HBO Satoshi documentary “Money Electric” is an insult to Bitcoin

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD.

Some say we live in the golden age of documentaries – certainly they are being created at a much higher volume than at any time in history, but for every “My Octopus Professor”, a truly inspiring and unusual human story, there is the opposite: cynical. trash like “Money Electric”.

Let’s start by acknowledging that “Money Electric” upped its own stakes by creating a week-long hype cycle with the promise of a big reveal – that the world would finally know the identity of Bitcoin’s anonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto.

Maybe we can also leave the historical baggage there. Sure, many journalists have died on this hill, but surely “Money Electric” could have something to add to the conversation? After all, from the trailer, it looks like they spent millions of dollars paying for Samson Mow’s dinners while evangelizing Bitcoin around the world. (Always great to subsidize education!)

There were even hints that there might be something inspired here, a photo showing a progression of cypherpunks, all of whom have interesting stories. Maybe the “big reveal” was just a ploy to keep our attention, and maybe there would be a series of revelations (none taken too seriously) that added up to a compelling story of what Bitcoin is and could be.

Unfortunately, no. For most of its runtime, “Money Electric” hides its motives, following its star (director Cullen Hoback) as he dives into the world of Bitcoin. But as the film unfolds, it’s clear that the creators had no other reason than to cast someone like Satoshi.

How else does a big-budget movie end up indulging in conspiracy theory, trotting out the alternate history of the “block wars” as a way to introduce accusations that are almost entirely uninteresting?

Hint: The timing of the big reveal here is that Peter Todd may have been working with an undercover government agent to promote his ideas for the Bitcoin roadmap.

This is where things come into their own (or you start going to the general plan). After making us suffer through his own misdirection, Hoback and Co. finally play their cards, uncovering a slew of alleged evidence showing that Adam Back and Peter Todd (as well as Greg Maxwell for some reason) were all secretly Satoshi.

Truly the most mundane and oft-repeated theory.

From there, we see a number of “gotchas” that could have been easily disproved if the executives had done further basic research.

Let’s review:

1. Peter Todd and Adam Back corresponded on the cryptography mailing list when he was young. This is true and widely known. It’s something that Peter and Adam comment on publicly, and it doesn’t say much about anything other than the fact that the crypto list was open to the public and included possibly hundreds of members.
2. Peter Todd’s first BitcoinTalk post was around the time Satoshi left – Again, another acquaintance. Actually, the post is written in Todd’s snarky style, but we’re supposed to believe that this was him misremembering that it was actually Satoshi and replying on his own. (Or so the director thinks). Never mind that his forum name at the time was “retep” and since no one knew who he was, he could have easily deleted it.
3. Peter Todd once made a joke about deleting Bitcoin. This is used to support the idea that he burned Satoshi’s keys.
4. Adam Back discussed Bitcoin on the crypto mailing list after Bitcoin was launched – Giving credit where credit is due, this is also something I didn’t actually know. But again, once we look at the archive, we can see that the material supports Back’s claim that he was not yet interested in Bitcoin. In the emails, Back passively reacts to the hype around Bitcoin (then breaking $30), and there is even a reply where he complains about why Satoshi (whose name he misspelled) didn’t add a feature on who thought it would be beneficial. . Again, 5 minutes of Google.
5. Todd and Back were in cahoots, engaged in a cover-up to mask the fact that they created Bitcoin. Ta-yeah. That’s why he never joined Blockstream! (Seriously, this is actually stated by the director in the movie.)

Stepping back, it’s hard to know what to say about this sequence except that it’s both a marvel of creativity and cynicism, and in saying that, know that it’s in no way a compliment.

For starters, Hoback makes no legitimate attempt to engage Back or Todd on his discovery. He just presents the material as he finds it, films them reacting, and closes up shop. It makes sense, even to someone like me who will admit that there is a non-zero chance of either Back or Todd being Satoshi. There aren’t many people you can’t completely rule out, and he’s one of them.

Unfortunately, a non-zero chance is not a smoking gun. It is not proof.

Todd and Back’s web presence, although removed from the web, is accessible. I read it. No, they weren’t the only ones involved in digital cash to wipe things out.

Of course, with the magic of editing and exposing the “findings” to no criticism, I’m sure many viewers will walk away thinking they’ve been shown an intelligent, well-researched theory.

All Hoback has shown me is that he understands the shortcuts you can take when making a documentary. The only creative work allows you to hide all your errors behind editing, while making baseless and dangerous accusations.

And to be clear, claiming someone is Satoshi without proof is just that.

Let’s hope no one gets hurt because of his idiocy.

Note: I interviewed a producer for “Electric Money” sometime in 2021. Not recorded. I had no further contact with the documentary crew.