Featured Article | The Satoshi Times - June 14th 2026
Rules of Engagement: What we owe Satoshi Nakamoto
A statement of editorial principles for sources, contributors, privacy, and the Satoshi Nakamoto question.
A few guiding rules will be discussed in this article. The first is on sources who come forward with interesting information as The Satoshi Times explores Bitcoin.
When it comes to newly learned unknown material that could potentially lead to the disclosure of a nyms details, things get murky. When that material comes from a nym source as well, murkier still, for various reasons.
The first is, verification of that material as legitimate can be very difficult. The standard in journalism is to have corroboration, ie two sources that cross reference each other. Once you have that, it may be publishable material. But, there is another gate to cross, and that’s the ethics of disclosing the information in the first place. Is it in the public interest? Does it do harm to someone for the information to be published widely?
If harm potential is evident, then publishing should be done carefully, if at all. Redaction is warranted for example. If it’s not in the public interest, or in this case, not in Bitcoin’s interest, or Satoshi’s, or related parties, then the same principle applies. Careful publishing, if at all, and redaction may be warranted.
Back to sources though. Protecting sources who disclose new information is a priority for The Satoshi Times. They are potentially risking a lot by coming forward with information. As such, our approach in dealing with sources is to put them first.
We prefer to tell the truth when it comes to how information is learned. But if a source desires to be protected from all angles, they will be. Thus we use PGP for encrypted communications and have a dedicated private email option for sources to interact with The Satoshi Times. Sensitive data is stored airgapped offline and encrypted. We do not cross borders with this data. We generally try to operate at the highest OPSEC level.
See our contact page for more info.
How a source wants things to proceed is the axiom. They have a right to pre-review Satoshi Times articles in which they are directly cited as a source, and to veto them or provide guiding edits.
As such, our goal is to protect our sources to the highest degree possible, while enabling them to interact with the wider Bitcoin community through The Satoshi Times as a medium.
As for contributing to The Satoshi Times, Bitcoiners are welcome to submit their content in confidence for editorial review and potentially publishing, with full rights reserved for your works as the author.
Now, onto Satoshi and Bitcoin.
The Satoshi Times approach is to balance the disclosure of new information with the potential for it to disrupt the current stasis of the Satoshi identity question. Satoshi remains unidentified, and we find it preferable that they continue to be. And in Bitcoin’s best interests.
Satoshi Nakamoto should be the only one who gets to decide how and when, if ever, they disclose their true name.
“An anonymous system empowers individuals to reveal their identity when desired and only when desired; this is the essence of privacy.” A Cypherpunks Manifesto – Eric HughesA Cypherpunks Manifesto – Eric Hughes
In any case, for us mere mortals combing over the crumbs of Bitcoin history for any revelations, finding new Satoshi artifacts is always fun. Minutia that adds to the Satoshi record that is harmless is probably fine to publish and agonize over.
Therefore, we intend to act in good faith, tell the truth, redact the details if they’re too telling, and pray for the best.
The last thing this outfit wants to do is out Satoshi Nakamoto. Rather, our aim is to correct and solidify the record as best as possible for our modern day William-Shakespeare-with-code hero. To preserve and enshrine their legacy.
Taking some guidance here from the cypherpunks manifesto:
“If I say something, I want it heard only by those for whom I intend it. If the content of my speech is available to the world, I have no privacy. To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy, and to encrypt with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for privacy.”A Cypherpunks Manifesto – Eric Hughes
Thus, communications that have been encrypted by Satoshi Nakamoto should probably never be published. But for those unencrypted communications, perhaps they’re fair game?
“Privacy only extends so far as the cooperation of one's fellows in society.”A Cypherpunks Manifesto – Eric Hughes
The hope is that The Satoshi Times can walk this line of cooperation, while exploring Bitcoin’s history and honouring Satoshi’s legacy.
Looking at Satoshi’s last message to Gavin Andreson may be worth considering for context and instruction as well:
“I wish you wouldn’t keep talking about me as a mysterious shadowy figure, the press just turns that into a pirate currency angle. Maybe instead make it about the open source project and give more credit to your dev contributors; it helps motivate them. I’ve moved on to other things and will probably be unavailable.”Satoshi Nakamoto, last message to Gavin Andresen
In summery. Sources and their preferences will be put first. Contributors and their rights will be respected. As for the Satoshi Nakamoto question, we will strive to enshrine their legacy, while not prematurely answering the question of their true name. That true name is solely theirs.
We owe these rights of respect and privacy to our sources, contributors and Satoshi at the very least.