifts to Todd’s reaction on camera when
Hoback outlines his theory: a mix of bemusement, mockery and indignation. The film frames the reaction
as incriminating, while others caution against reading anything into it.
Enter Ethereum
Bitcoin is maintained by an open group of volunteered computers (whose operators are paid in new bitcoin
for the work of validating transactions and storing them on a ledger called the blockchain) where no one
is in charge, and yet maintains high security.
Early bitcoin enthusiasts saw the potential for bitcoin’s blockchain technology to handle more than
financial transactions, but the developers helming bitcoin (including Todd) thought it would be best if
bitcoin stayed in its lane.
Some bitcoin enthusiasts in Toronto then banded together and launched Ethereum. Led by 21-year-old
Vitalik Buterin, Ethereum provides a platform where anyone can run their code on a blockchain simply by
paying a fee and pushing a button. The code could be anything from a new digital currency to
sophisticated financial technology.
In Hoback’s documentary, many of the interviewees view bitcoin and its developers as competitors and
antagonists of Ethereum.
Ethereum gets only about two minutes of screentime, dominated by Buterin rapping about Ethereum on the
mainstage of a conference and being ribbed for his hat’s safari flaps.
Hoback’s documentary emphasizes Ethereum’s scam tokens but overlooks the innovative financial services
that captured US$64 billion of assets in 2021, as well as its advancements in areas like efficiency and
cryptography.
Ironically, it is Ethereum technology that runs crypto-betting platform Polymarket, which hosted a US$44
million betting pool on who would be named as Nakamoto in Hoback’s film before it aired.
“Polymarket turned Money Electric into a sporting event,” Hoback enthused. “Even I’m refreshing the
betting pool to see how high the total volume gets.”
The end of privacy?
In his 2014 documentary, Terms and Conditions May Apply, Hoback did show he is willing to tackle social
concerns that might seem a little dry or academic, such as privacy rights in a digital age.
He picks up this thread again in Money Electric, embedding an earnest message about the potential
privacy and surveillance implications of governments — including Canada, the United States and 130 other
countries — launching central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), something my research also draws
attention to.
In theory, the technology underlying bitcoin can be expanded to provide a CBDC system as private as
paper cash. However it will take a strong political will to get there.