by Enjay » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:55 pm
Did he hope for the value of bitcoins to go down (or up, in either time period where he did) because of the value of the bitcoins themselves? Yes - based on your explanation below this is correct or because he hoped something would happen technologically or mathematically that would have the side effect of the value of bitcoins going down? No
In case you're thoroughly confused, I was thinking of something along these lines: The supply of bitcoins is limited by the rate of discovery of certain numbers, and the problem of discovering these numbers is believed to be "hard", for some mathematical sense of the word "hard". If someone were to prove that there is an "easy" way to find these numbers, I imagine that this mathematician would be a very serious contender for a prize worth considerably more than an average person's collection of bitcoins. Similarly, if there were a great technological advance like quantum computing that made finding these numbers dramatically faster, that would also be worth a tremendous amount (possibly more than all the bitcoins in circulation). Conversely, for security researchers this would be bad news. So I was thinking that maybe the subject of this puzzle was working in one of these fields and faced this kind of "conflict of interest". Nothing like this but good thought!