After the controversial documentary, Peter Todd responds to HBO’s speculations in our interview.
During the Plan B Forum conference in Lugano, Atlas21 met Bitcoin developer Peter Todd to discover the details and behind-the-scenes of the recently released HBO documentary.
Did you know that the HBO documentary would focus on searching for Satoshi Nakamoto’s identity?
No, I had no idea. I suspect that director Hoback changed direction at the last moment, probably after realizing that a simple Bitcoin documentary wouldn’t generate enough interest. I did four or five interviews with him, and only in the last one he introduced the question of Satoshi’s identity. None of us knew about this change of direction, not even Adam Back. It was clearly a marketing choice to make the documentary more appealing.
How long did the documentary filming take?
The filming lasted more than two years, mainly during Bitcoin conferences. We met twice at BTC Prague, once at Adopting Bitcoin in El Salvador, and at the Baltic Honeybadger in Riga. Our first meeting happened during one of these conferences.
What did Hoback tell you when you first met?
He told me about his desire to make a documentary about Bitcoin, focusing on the protocol’s early years and its evolution. He never mentioned any intention to reveal Satoshi’s identity.
Do you feel more at risk after the documentary’s publication?
It’s important to emphasize that the documentary not only speculated about Satoshi’s identity but also advanced the unproven idea that he holds one million bitcoin. This thesis is just a hypothesis based on bitcoins that have been inactive for a long time; there’s no concrete evidence. We know that many people mined bitcoin in the early days, and the protocol was developed precisely to allow anyone to participate in mining.
It’s said that the documentary initially wanted to identify Craig Wright as Satoshi. Have you heard this rumor?
No, I haven’t heard this rumor. If it were true, we would have ruined the documentary having defeated Craig Wright in court.
What kind of reactions have you received from the public outside the Bitcoin community? Have you received threats?
After it aired, my email inbox was flooded with messages. One person, in particular, sent me 30-40 consecutive emails asking for money. It’s annoying but manageable, just delete them. Obviously, there’s a risk that someone might think I possess wealth that I don’t have and attempt a break-in or kidnapping. I’ve implemented some additional security measures, but I prefer not to specify which ones. Let’s just say that if someone tried to enter my apartment, they would have a very bad day. But it’s absolutely not true that I’m hiding.
What’s your opinion on the documentary’s narrative driven by Roger Ver’s theories?
I think it was another choice made to create televisually interesting content. I doubt Hoback really believed Ver’s thesis, but he probably thought that his absurd theories could capture the audience’s attention. It’s always about marketing and entertainment. The real problem with producing a documentary is figuring out how to make Bitcoin visually engaging.
Have you spoken with Hoback after the documentary’s release?
No, our last contact was during the final interview, when he revealed his true intentions. I haven’t had the chance to ask him why he chose me. If he had really wanted to discover Satoshi’s identity, he could have contacted me and Adam Back for evidence that refutes the documentary’s thesis. In my case, it would have been quite simple: there are moments when Satoshi was writing on BitcoinTalk while I was present at events or special occasions. But evidently, this wasn’t his interest.
In the documentary, Hoback claims to understand why Satoshi disappeared, yet he dedicates half the documentary to searching for his identity. How do you explain this?
Probably it was the only way to make the documentary commercially interesting. It’s almost ironic that his previous work was a documentary about QAnon, full of conspiracy theories.
