Very unlikely. Hal Finney is the more likely candidate.
Adam is/was not a good programmer like Satoshi was.
Satoshi was in favor of alt coins in Adam is notoriously against them.
"Adam put enough effort into proclaiming that Bitcoin was based on the concept of HashCash that, if he was Satoshi, Satoshi would have given HashCash more credit." - Another HN User.
Satoshi had a positive attitude and Adam is notoriously unpleasant.
Hal is a great programmer, worked for Phil Zimmerman on PGP.
Hal is the first person Satoshi contacted, first person to mine outside Satoshi (op sec).
Hal was aware of all the prior works that failed, b-money, bit gold, hashcash, etc.
Linguistic analysis of the Bitcoin whitepaper and Satoshi's forum posts most closely match Hal's writings.
Hal lived in the same town for 10 years as did Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto.
Hal died of ALS shortly after Satoshi disappeared (he knew it was coming and that he couldn't continue).
I also think living somewhere he could have seen Dorian Nakamoto's name is a very, very strong pointer towards Finney.
It may seem like a dumb opsec mistake to pick a name from your town, but lets remember, at that point we're talking about launching a cool experiment about digital money worth $0, not about picking a pseudonym as the figurehead of a project worth a trillion dollars.
After reading an article about it, I do wonder about Len Sassaman, who apparently fits Satoshi's timezone and "accent" better. It could even have been both of them collaborating...
However, there are some valid counter arguments in this thread, such as Satoshi coming out of retirement in March 2014 to state that he was not Dorian Nakamoto, in the wake of a Newsweek article that falsely fingered the latter as Satoshi.
Selling this may ruin the story and crash the price. It would probably go against his values and mission. He could easily have other early wallets and have $B's. Most likely explanation though is that it was Hal Finney who passed shortly after Satoshi disappeared.
There are many scams in crypto, and there are many people doing it for speculation, but the space/tech/utility/use cases is not a scam.
It's important to delineate between something that's a scam and speculative, those are not the two same things. A scam is a rug, there's an intent involved, you have scams everywhere not just in crypto.
The legit companies working on DeFi and NFTs are not scams, while some of them may be a bit speculative, there are also companies providing real value to end users.
Check out Stacks (https://stacks.co), enables smart contracts on top of Bitcoin through Proof-of-Transfer consensus. Founded by YC alums and launched this January after many years of R&D.
That’s way too expensive. My $80/month server bill can support millions of users per month but would only get me <300 MAUs on this service?
Edit: my guess is I misunderstood who they are targeting with this. Thought they were targeting developers who want to integrate Jitsi with an existing product.
They must be targeting people who just want to use this for internal purposes, rather than developers who want to integrate Jitsi with an existing product.
If you believe this, start a competing service. There is no moral or practical rule that forces prices down to cost without external reason. If Fastmail is making big bucks, and customers are happy with the price, that's good for everyone.
Do you go to restaurants expecting to pay only the total cost of ingredients for your meal? Fastmail provides an excellent service and if anything I feel as though I underpay for what I'm getting. I'm happy to know they have a healthy margin to pay their developers from and improve the product.
I have worked in one and no they don't. Most restaurants barely break even by the end of the month once you factor in all costs (like employees, rent...), which I did in the example of fastmail.
You said marginal cost which is not all costs. Marginal cost is equivalent to ingredients and does not include fixed costs which likely make up the majority fo their expenses.
