Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
CFD
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Promotions
AI
Gate AI
Your all-in-one conversational AI partner
Gate AI Bot
Use Gate AI directly in your social App
GateClaw
Gate Blue Lobster, ready to go
Gate for AI Agent
AI infrastructure, Gate MCP, Skills, and CLI
Gate Skills Hub
10K+ Skills
From office tasks to trading, the all-in-one skill hub makes AI even more useful.
GateRouter
Smartly choose from 40+ AI models, with 0% extra fees
Just caught up with something pretty interesting from the crypto history rabbit hole. There's this documentary called Finding Satoshi that's been making waves, and it's based on a solid four-year investigation into who actually created Bitcoin.
Here's where it gets intriguing: instead of pointing to a single person, the research suggests Satoshi Nakamoto might have been a collaborative pseudonym used by Hal Finney and Len Sassaman. Yeah, those two names from the early cryptography scene.
The investigation firm QRI actually did some deep work on this. They pulled together early mining patterns, analyzed C++ coding styles, dug through PGP work records and documentation, and traced the Cypherpunk connections. All of it pointed toward Finney and Sassaman as the likely architects behind Bitcoin's implementation and the white paper itself.
What's wild is they interviewed actual early crypto participants and even spoke with the widows of both men. These conversations acknowledged the two as co-creators, but here's the catch—there's still no cryptographically verifiable proof. No smoking gun, just circumstantial evidence that's pretty compelling when you look at the whole picture.
It's one of those rabbit holes that makes you think about how much of crypto history is still shrouded in mystery. The documentary definitely raises some eyebrows in the community.