????“我不是多利安?S?中本,。”

????這是美國(guó)東部時(shí)間上周四晚10點(diǎn),，一個(gè)賬號(hào)在Peer to Peer Foundation網(wǎng)站上留下的簡(jiǎn)單信息,。這個(gè)賬號(hào)的用戶(hù)名是“中本聰”。

????這位比特幣數(shù)字貨幣協(xié)議的匿名締造者曾在這個(gè)論壇上使用過(guò)這個(gè)賬號(hào),，探討他發(fā)明的這種貨幣的未來(lái)發(fā)展,，直到他消失在這個(gè)他自己親手創(chuàng)造的世界。這個(gè)賬號(hào)最后的活躍日期是2009年2月18日——那是一次關(guān)于比特幣的討論。Peer to Peer Foundation的創(chuàng)始人表示,，這個(gè)賬號(hào)的注冊(cè)郵箱與中本聰之前的比特幣原始設(shè)計(jì)文檔相關(guān)聯(lián)的公共郵箱一致,。

????其實(shí)，這些未必有多大的意義,。這個(gè)賬號(hào)也存在被黑客盜取的可能,。或者多利安?S?中本只是為了登錄論壇散播虛假信息,，希望轉(zhuǎn)移已經(jīng)把他淹沒(méi)的媒體關(guān)注漩渦,。不過(guò)在美聯(lián)社（AP）的采訪(fǎng)中，多利安否認(rèn)自己與比特幣的關(guān)系,，還表現(xiàn)得非常困惑,。此外，作為被采訪(fǎng)人的中本與網(wǎng)絡(luò)上的中本,，兩者的語(yǔ)言能力也大相徑庭,。結(jié)合這兩點(diǎn)看，利亞?麥格拉斯?古德曼的故事至少看起來(lái)是具有爭(zhēng)議的,?！咀杂勺迦斯诺侣凇缎侣勚芸钒l(fā)表文章稱(chēng)，她已經(jīng)找到了比特幣的發(fā)明人中本聰,，還與他進(jìn)行了面談,。然而此人在接受美聯(lián)社采訪(fǎng)時(shí)否認(rèn)自己跟這種數(shù)字貨幣存在任何關(guān)系,?！g注】

????但這根本就無(wú)所謂。

????無(wú)論他是否是真的多利安?S?中本,，也無(wú)論他的動(dòng)機(jī)是什么,，在他自己創(chuàng)造的虛擬貨幣的大肆炒作中，中本聰置身事外,，這一點(diǎn)讓圍觀(guān)者不僅好奇,，而且變得有些瘋狂。追溯到2011年的一連串推測(cè)和調(diào)查,，都在試圖填補(bǔ)比特幣中心的這一空白,。《紐約客》（New Yorker）的約書(shū)亞?戴維斯,、文本分析師斯凱?格雷和其他許多愛(ài)好者和專(zhuān)業(yè)調(diào)查者都進(jìn)行過(guò)嘗試,，但他們提出的理論都沒(méi)能讓人們滿(mǎn)意，《新聞周刊》（Newsweek）的獨(dú)家新聞可能又將是一次失敗的調(diào)查,。

????然而不知為何,，盡管沒(méi)有了創(chuàng)造者，比特幣卻依然堅(jiān)挺至今。

????我們之所以想搞清是誰(shuí)創(chuàng)造了比特幣是出于許多重要,、合理的理由,。畢竟，金錢(qián)建立在信任的基礎(chǔ)上,，匿名的創(chuàng)造者無(wú)法取信于人,。即便是比特幣的早期用戶(hù)，也在不斷懷疑比特幣的代碼中可能包含由創(chuàng)造者控制的秘密功能——比如能讓整個(gè)網(wǎng)絡(luò)癱瘓的“殺戮開(kāi)關(guān)”,。

????但我們知道事實(shí)并非如此,，因?yàn)楸忍貛诺拇a完全公開(kāi)，而且此時(shí)已經(jīng)經(jīng)過(guò)全世界成千上萬(wàn)程序員的檢查和修訂,。這些人中也包括盈利性公司的創(chuàng)始人和員工,，他們有著充分的動(dòng)機(jī)來(lái)確保自己的安全。

????越來(lái)越多的人開(kāi)始信任比特幣,，但這種新任有賴(lài)于比特幣社區(qū)及其生態(tài)系統(tǒng),。盡管比特幣的企業(yè)家中不斷有人破產(chǎn)，但比特幣分散化和開(kāi)源的發(fā)展模式使得比特幣底層協(xié)議的可靠性足以媲美其他優(yōu)秀開(kāi)發(fā)者控制的任何技術(shù)——甚至更加可靠,。

????盡管如此,，人們依然在尋找這樣一個(gè)人，光這個(gè)人的身份就能表明整個(gè)系統(tǒng)的可靠性,。

????"I am not Dorian S. Nakamoto."

????That was the simple message posted from an account on the website of the Peer to Peer Foundation at 10 p.m. ET Thursday. The message was posted from an account under the name "Satoshi Nakamoto."

????The pseudonymous creator of the Bitcoin digital currency protocol had previously discussed the development of his invention on this forum, using this account, until he vanished from the world he created. The last prior activity on the account was from Feb. 18, 2009 -- also a discussion about bitcoin. The founder of the Peer to Peer Foundation has stated that the e-mail registered with the account matches previous public emails associated with Satoshi Nakamoto in Bitcoin's original design documents.

????This doesn't necessarily mean much. The account might have been hacked. Or Dorian S. Nakamoto may simply have logged in to spread disinformation in an attempt to deflect the media maelstrom converging around him. But combined with an AP interview in which a sometimes confused Dorian denied his involvement with Bitcoin and serious inconsistencies in the language abilities of the two Nakamotos, Leah McGrath Goodman's story at least starts to look contestable.

????And it doesn't matter a bit.

????Whether or not he is in fact Dorian S. Nakamoto, and whatever his motivations, the absence of Satoshi Nakamoto from the huge hype surrounding the virtual money he created has obviously left onlookers not just curious, but slightly manic. A constant stream of speculation and investigation stretching all the way back to 2011 has tried to plug the hole at the center of bitcoin, including attempts by Joshua Davis at the New Yorker, a textual analyst named Skye Grey, and a slew of other amateur and professional investigators. None of the theories have proven out, and Newsweek's scoop may be the next to fall.

????But somehow, without its creator, bitcoin soldiers on.

????There are many important, sensible reasons we want to know who created bitcoin. Money is based on trust, after all, and an anonymous creator inspires little. Even among bitcoin early adopters, there has been persistent hypothesizing that the bitcoin code could contain secret functions controlled by the anonymous creator -- for example, a killswitch that would disable the entire network.

????Except that we know this isn't true, because the bitcoin code is entirely public, and has at this point been reviewed and revised by thousands of programmers across the world. This includes the founders and employees of profitable businesses, who have every motivation to ensure they're on stable ground.

????The trust increasing numbers of people place in bitcoin rests on that community, and on that ecosystem. Though shakeouts continue among bitcoin entrepreneurs, its decentralized, open-source development model has made the underlying protocol as trustworthy as any technology controlled by a strong creator -- or more.

????But still, people go looking for one person whose identity can stand in for the trustworthiness of an entire system.