Pete Rizzo, editor of Bitcoin Magazine, suggested a shaky link between Bitcoin (BTC) developer Gavin Andresen’s June 2011 visit to the CIA and Satoshi Nakamoto‘s disappearance.
Rizzo’s Tweet included a screenshot of a post by Andresen from the bitcointalk.org forum. In the post, Andresen talks about being invited by the CIA to talk about Bitcoin at an “Emerging technologies conference” for the US intelligence community. Because he was invited, Andresen believed that Bitcoin was already on the CIA’s radar.
According to Rizzo, Nakamoto was never heard from again, after Andresen’s visit to the CIA.
According to Andresen’s post, the presentation was a great chance to talk about how Bitcoin can help the world by becoming “a better currency,” increasing competition, reducing obstacles to international payments, and allowing individuals more control over their finances.
Andresesn was confident enough to think that these goals were in line with what governments would want.
Despite this, Andresen expressed some reservations about attending, stating that he is concerned that the CIA may get Bitcoin (BTC) developers to do something they don’t want to do. At the same time, he saw it as an opportunity to clear up some misconceptions regarding the initiative.
Could the Bitcoin creator have been a target of the CIA?
Well, Rizzo’s theory is very speculative. Such conspiracy theories are no doubt fun to read, but at the same time can be dangerous to get too deep into. Let’s take a look at the timelines and see if there is any truth to the claim.
Nakamoto’s last post on the bitcointalk.org forum was on the 10th of December, 2010. This was many months before Andresen’s visit to the CIA. Moreover, the Bitcoin creator’s last email to the team was on the 26th of April 2011. The email informed his colleagues that he was moving on to other projects. This implies that Nakamoto had left the Bitcoin project two months before Andresen’s meeting with the CIA.
Although this does not completely remove the possibility of Nakamoto being targeted by the CIA, it still does not have ground to be the truth. Such talk is purely speculative, and not true unless proven otherwise.