Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Merits 32 from 10 users
Topic OP
Why did Satoshi use GB English and international English ?
by
arabspaceship123
on 11/07/2021, 15:12:55 UTC
⭐ Merited by Welsh (8) ,LoyceV (6) ,DdmrDdmr (5) ,ETFbitcoin (3) ,dkbit98 (3) ,nutildah (2) ,vapourminer (2) ,davis196 (1) ,hosseinimr93 (1) ,kaggie (1)
I've studied some of the 575 posts Satoshi made. Satoshi's used international English and GB British English so is Satoshi more than one person living in different countries? It's a mystery that's not going to be solved soon but here's some of Satoshi's words that I've picked up on

criticised/criticized
serialisation/serialization
optimised/optimized
optimisation/optimization

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2162.msg28549#msg28549
December 09, 2010, 03:17:53 PM
I came to agree with Gavin about whitelisting when I realized how quickly new transaction types can be added.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2151.msg28228#msg28228
December 08, 2010, 08:21:49 PM
I know I've been criticized for being reluctant about listtransactions.  Let me explain my reluctance


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=632.msg7090#msg7090
August 02, 2010, 08:22:08 PM
The reason I didn't use protocol buffers or boost serialization is because they looked too complex to make absolutely airtight and secure.  Their code is too large to read and be sure that there's no way to form an input that would do something unexpected.

I hate reinventing the wheel and only resorted to writing my own serialization routines reluctantly.  The serialization format we have is as dead simple and flat as possible.  There is no extra freedom in the way the input stream is formed.  At each point, the next field in the data structure is expected.  The only choices given are those that the receiver is expecting.  There is versioning so upgrades are possible.

CAddress is about the only object with significant reserved space in it.  (about 7 bytes for flags and 12 bytes for possible future IPv6 expansion)

The larger things we have like blocks and transactions can't be optimized much more for size.  The bulk of their data is hashes and keys and signatures, which are uncompressible.  The serialization overhead is very small, usually 1 byte for size fields.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2162.msg28302
December 08, 2010, 11:19:24 PM
Changes:
- Fixed a wallet.dat compatibility problem if you downgraded from 0.3.17 and then upgraded again
- IsStandard() check to only include known transaction types in blocks
- Jgarzik's optimisation to speed up the initial block download a little


Do you believe Satoshi was a group pseudonym used by more than one person that's why there's differences in written English ?