There was little incentive to take credit when he's juggling SpaceX and Tesla.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30131095

This might change when there is sufficient public will asking him to take credit.

There is no reason for him to deny it. Your first reason (some nebulous government regulation point) is completely null and void because there are no modern example of cryptocurrency founders being arrested or anything for simply writing and distributing a codebase like that. In the case of E-gold, the founders explicitly set aside a fund that allowed them to encourage the currency's use for illicit activities, which lead them to being tried on criminal charges. Bitcoin has never had that, much less a centralized ownership scheme in the first place. If Elon Musk admitted to writing the Bitcoin code, even in 2012, there would be no basis for legal consequence.

Your second point, that SpaceX and Tesla are priorities for him, also makes no sense. Bitcoin is entirely autonomous, if he announced and proved that he designed the Bitcoin protocol, very little would change vis-a-vis his own responsibilities. In fact, if he was able to prove that he was Satoshi, he almost certainly would have done so before selling billions of dollars in his own stocks last November. To insist otherwise would be to accuse Musk of pissing his own corporate value down the drain, which everyone knows is the last thing he'd do.

Furthermore, I don't even know what you mean by "sufficient public will" here. If Musk wanted the public to universally acknowledge him as Satoshi, as I stated, there are several ways that he could prove his unequivocal authorship of the Bitcoin code. Your "extraordinarily specific commonalities" are that he knows one of the most popular programming languages in the world and lives on the west coast. That's not extraordinary or specific at all. You're basing your entire argument off of a few coincidences that could apply to hundreds if not thousands of people, and you're simply choosing the most popular person who fits the description.

Elon Musk had every opportunity to step forward, and he still admits that he had nothing to do with the creation of Bitcoin. Insisting otherwise is a waste of time and credibility, as I'm sure other people will remind you of if you continue to espouse this theory that is undeniably deranged.

For newcomers to this thread, reread my posts, and if you have open-ended questions, I'd be willing to answer.

That's a strange way to concede but I'll take it.

I don't think his point is to argue what's true. More like that he wants exposure for this idea that Elon is Satoshi. I'm still struggling to understand why this is a thing right now.

That would indeed seem to be the case, judging by his submission history.