https://twitter.com/ryanxcharles/status/1035322235983159296?s=21
In all fairness, anyone with a background in common law will understand that no one wants to be take ownership of being Satoshi Nakamoto.
In all fairness, anyone with a background in common law will understand that no one wants to be take ownership of being Satoshi Nakamoto.
Indeed.
However, one cannot simply continue to pretend to be someone or something, especially when that very thing allows you to prove otherwise.
This is about cryptography. Financial cryptography at that. Sign and Verify.
I decided I should do this myself recently, it was really hard for me to do, not in practice (that's the really easy bit), but emotionally difficult.
Verifying my (old) zero balance wallet address for blockchain research etc.,
- https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/verifying-my-old-zero-balance-wallet-address-for-blockchain-research-etc-4630066
Ask yourselves - Why can't CSW login to this forum as Satoshi Nakamoto or just simply sign and verify somewhere? If a three letter agency has his keys or he requires a multi-party signing to do this then he needs to explain this. This is not a joke.
Like me, Craig was clearly around during Bitcoin's inception (even earlier on than myself and many others on this forum) - However, I have no knowledge of him mining. I do know that Dave Kleiman was mining.
- https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.42180805
If he is Satoshi, it would be best for BTC and BCH that he not verify. That would give him undue influence on how things turn out. Bitcoin is supposed to be based on Nakamoto consensus, which is basically proof of work. Nakamoto consensus should not be proof of who is Satoshi Nakamoto.
Also, Theymos locked the satoshi account. Theymos would need undeniable proof to allow anyone to sign in. This is good, since Bitcointalk was hacked back in 2015, and I believe the e-mails and passwords were compromised along with much more personal data.
