Reviewing the Epstein Files, Discovering He Met Satoshi Nakamoto

marsbitPublished on 2026-02-03Last updated on 2026-02-03

Abstract

U.S. Department of Justice recently released a batch of Epstein files, revealing his significant early involvement in the cryptocurrency space. As early as 2011, Epstein was discussing Bitcoin, calling it a "brilliant idea" with "serious flaws." The documents show his communications with tech elites, including former Microsoft executives and PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel, about cryptocurrency investments and ideology. Epstein invested in Blockstream's seed round, and emails suggest he may have also funded Ripple/Stellar, leading to internal conflicts. He was also connected to MIT's Digital Currency Initiative, which paid Bitcoin Core developers using his anonymous donations. Most notably, in a 2016 email, Epstein claimed to have "spoken with some of the Bitcoin creators," raising questions about Satoshi Nakamoto's identity and potential U.S. government awareness. However, he later advised against buying Bitcoin in 2017 when it was under $5,000. The files also note his brief encounter with MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor. With half the documents still unreleased, the full extent of Epstein's crypto connections remains unknown.

On January 30th, the U.S. Department of Justice disclosed a large number of "Epstein Files" for the first time, immediately attracting widespread attention and discussion globally. While we were seeing whether Musk "went to the island," Bill Gates' extramarital affair, or the next Federal Reserve Chair nominee Kevin Warsh also appeared on Epstein's party invitation list, these newly disclosed files also dropped a bombshell regarding the cryptocurrency industry.

The history of the cryptocurrency industry may have finally revealed the tip of the iceberg and could be rewritten from now on.

Was Epstein a "Crypto OG"?

As early as 2011, Epstein had already taken notice of Bitcoin. That year, the total annual trading volume of Bitcoin had not yet exceeded $100 million, and its price once broke $30 before plummeting by 90%.

The following email is dated June 12, 2011, right around the peak of Bitcoin's price that year. Epstein stated in the email, "Bitcoin is a brilliant idea, but it also has some serious shortcomings."

In 2013, the frequency of cryptocurrency mentions in Epstein's correspondence increased.

First, there was an email exchange with Boris Nikolic (who once served as Bill Gates' chief technology advisor and was named in Epstein's will), titled "Who Uses Bitcoin Now?". They jokingly and mockingly discussed Ross Ulbricht, the founder of Silk Road who was arrested that year, saying that Ross using a Gmail account with his real name was a stupid mistake.

a16z board partner, former president of Microsoft's Windows division, Steven Sinofsky, emailed Epstein saying his Bitcoin investment had already increased by 50%, and shared Timothy B. Lee's article "How Bitcoin Captivated Washington".

He also received news that the once-famous Bitcoin website Satoshi Dice was sold for $11.4 million.

In 2014, Epstein engaged in an in-depth discussion with PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel about the nature of Bitcoin.

This conversation indicates that Epstein was already very familiar with the ideological debates surrounding Bitcoin's nature in the early stages of the cryptocurrency market. He even compared it to gender identity.

Another email shows that Epstein participated in the seed round financing of Bitcoin infrastructure company Blockstream. The total amount of this round was $18 million, and Epstein's investment increased from $50,000 to eventually $500,000.

Blockstream CEO Adam Back recently issued a statement denying any direct or indirect financial connection between the company and Epstein or his estate. He explained that Epstein was once a limited partner in a fund that held a minority stake in Blockstream, but the fund has since completely divested.

However, the names of Adam Back and Austin Hill (Blockstream co-founder) appeared in travel arrangement emails for St. Thomas Island (about 2 miles from "Epstein Island"):

Furthermore, in 2014, Austin Hill emailed Epstein and Joi Ito (former director of the MIT Media Lab; Epstein invested in Blockstream through his fund). He stated that Ripple ($XRP) and Stellar (a new project by Ripple founder Jed McCaleb after leaving Ripple) had a negative impact on the ecosystem Blockstream was building and harmed Blockstream because their investors were "backing two horses in the same race."

The interpretation of this in English-speaking circles has some divergence. Considering the context, my personal interpretation tends to be that Epstein might have also invested in Ripple/Stellar at the time, which caused Blockstream's dissatisfaction, leading Austin Hill to say in the email, "I was asked by other co-founders to reduce or even cancel your allocation."

Although the growth of Ripple and Stellar was not affected, we don't know if more, unknown, excellent cryptocurrency projects have been stifled in their infancy through such behind-the-scenes pressure, from then until now.

In response, former Ripple CTO David Schwartz tweeted, "I don't want to be a conspiracy theorist, but if this is just the tip of the iceberg, I wouldn't be surprised at all."

So does this mean Epstein's evil also existed in the cryptocurrency field? David Schwartz also said that for most ultra-wealthy individuals, having some connection to Bitcoin is probably very common.

Even more, in 2014-2015, the collapse of the Bitcoin Foundation left Bitcoin Core developers without stable salaries. The MIT Media Lab's Digital Currency Initiative (DCI) began paying salaries to several Bitcoin Core developers. Gavin Andresen, Wladimir van der Laan, and Cory Fields, three Bitcoin Core developers, therefore decided to join the MIT Media Lab.

At that time, the scandal had not yet broken, and the public was unaware of Epstein's anonymous donations to the MIT Media Lab. Joi Ito thanked Epstein via email, not only explaining Bitcoin's development operations to Epstein but also stating that thanks to this money, the lab was "able to move quickly and score a huge victory" because "many organizations wanted to take advantage of the situation to control Bitcoin's developers."

Epstein's reply was a simple compliment about Gavin Andresen: "Gavin is very smart."

Did Epstein Meet Satoshi Nakamoto?

In 2016, Epstein emailed Saudi Royal Court advisor Raafat AlSabbagh and current Abu Dhabi Department of Culture and Tourism advisor Aziza Al Ahmadi, proposing two "radical ideas for creating two new currencies." One was a "Sharia" dollar; just like all U.S. dollar bills have "In God We Trust," the Middle East could have its own "Sharia" dollar for internal use.

The other idea was to create a digital currency like Bitcoin to make money compliant with Sharia law. Then, after this idea, he casually and lightly dropped this message as if in small talk:

"I have spoken with some of the Bitcoin creators, and they are very excited."

Epstein's purpose at the time might have been more about炫耀 his connections to enhance his reliable image, so he just mentioned it offhand. But this could completely rewrite the entire history of Bitcoin and even the cryptocurrency industry. "Some Bitcoin creators"—does this mean Satoshi Nakamoto was not an individual but a team? If so, many mysteries surrounding Satoshi Nakamoto would have a reasonable explanation.

There are even more thought-provoking questions. Who was this team? What was the motivation for creating Bitcoin? If Epstein really met them, how did he initially find out who they were, and how did he establish a relationship with them? If even Epstein knew who created Bitcoin, wouldn't the U.S. government know? What motive has the U.S. government had for remaining silent on this issue all along?

After this latest batch of Epstein files was disclosed, the probability on the prediction market Polymarket of "Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin address taking action in 2026" rose from about 6% to about 9.3% at one point and is currently holding at 8%.

If Epstein did meet Satoshi Nakamoto, it seems Satoshi did not successfully evangelize Bitcoin to him during their contact. In an email exchange on August 31, 2017, when asked "Is it worth buying one Bitcoin?", Epstein simply replied "No." At that time, one Bitcoin was less than $5,000.

Whether Epstein actually met Satoshi Nakamoto, we currently have no way of knowing. However, we can know that he met the now most famous Bitcoin bull—MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor.

For years, Saylor's determination to only buy and never sell Bitcoin has been堪称变态 (abnormal/extraordinary). But in 2010, he was not yet famous for this identity.

That year, Comrade Saylor spent $25,000 to get into a party set up by Epstein's publicist Peggy Siegal and initially displayed his "autistic" traits at the party. This is how Peggy Siegal described Saylor:

Being called变态 (abnormal/weird) by a变态 (abnormal/weird) subordinate shows just how变态 Saylor really is. Perhaps only a creation as great as Bitcoin could accommodate a变态 like Saylor and allow him to build a great enterprise.

Conclusion

About half of the Epstein files have not yet been disclosed. How many more bombshells related to the cryptocurrency industry are hidden in these remaining files?

Will time clear the fog?

Sequoia Dialogue with Jensen Huang: Computing Model Undergoes a 60-Year Transformation; You Won't Be Replaced by AI, But You Will Be Dimensionality-Reduced by 'Those Who Master AI'

NVIDIA founder and CEO Jensen Huang, in a conversation with Sequoia Capital's Konstantine Buhler, argues that we are witnessing the most significant computing shift in 60 years—from retrieval-based to generative computing. Instead of just storing and retrieving data, future systems will generate highly personalized content (text, images, video) on demand, powered by massive "AI factories." Huang envisions a global "intelligence network" that will envelop the planet, following the historical patterns of energy and communication grids. He outlines a five-layer investment framework: 1) Energy, 2) Chips/Computers, 3) Infrastructure (data centers), 4) AI Models, and 5) Applications. He predicts this ecosystem will reach a scale of $20 trillion annually. Crucially, Huang pushes back against fears of AI-driven job loss. He distinguishes between specific "tasks" (e.g., typing, analyzing images) and overall "jobs" (e.g., CEO, radiologist). While AI automates tasks, it increases efficiency and demand for the higher-value problem-solving aspects of professions, thus creating more jobs and "up-leveling" careers. The real risk, he asserts, is not being replaced by AI, but being outperformed by someone who effectively leverages it. He urges everyone to embrace AI as a tool for augmented capability and innovation.

marsbit6m ago

Sequoia Dialogue with Jensen Huang: Computing Model Undergoes a 60-Year Transformation; You Won't Be Replaced by AI, But You Will Be Dimensionality-Reduced by 'Those Who Master AI'

marsbit6m ago

"I Don't Need a Better Model Anymore": A Panorama of AI Users Under a Reddit Hot Post

Titled "I Don't Need a Better Model Anymore": AI User Reactions on Reddit Anthropic recently released Claude Fable 5, its first publicly available 'Mythos'-tier model, achieving 80.3% on the SWE-Bench Pro benchmark and significantly outperforming its predecessor and competitors. However, a viral Reddit post titled "Claude Fable made me realize I don't need better models anymore" highlighted a growing user sentiment of "good enough." Top comments expressed "model fatigue," with users stating that earlier models like Opus 4.5/4.8 already sufficed for their workflows. High cost was a key concern, as Fable 5's API is nearly twice the price of Opus 4.8, with users questioning the return on investment and suggesting the field has hit a plateau. The most frequent complaint targeted Fable 5's stringent safety filters. Designed to intercept high-risk requests (e.g., cybersecurity), the system was perceived as overly conservative. Users reported frequent rejections for routine security-related tasks, leading to automatic fallbacks to the older Opus model. Paying users were particularly frustrated, feeling they paid a premium for a less usable product. Dissenting voices came from users with heavy, complex tasks. For workloads like high-energy physics simulations with thousands of code lines, Fable 5's improved long-context understanding and error detection represented a significant, worthwhile leap—described as moving from a "college player to an NBA starter." The debate underscores a divergence between benchmark performance and practical utility. For most users, current models meet their needs, making further advances relevant only for extreme use-cases. The discussion also raised concerns about a potential "Public AI Freeze," where the most powerful models (like the restricted Mythos 5) remain exclusive to enterprises and governments, while public offerings stagnate. The launch presents two report cards: one of technical excellence and another of user skepticism. Fable 5's ultimate reception may depend on Anthropic's ability to refine its safety filters and justify its cost for specialized, high-demand users.

marsbit13m ago

"I Don't Need a Better Model Anymore": A Panorama of AI Users Under a Reddit Hot Post

marsbit13m ago

When AI Traffic Surpasses Humans, How Do You Prove You're Human?

With AI-generated web traffic surpassing human activity, websites face a crisis as AI agents bypass ads, avoid clicks, and scrape data without generating revenue. This disrupts the ad-based internet economy, diverting traffic and reducing site visits. In response, sites are blocking AI crawlers and deploying traps like Cloudflare's "honeypot" pages. Traditional CAPTCHAs are now ineffective against advanced AI. The focus has shifted to behavioral biometrics—analyzing unique human patterns such as cursor movement, typing rhythm, and keystroke dynamics. Companies like IBM and BioCatch use this data to distinguish humans from bots, even detecting fraud through behavioral inconsistencies. Two competing approaches aim to verify human identity centrally. Sam Altman’s World (formerly Worldcoin) uses iris scanning to create unique credentials, though it faces privacy concerns and regulatory bans. Alternatively, cryptographic zero-knowledge proofs offer anonymous verification without revealing personal data, championed by Vitalik Buterin to avoid centralized surveillance. However, both systems have flaws. Centralized solutions risk biometric data misuse, while decentralized models may be exploited through identity rental markets in economically unequal regions. Despite challenges, the author favors cryptographic methods for preserving privacy over pervasive behavioral monitoring that permanently captures and controls personal biometric data.

marsbit22m ago

When AI Traffic Surpasses Humans, How Do You Prove You're Human?

marsbit22m ago

2026 Landscape of Decentralized AI: Why is Blockchain the Inevitable "Antidote" for AI?

**The 2026 Landscape of Decentralized AI: Why Blockchain is the "Cure" AI Cannot Ignore** Decentralized AI addresses fundamental bottlenecks of centralized AI: scarce and expensive computational resources, excessive control concentration, unverifiable model outputs, and increasing difficulty in acquiring training data due to privacy and regulation. Blockchain offers a path to make intelligence open, verifiable, and economically accessible. The technical stack comprises three layers: 1. **Applications & Services**: The main crypto use cases are "Agentic Finance" (converting natural language into on-chain actions) and "Agentic Payments" for machine-to-machine commerce. Projects like Giza, Infinity Labs, Coinvest AI, and x402 (handling 173M+ transactions) are key players. 2. **Middleware**: This coordination layer enables agents to discover, identify, and transact. Notable projects include Gokite AI (specialized L1), Virtuals (an OS for the agent economy), and especially Bittensor—a network of specialized subnets forming competitive AI micro-economies. 3. **Infrastructure**: The capital-intensive layer providing raw resources. It includes decentralized compute (Akash, Render, Aethir), verifiable inference (Venice AI, OpenGradient), distributed training (Prime Intellect, Templar AI), decentralized storage (Filecoin, Walrus), and privacy/verification layers (Nillion, Arcium, Phala Network) using technologies like ZKPs, MPC, and TEEs. The outlook for 2026-2027 indicates AI demand outpacing infrastructure, with AI agents as a primary growth engine. Computation is becoming an asset class, with on-chain markets as its financial layer. Tokenomics is emerging as a structural advantage for coordinating capital, compute, and data in decentralized AI networks. While still early—with adoption uneven and revenue often trailing token incentives—projects like Bittensor, NEAR, and Virtuals demonstrate a shift from speculative narrative to a new model for coordinating intelligence.

marsbit25m ago

2026 Landscape of Decentralized AI: Why is Blockchain the Inevitable "Antidote" for AI?

marsbit25m ago

a16z Crypto Partner: Cash Flow is the Moat

Cash Flow as the Moat: A Playbook for Crypto Founders Historically, the most enduring businesses have been built by positioning themselves within the "flow of funds"—facilitating the creation and transfer of value in a network and extracting a portion of it. Cryptocurrency is the first modern technology natively built for this purpose. For startups, failing to architect products and businesses to leverage these principles means missing a major opportunity. Blockchains are inherently network businesses. Each transaction settles on a shared ledger, and every new participant strengthens the underlying network for all. Well-designed network tokens amplify this by aligning users, developers, and validators around growing the network, with value flowing back to contributors in a transparent feedback loop. This model is not new; companies from railroads and Standard Oil to Google, Meta, and AWS have thrived by inserting themselves into critical flows of value (goods, attention, compute). Financial markets make it even clearer: firms like Visa and major market makers generate immense revenue not by predicting markets but by being in the path of transactions. The combination of fund flow and network effects creates one of the most durable business structures. The high margins in traditional finance (payments, custody, lending, FX) represent prime targets. Crypto founders have the opportunity to build the next version—programmable, instant, global, and natively in the flow of funds. The frontier extends beyond finance to areas like computing/GPUs, AI training data, energy, robotics, and space—markets without entrenched intermediaries, ripe for building new, efficient value rails on programmable infrastructure. Founders should ask: Are you in the flow of funds today? Does your revenue scale 10x with the value of activity on your platform? Where in your target market are profit margins highest relative to value created? The opportunity is clear: embed your startup into the new flows of value and let the network effects accumulate.

marsbit27m ago

a16z Crypto Partner: Cash Flow is the Moat