The Man Who Might Be Satoshi: An Exclusive Interview with Peter Todd

On June 14, 2025, Peter Todd took the stage at Incrypted Conference in Kyiv. One of the most well-known Bitcoin Core developers, he is the creator of OpenTimestamps and a contributor to several cryptographic initiatives.

Related: Incrypted Conference 2025: Insights from Ukraine’s Flagship Crypto Event

It is Peter Todd who was named as a possible Satoshi Nakamoto in Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery, a documentary directed by Cullen Hoback and released by HBO in October 2024. Todd, however, dismisses the claim.

After his talk at the conference, we sat down with him to discuss the early years of his career, Satoshi’s anonymity, the HBO film, and his thoughts on celebrity culture.

No Freedom Without Money: How Cryptography Led Peter Todd to the Idea of Digital Currency

Peter Todd’s interest in cryptography began in his teenage years. He was drawn to technologies that enabled the free flow of information without centralized control. One of the first projects that caught his attention was Freenet, a network designed for anonymous, censorship-resistant publishing.

Over time, these technologies led Todd to a deeper conclusion: freedom of speech cannot exist without freedom of money.

You don't really have freedom of speech unless you also have freedom of money. Because without money, speech doesn't really do you anything,

said Peter Todd.

He realized the problem extended beyond communication privacy. Even if you’re free to speak, that freedom means little without financial access. Politics depends on resources. Real independence begins with money that operates outside state control.

As Freenet and similar projects emerged, so did early conversations about digital currency. There was no Bitcoin community yet; just a group of people interested in building anonymous and independent tools.

Todd joined those discussions on the Blue Sky mailing list, where participants explored early ideas for decentralized money. Adam Back and Hal Finney were also part of the dialogue, though Todd never viewed them as celebrities.

Vlad Vovk: I know you communicated with Hal Finney and Adam Back when you were a teenager. How was it? I mean, you were just a teenager, and they were the “big guys.”

Peter Todd: I've never been someone who cared for celebrities. The whole celebrity culture stuff just seems nonsense to me. […] My interactions with them were really as peers talking about potential of these [technical] things.

For him, they were colleagues with whom he could discuss technical ideas. His main conclusion from that time: without economic freedom, no other freedom can truly exist.

Peter Todd: “Satoshi Is Probably Someone Who Didn’t Have a Normal Background in Cryptography”

Peter Todd took part in early discussions about digital money. In the early 2000s, the cryptography community and the Blue Sky mailing list explored dozens of ideas, but none produced a working model. Todd believes the problem was misdirection: participants kept adding unnecessary complexity. 

The simple solution was hiding in plain sight, but no one saw it. He suggests that Satoshi’s outsider perspective may have been the key advantage:

None of us came close to inventing Bitcoin. […] We just kept on going in the rabbit holes, which are in the wrong direction. It makes me think Satoshi is probably someone who didn’t have a normal background in cryptography, hadn’t read much about it, probably wasn’t on that mailing list.

Todd recalls that he may have been the first to propose the idea of transferring value through a chain of digital signatures. At the time, it seemed like an obvious solution, but it didn’t lead to the creation of a currency like Bitcoin.

He believes that being too deep in the technical details made it harder to find a simple solution. When the idea of Bitcoin came along, it looked so elegant that it seemed obvious – but only after someone had already built it: “Bitcoin is one of those things which is sort of so simple. Once it’s invented, you just think to yourself, ‘F*ck. I should have thought of that.’”

The idea was right in front of everyone. But to see it, you had to look from outside the system.

The Monetary Value of BTC Is the Foundation of Its Security

Todd stresses that the monetary value of BTC is not a byproduct or a bubble. It is the foundation of Bitcoin’s security. Without value, no one would mine blocks, and without the incentive to hold Bitcoin, the network would collapse. Bitcoin does not have – and cannot have – a stable peg to the dollar, as that would go against the very nature of decentralization.

Vlad Vovk: How has the community changed the idea of Bitcoin? Is it still moving in the right direction, as it was at the beginning, or is it just speculation now?

Peter Todd: Bitcoin security model depends on it being valuable. Why do miners mine blocks? Well, because Bitcoin’s valuable. So if Bitcoin didn’t have speculation, Bitcoin didn’t have investors, Bitcoin would not work.

According to Todd, the more people are willing to hold BTC as a store of value, the stronger its potential to function as real-world currency: “The more we have people interested in holding Bitcoin as a store of value, the more useful it can be as a medium of exchange.”

Peter Todd on Satoshi Nakamoto’s Anonymity: “The Best Thing for Bitcoin Is if Satoshi Is Never Found”

For Todd, attempts to uncover Satoshi’s identity are not just pointless but ethically questionable. He believes the creator’s anonymity strengthened trust in the protocol and underscored its independence from any single person.

In his view, Satoshi’s disappearance is an advantage. It separates Bitcoin from systems where the founder remains the central authority. With Bitcoin, the design makes identity irrelevant.

They gave this gift to the world, and the most important thing about Bitcoin was that the identity of the creator did not matter.

Todd believes it’s better if Satoshi is never found: “The best thing for Bitcoin is if Satoshi is never found. Now, if Satoshi is found, it’s not really that big of a deal – but it is better.”

He is convinced that Satoshi is most likely one person. First, because it’s easier to keep a secret alone. And second, because Bitcoin isn’t technically complex enough to require a team to build it.

Vlad Vovk: Do you think Satoshi was a one person, or a group of people?

Peter Todd: Very likely to be one. Bitcoin’s not that complex. The underlying protocol is simple enough, one person absolutely could have made it.

Todd believes the emergence of Bitcoin was inevitable. If Satoshi hadn’t created it in 2009, someone else would have done it later. In 1995, cryptography was still too weak, and by 2005, computers were too slow. But by 2009, everything was in place, and the idea was already in the air. Satoshi was simply the first to shape it correctly.

Peter Todd on the HBO Director: “Cullen Has Burned His Reputation”

Peter Todd wasn’t surprised to become the focus of a documentary about Satoshi’s identity. He had dealt with journalists before. But in his view, the HBO film Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery wasn’t an investigation; it was an attempt to rescue a dull story.

He says the director originally set out to make a film about Bitcoin, but the project wasn’t coming together. So he shifted the angle, added the Satoshi theory, and made Todd the central figure.

Todd emphasizes that the filmmakers knowingly ignored obvious arguments. Some scenes relied on “evidence” that doesn’t hold up to even basic scrutiny. For example, the story about the BitcoinTalk account. He says the director understood this but chose spectacle over substance.

Vlad Vovk: Do you think a project like this film harms journalism’s reputation, or does it help to popularize Bitcoin?

Peter Todd: Oh, it certainly harms journalism’s reputation.

Todd doubts the director will be able to work in the crypto space again. He believes the hit to his reputation was too strong. HBO may be pleased with the viewership, but the film left a sour impression in the community.

I think Cullen has burned his reputation enough. He’s gonna have a tricky time making anything else in Bitcoin.

He also recalls that Hoback’s previous project focused on the QAnon conspiracy theory. In Todd’s view, that reflects the director’s style: choosing striking but controversial topics and creating a show rather than a documentary.

Todd doesn’t rule out the release of a second film, but he has no intention to take part in it.

Peter Todd: “Math Is Pretty Cool. People, I Don’t Know”

Todd is pretty skeptical about the culture of selfies with crypto celebrities. He says it’s more valuable to come with a relevant question than with a request for a photo. In his view, idealizing developers misses the point – what matters are the ideas, not the people behind them.

Vlad Vovk: For many people in the crypto space, you’re seen as a kind of symbol, even a personal hero. Who is your personal hero?

Peter Todd: I don’t have heroes. I’ve never been a person who really idolized people. Don’t idolize people. It’s not good. Idolize the tech at most. […] Math is pretty cool. People, I don’t know.”

He recalls the first time he spoke to Adam Back. Instead of giving compliments, he asked a specific technical question about cryptography. Back didn’t know who he was, but they ended up talking for more than an hour simply because the topic was interesting.

After the release of the HBO film, he attended a conference in Brazil where dozens of people approached him asking for photos, but none of them had anything to say. Except for one woman. She asked a question about her mining project and started a meaningful conversation. According to Todd, she was the only person there he genuinely wanted to keep talking to.

Todd’s reflections remind us that the strength of Bitcoin lies not in personalities but in principles. In a space often driven by hype, he continues to value the quiet resilience of ideas over the noise of recognition.