Eli Ben-Sasson, the founder of Starknet and co-founder of Zcash, has reignited conversations regarding the legacy of Bitcoin’s enigmatic creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. This renewed interest was sparked by an old screenshot from the Bitcoin Talk forum that dates back 16 years, which indicates that early developers in the Bitcoin community not only accepted but also encouraged the emergence of alternative blockchains.
During this period, Hal Finney—the first person to receive a Bitcoin—was actively engaged in discussions about BitDNS, which would later evolve into Namecoin. He suggested launching it as a fork from Bitcoin; essentially creating a distinct blockchain where coins could be acquired using $BTC.
Did Satoshi Support Alternatives to Bitcoin?
The argument that Satoshi endorsed alternative cryptocurrencies is supported by several historical instances. For instance, he took part in discussions surrounding BitDNS and expressed his opposition to storing domain name information directly on Bitcoin’s primary blockchain.
Additionally, Satoshi once introduced an idea for technology that would allow new projects to thrive without compromising security—enabling miners to simultaneously mine both Bitcoin and another cryptocurrency. This implies he envisioned a cooperative network rather than one focused solely on eliminating competition.
Ultimately, both Satoshi and Finney regarded Bitcoin as a foundational layer upon which various services could be constructed. The notion proposed by Finney about purchasing tokens with $BTC effectively laid down the framework for what we now recognize as today’s crypto economy.
Not just him. Satoshi approved as well. https://t.co/4JZCjPGH1O?from=article-links
— Eli Ben-Sasson | Starknet.io (@EliBenSasson) March 13, 2026
Contemporary advocates for maximalism within the Bitcoin community often assert that any cryptocurrency other than $BTC is either erroneous or fraudulent. However, Ben-Sasson contends that early ideologies were markedly different; they reflected pragmatism on Satoshi’s part—if tasks like DNS necessitated an alternate blockchain solution, then it should indeed be developed.
This perspective suggests that during crypto’s formative years forks were seen more as enhancements to the ecosystem rather than threats against its supremacy.