Why link to some random forum post? This is a terrible submission.

There has been much speculation on the subject, you could have chosen from a lot of decent articles like this:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/10/10/111010fa_fact_...

or this:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2011/10/race-unmas...

I'd rather read posts from above-top-secret than the bitcoin forums.

Wow, the comments on that forum are certainly an interesting insight into the weird sort of paranoia/megalomania that leads people to become Bitcoin zealots -

"Satoshi definitely saw this as a strike against the malignant forces that national fiat currencies and the parasitic monetary/finance system has become.

Enslaving us all in unpayable debts and endless taxation for wars and bankster bonuses ... it is now a criminal system that will go down in history and those at top aren't doing squat to change it, except personal enrichment. (Oh but we are chasing bad guys playing poker online, trading goldbits and smoking weed on their couches ... whatta a load of BS)."

"Satoshi Nakamoto was the pseudonymous person or group of people who designed and created the original bitcoin protocol and launched the bitcoin network." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin#Satoshi_Nakamoto

-- I think that pretty much sums it up ... likely one or more people who wanted to remain anonymous.

This is only speculation as the source cited for this info on wikipedia is a wired article which is not very good for factual information.

The stronger the bitcoin exchange rate is, the more stories I see about bitcoin. Or is it the other way around?

Well as its value seems to be driven almost entirely by a combination of hype and fanaticism... either way really :)

What else do you propose would set its value? It's not exactly correlated to precious metal so the exchange value is really the only definition isn't it?

The value is set just like for other currencies. Really no difference there, no matter how much some people are trying to say that there is some "real" value behind other currencies. Nothing has a "more real" value behind them, not even gold. It's all based on how limited the supply of it is, and the value of the transactions done it in. That's how all currencies get valued.

The "problem" with Bitcoin right now is that much of its new value is based on rumors and hype. But it's base value (say that of ~$15 or so) is pretty real, as real as it can be. But most or all of the difference between $15 and its current price of $25 or whatever it is now, seems to have been made mostly on hype, and I hope it ends soon. And this is only happening right now because the transaction value is still pretty tiny of around $200 million or so. Get that to $200 billion or $2 trillion, and then this shouldn't happen as often or with as much variability.

Almost all bubbles began with a "new" thing that propelled demand for a "new economy".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company

Luckily, other currencies are never manipulated by rumors, press media and public talk.

Other currency markets are millions of times larger than bitcoin. The entire bitcoin market could be cornered and manipulated by a single modestly wealthy individual.

That's correct. My point is that the original theory of exchange rates had to do with "natural" demand and supply. If a country produces great cheese, and you want to buy that cheese, demand for the currency to buy that cheese is up. This does not apply any more, and many financial markets have little to do with real economic utility. Alas, when gravity hits - and it always does - people are still shocked.

More dense information than in this forum thread here:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Satoshi_Nakamoto

The wise creator of the future currency of the planet. Start using Bitcoins here! - http://thebitcoinmaster.blogspot.com

Why does it matter?

The creators of bitcoin still control something like 25% of all bitcoins, which gives them a huge amount of leverage in manipulating the bitcoin economy. So it's interesting that nobody knows who they are.

http://eprint.iacr.org/2012/584.pdf

Where did you get that, out of that PDF? The number 25% sounds extremely high.

I have read this PDF before, a while ago, and I don't remember that stat. A quick glance tells me that they say that 2 addresses have over 500,000 Bitcoins, but that's just 4.6% (or more, obviously) of the total 10.7M issued so far. And there's no proof that this is the creator of Bitcoin. In fact, it's more likely one of the large exchanges!

So, please help me understand your statement. If it's buried in the text of that PDF, my apologies.

On page 11, it says that Entity A has 78k addresses and 2.8M bitcoins, and is distinct from known large exchanges.

The implication is that some early adopters (possibly the creators) have stockpiled bitcoins in that entity.

Entity A is most likely a largest bitcoin pool (they own only a little commission on this money).

I'm betting it's PG ;-)