There's zero good evidence it was him. There hasn't been good evidence for anyone named, so far. Him living kind of close to someone with the last name Nakamoto (it was actually more than two blocks away, I believe) is not good evidence whatsoever, and there's some specific circumstantial evidence to suggest they were different people. No, no smoking gun to disprove it, but no good case has ever been made.
Zero? Definitely more than zero. In fact you’ll find papers if you try that put the probability higher than anyone other than Nick S. But it doesn’t really matter in the end in my opinion. The whole point was to not have a godhead.
I've read those papers. There's ostensible evidence put forward, but I find zero of it to be good evidence, personally. Nick Szabo is definitely a more likely match, with better evidence, but I think there's almost no chance it's him, either.
>But it doesn’t really matter in the end in my opinion. The whole point was to not have a godhead.
Of course; but it's not about that. It's about the mystery, the challenge, the thrill of the adventure.
It's one of the absolute strangest and most enigmatic events in internet history - when else has some open source software blown up to even 0.0001% of this level with a 100% anonymous creator who no one's come close to identifying (that we know of)?
Would I reveal who Satoshi was if I found out? Probably not. Their life would probably undeservedly become much harder and much worse. But I still sure as hell would be interested to know who made this thing.
Also, if we know who it is, then we know who it isn't. Rumors over certain people being Satoshi can be very irresponsible.
