WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD.
Some say we live in the golden age of documentaries – they are certainly being made at a much higher volume than ever before in history, but for every ‘My Octopus Teacher’, a truly inspiring and unusual human story, there is the opposite: cynical trash like “Money Electric.”
Let’s start by recognizing that “Money Electric” raised his own stakescreating a week-long hype cycle with the promise of a big reveal – that the world would finally know the identity of Bitcoin’s anonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto.
Let’s maybe also do the historical baggage there. Sure, many journalists have died on this hill, but surely ‘Money Electric’ would have something to add to the conversation? After all, from the trailer, they apparently spent millions of dollars paying for Samson Mow’s dinners while he preached Bitcoin around the world. (It’s always great to subsidize education!)
There were even hints that something might have been inspired here, a still image of a series of cypherpunks, all of whom have interesting stories. Perhaps the “big reveal” was just a ploy to keep our attention, and perhaps there would follow a series of revelations (none of which were taken too seriously) that together would create a compelling story about what Bitcoin is and could be .
Unfortunately not. For most of its running time, “Money Electric” hides its motives and follows its star (director Cullen Hoback) as he delves into the Bitcoin world. But as the film unfolds, it becomes clear that the creators had no motive other than to cast someone as Satoshi.
How else can a big-budget movie indulge in outright conspiracy theories, dredging up the alternate history of the “Block Size Wars” as a way to introduce accusations that are almost entirely uninteresting?
Hint: The impetus for the big reveal here is that Peter Todd may have been working with a secret government agent to promote his ideas for the Bitcoin roadmap.
It’s here where things go off the rails (or to the master plan). After making us suffer his own deception, Hoback and Co. play. finally get their cards and discover a series of alleged evidence proving that Adam Back and Peter Todd (and for some reason Greg Maxwell too) were all secretly Satoshi.
Truly the most banal and often repeated theory.
From there we see a series of ‘pitfalls’, all of which would have been easily refuted if the directors had done basic follow-up research.
Let’s take a look:
- Peter Todd and Adam Back corresponded on the cryptography mailing list when he was young. This is true and common knowledge. It’s something that Peter and Adam comment on publicly and not much is actually said about, other than the fact that the cryptography list was open to the public and may have had hundreds of members.
- Peter Todd’s first BitcoinTalk post took place around the time Satoshi left – Another acquaintance. In fact, the message was written in Todd’s snarky style, but we are left to believe that it was him who misremembered that he was actually Satoshi and responded to himself. (At least that’s what the director thinks). It doesn’t matter that his forum name at the time was ‘retep’, and since no one knew who he was, he could have easily deleted it.
- Peter Todd once made a joke about deleting Bitcoin. This is used to support the idea that he burned Satoshi’s keys.
- Adam Back discussed Bitcoin on the cryptography mailing list after Bitcoin launched – Giving credit where credit is due, I actually didn’t know that either. But again, once we look at the archive, we can see that the material supports Back’s claim that he was not yet interested in Bitcoin. In the emails, Back passively responds to the hype surrounding Bitcoin (which subsequently rises above $30), and there is even a reply complaining about why Satoshi (whose name he misspelled) didn’t add any features he thought would be useful. Another 5 minutes of Googling.
- Todd and Back were in cahoots, involved in a cover-up to mask the fact that they created Bitcoin. Ta-da. That’s why he never joined Blockstream! (This is seriously said by the director in the movie.)
Taking a step back, it’s hard to know what to say about this series other than that it’s both a marvel of creativity and cynicism, and when you say this, know that this is in no way a compliment .
For starters, Hoback makes no legitimate attempt to involve Back or Todd in his findings. He merely presents the material as he found it, films how they react, and closes shop. It makes sense, even someone like me will admit that there’s a non-zero chance that Back or Todd was Satoshi. There aren’t many people you can’t completely exclude, and that includes them.
Unfortunately, a non-zero probability is not a smoking gun. It’s not proof.
Todd and Back’s internet presence, while removed from the internet, is accessible. I’ve read it. No, they weren’t the only ones involved in digital money who deleted those things.
Of course, I’m sure that, with the magic of editing, and by leaving the “findings” open to no criticism, many viewers will walk away thinking they are seeing a clever and well-researched theory.
The one thing Hoback has proven to me is that he understands the shortcuts you can take when making a documentary. Just among the creative works you can hide all your mistakes behind the editing, while unfounded and dangerous accusations seem plausible.
And just to be clear, claiming someone is Satoshi without proof is exactly that.
Let’s hope no one gets hurt because of his idiocy.
Remark: I once interviewed a producer for “Electric Money” in 2021. It is not recorded. I had no contact with the documentary team after that.