The NYT claims to have found Satoshi Nakamoto and the evidence is as conclusive as ever. That is, little or nothing

On October 31, 2008, someone calling himself Satoshi Nakamoto posted a document nine-page document that proposed a decentralized electronic money system. That was the birth of bitcoin and a phenomenon that has shaken the foundations of the modern economy, but no one has ever been able to know who was really behind that pseudonym. And no matter what they say in The New York Times, we still don’t know. Adam Back. The journalist John Carreyrou became famous for uncover he Theranos fraudand in a new and in-depth investigation published in The New York Times claims to have discovered the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. According to their data, that person is Adam Back, a well-known 55-year-old British cryptographer who is currently the CEO of the Blockstream company. Back denies all these claims, and we fear that this investigation will once again end up like the rest of the previous attempts. He is not just any suspect. In 1997, Back invented HashCash, a mathematical puzzle-solving system that Satoshi explicitly cited in his white paper and that in fact became the basis of the bitcoin mining mechanism. He was an active member of groups of anarchist cryptographers who had been trying to create digital money for decades. And between 1997 and 1999 he published messages on Internet forums that accurately described almost all the fundamental elements of the system. That was like an instruction manual for creating bitcoin, but created a decade before Satoshi Nakamoto published it. Analysis based…on how Satoshi wrote? The methodology followed by Carreyrou is striking. He worked with an AI expert from the NYT to collect messages from crypto mailing lists between 1992 and 2008, merged them into a database with 134,000 messages from 620 different users, and applied three methods of analyzing those messages. In the analysis, it was seen that the British spelling, the same hyphen errors in some terms, the confusion between “it” and “its” or the use of two spaces between sentences pointed to Back writing the same as Satoshi in his document. All circumstantial. This style analysis led Back to be identified as the clear candidate among a group of 12 “suspects.” However, the experts who carried out the analysis were not entirely sure and, for example, another of the traditional candidates in these investigations, Hal Finney, was almost tied in these style matches. Back himself indicated that anyone who writes about cryptography is going to sound just like the rest of the community. Back denies the major. Carreyrou ended up traveling to a bitcoin conference in El Salvador to meet with Back and explain his findings. During their two-hour conversation, Back denied being Satoshi on several occasions. The journalist claimed to have caught Back making a mistake when he stated that “I’m better with code than words”, something that Satoshi Nakamoto also said in a late 2008 message on one of the mailing lists analyzed. Back said he was simply making a general observation about programmers, and the truth is that all of Carreyrou’s evidence was inconclusive. Only Satoshi can prove that he is Satoshi. The bitcoin user community often says that “we are all Satoshi”, in reference to the fact that revealing the real identity of the creator of bitcoin is not relevant. The only way to do this would be for Satoshi himself to reveal himself and prove to be that person by transferring bitcoins from one of Satoshi Nakamoto’s original wallets – where he houses nothing less than 1.1 million bitcoins. Many have tried to unmask Satoshi. They have all failed. We are facing another attempt to reveal the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. It is neither the first nor probably the last. In recent years we have seen several more: Neither then nor now has anything really been proven. The mystery continues. Image | Wikipedia | Michael Fortsch In Xataka | The creator of Bitcoin disappeared 13 years ago. Now your account has just received a million-dollar transfer

The NYT published the story of the AI ​​entrepreneur who has a turnover of 1.8 billion with two employees. Forgot to mention a few things

On April 2, The New York Times public a profile of Matthew Gallagher, a 41-year-old entrepreneur from Los Angeles who with $20,000, the help of his brother and a dozen AI tools managed to create MEDVi. This telemedicine startup sells GLP-1 weight loss drugs and in 2025 had a turnover of $401 million and projects to reach $1.8 billion in 2026. The story went viral and seemed to show that the AI ​​revolution can make you rich if you set up your own sole proprietorship (or almost), but in reality the NYT article left without mentioning important details and disturbing aspects of this business success. 800 fake doctors. In creating MEDVi, Gallaguer created more than 800 Facebook pages that posed as the profiles of individual doctors. Dr. Daniel Foster, Dr. Jacob L. Chandler or Dr. Alistair Whitmore do not exist: they are profiles created by AI, with photos generated with AI, and which precisely serve as support for women between 35 and 55 years old on Facebook who want to lose weight to see these profiles. The NYT article itself commented that photos with models generated by AI appeared on the MEDVi website and that some advertisements They were “AI Slop”. The media talks about me or not really. The company’s official website also showed logos of Bloomberg or The Times as if they had published articles about it when in reality it had barely advertised in said media and then could show that it had appeared in said media. What the article does not mention is the scale of this Facebook profiling operation. The FDA warns. On February 20, 2026, the US Federal Drug Administration (FDA) sent a warning letter (#721455) which was in fact part of a set of similar letters sent to 30 telemedicine companies. This type of letter is not a formal accusation, but rather an “informal and advisory” communication. The reason for the letter to MEDVi were two specific problems on its website. First, the images of the products showed the label “MEDVi”, which in American regulations implies that the company is the manufacturer of these medications, when in reality it is just an intermediary that orders them from external pharmacies. Second, phrases such as “same active ingredient as Wegovy® and Ozempic®” led one to believe that MEDVi’s compounded products had received FDA approval or evaluation, when compounded medications do not go through that process. The NYT did not mention the FDA letter. Medications with uncertain (or no) effectiveness. Part of MEDVi business includes oral compound tirzepatidea product that does not exist in an FDA-approved form. This company falsely presented it as a safe and effective GLP-1 drug for weight loss, even though there is no regulatory-approved variant. The only approved oral GLP-1 requires an absorption enhancer and very controlled administration conditions: MEDVi was selling something that probably did nothing, and in fact laboratories like Lilly have warned of these types of products and have taken legal action to prohibit its sale. A group of people already sued several telemedicine companies for selling “snake oil” as if oral tirzepatide were magic when nothing has been proven. Again, there was no data on this in the NYT article. 1.6 million medical records leaked. MEDVi outsources its medical infrastructure to OpenLoop Health, which the NYT article mentions as “managing doctors, pharmacies, shipping and regulatory compliance.” In January 2026, a cybercriminal managed to access OpenLoop systems and claimed to have obtained the records of some 1.6 million patients including names, contact information, dates of birth and medical information. OpenLoop reported of the intrusion in March 2026 and confirmed that at least 68,000 were affected in the state of Texas alone. If you want clients, the key is spam. MEDVi too has been sued in California for violating this state’s anti-spam laws. According to that lawsuit, MEDVi used an affiliate marketing technique that sent spam using falsified information, spoofed domains, and shipping addresses designed to avoid spam filters. Gallagher noted in The New York Times that “a total of $20,000 was spent on the software and the first month of marketing,” and it is not clear how much of the initial growth was due to practices that are now part of that new legal process. A success story with a dangerous background. The story that NYT tells us is fascinating and seems to effectively point to that future in which a person will be able to set up a successful business with the help of AI. However, in this case the success achieved is overshadowed by the way in which AI was used and the way in which Gallaguer presented his business. The NYT seems to have verified that the company actually earned $401 million in 2025. The question that remains unanswered is what part of that income came from people who bought a drug that probably doesn’t work, promoted by doctors who don’t exist, through an infrastructure that ended up leaking their medical data. Image | MEDVi In Xataka | We believed that GLP-1 drugs were only going to change obesity. They just turned upside down how we treat addictions

In case there weren’t enough AI companies. Jeff Bezos has just returned from the shadows to raise another one, according to the NYT

After leading Amazon for almost three decadesJeff Bezos left four years ago the highest position in the company that he created to focus on other projects. Personally, His wedding to Lauren Sánchez made headlines; professionally, His involvement with Blue Origin has been constantat a time when the space company rivals SpaceX like never before. At 61 years old and in a comfortable stage of his life, few would have imagined that Bezos would return to the CEO chair of a new company. But in Silicon Valley, where withdrawal is rarely final, nothing can ever be closed. The case of Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google, is a good reminder: At the age of 70 he assumed the presidency and executive direction of Relativity Space. And now, according to The New York TimesBezos is back. Bezos returns to an operational position with a powerful bet The tycoon, who as of this writing appears as the third richest person on the planetaccording to Forbeshas set his sights on a new project. We talk about Project Prometheusa company that emerges with financing of 6.2 billion dollars, much of it contributed by Bezos himself. And, of course, it is a bet on artificial intelligence. The company appears at a time when artificial intelligence is experiencing accelerated expansion. It is no secret that the environment is dominated by names like Google, Meta and Microsoft, along with references such as OpenAI and Anthropic. Added to this dynamic is a growing number of startups seeking to differentiate themselves with more specialized proposals. That Bezos adopts an operational role in this context reinforces the relevance of the project and positions it from the beginning within the competition for the most ambitious advances in the sector. As detailed by the American newspaper, the first steps of Project Prometheus have not been particularly visible and there is still no confirmed date for the start of its operations. However, the type of technology that is being developed is known, focused on applying AI to engineering and manufacturing challenges in areas such as computing, aerospace and automotive. It is an approach that requires teams with high scientific specialization. For now, the location of the company has not been made public either, a fact that remains unclear. The company is focused on applying AI to engineering and manufacturing challenges in areas such as computing, aerospace and automotive. The sources consulted point out a relevant detail: Bezos returns to direct management by becoming co-CEO of Project Prometheus, a role that he had not held since leaving Amazon. Share that responsibility with Vik Bajajphysicist and chemist with extensive experience in applied research. We are talking about a profile that worked alongside Sergey Brin at Google X and later participated in the launch of Verily, Alphabet’s laboratory dedicated to life sciences. Project Prometheus is part of a broader trend within the sector. A growing number of companies are applying artificial intelligence to tasks linked to the physical world, from robotics to drug design or scientific research. This year, several researchers from companies such as Meta, OpenAI or Google DeepMind have abandoned consolidated projects to found new initiatives, such as Periodic Labsfocused on accelerating discoveries in physics and chemistry. It is in that environment where Prometheus begins to place itself. The interest in applying artificial intelligence to the physical world also responds to an important technical difference. Large language models learn from huge amounts of digital text, from articles to technical documentation. According to The New York Times, the new approach goes one step further: systems that can also learn from real experiments, run by robots in automated laboratories. Initiatives like AlphaFold have already demonstrated advances in areas such as drug design. It’s on that frontier, where software meets physical experimentation, where Prometheus wants to compete. The implementation of the project is also reflected in your team. Project Prometheus, sources say, has incorporated nearly a hundred employees, including researchers from companies such as OpenAI, Google DeepMind and Meta. This movement confirms the technical ambition of the company and the intention to advance quickly in a field where talent is decisive. Bezos’ decision to return to an operational role also comes at a particularly competitive time for the industry, adding even more attention to the company’s next steps. Images | Jeff Bezos | Igor Omilaev In Xataka | Apple steps on the accelerator towards the most important change of the decade: the succession of Tim Cook

has also caused the anger of neighbors, according to NYT

A metal fence 4.8 meters high and a door with security camera. That was the spark of a legal dispute that involves a property of West Lake Hills, an exclusive residential area on the outskirts of Austin, Texas. The house is linked to Elon Musk, According to information obtained by The New York Timesalthough it appears in the name of a limited society called Stratford House LLC. A property in the spotlight. The property was acquired in 2022 by this society and since then has been in the center of an urban controversy. According to municipal records, the structures were built without the required permits, contravening the local code. The case was discussed on April 16 in a session of the Zoning and Planning Commission, whose public act includes all the details. The Commission voted against granting the requested exceptions and the matter will now go to the City Council, at a meeting scheduled for June 11, after the applicant asked for a postponement. The before and after, captured by Street View. Google Street View images help visually draw the change. In a capture taken in 2018, the area appears without visible security elements. There is no metal door or closed structures, and in the background you can see a partially exposed building, as well as two vehicles parked on an open platform. View from Street View from an area close to the housing related to Elon Musk: before the reforms (2018) and then (2024) However, in the view corresponding to 2024, the environment has changed substantially. The entrance has been replaced by a metal door, accompanied by at least one visible surveillance chamber. In another capture you can see an imposing wooden door that did not exist in previous records. These transformations would have been carried out without municipal permission. View from Street View from an area close to the housing related to Elon Musk: before the reforms (2018) and then (2024) A story that has changed. All this contrasts with the image that Musk projected in 2021, When he said he lived in a prefabricated house in Boca Chicarented to Spacex, and that the only house of its property was a home for events in the San Francisco area. However, the aforementioned media maintains that the businessman has added at least three mansions in recent yearsamong them this controversial residence. The interior of the prefabricated booth in Boca Chica Beyond an urban issue. The controversy has also revolved around the privacy of the process. According to Correos obtained by the American newspaper, representatives of the alleged owner tried to persuade local authorities to keep the case secret. They argued that, due to their relationship with the Donald Trump government, it should be considered a “federal public official” and that both records and communications with the city were exempt from transparency laws. The city lawyer rejected the petition, protecting himself in the Texas Open Meetings Law. An additional request signed by lawyer Inna Kplun was also dismissed, in which he claimed that the presence of armed security personnel, including federal sheriffs, justified to deal with the matter outside the public scrutiny. The day everything came to light. As Kxan points outDuring the April 16 hearing, the owner’s representatives submitted six exception requests to the Municipal Code, including the five -meter high fence. They recognized that the structures were installed without permission in 2022, when the house was bought. Several neighbors expressed their rejection. The process is still open. But what began as a series of discreet reforms in a property associated with the employer has ended up becoming a public issue, exposed to detail in acts, internal emails and official documents. All in one of the most exclusive areas of Texas, where privacy also has its limits. Images | USAFA | Screen capture Google Street View | Elon Musk In Xataka | The best paid CEO in the US is not in Apple or Tesla. It is a complete stranger of a company that you had not heard

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.