BREAKING NEWS: SATOSHI FINALLY REVEALED! - page 17.

Gyrsur

legendary

Activity: 2856

Merit: 1518

Bitcoin Legal Tender Countries: 2 of 206

Quote from: PinkLlama on May 03, 2016, 01:51:22 PM

Quote from: Gyrsur on May 03, 2016, 01:50:34 PM

Quote from: pawel7777 on May 03, 2016, 01:44:51 PM

Scanned last few pages and didn't see anyone posting this:

The Bitcoin affair: Craig Wright 'to move' Satoshi coin
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36193006

Quote

Craig Wright's spokesman told the BBC that he would "move a coin from an early block" belonging to the crypto-currency's inventor "in the coming days".

So what happens if he actually does it? Proof good enough?

how will mr. wright prove that HE moved the coins and not Gavin Andresen or anyone else? Maybe SN handed over some of the early blocks? or SN is already passed away and now Gavin or mr. wright try to get some blocks from the family of SN.

Satoshi is dead?

not very unlikely. Hal Finney passed away unfortunetly.

Slowturtleinc

member

Activity: 84

Merit: 10

Why is this being dragged out so long,if he is the dude he could make it obvious very quickly.
My mother called me and the first thing she tells me is they found out who created bitcoin and she now claims to know more than me about it. She tells me it is actually a Chinese currency they needed as a alternative to their current setup. Shes a old lady and I amuse her but now I am starting to wonder about the general publics view on this.

Get on with it already!

PinkLlama

full member

Activity: 186

Merit: 100

Quote from: Gyrsur on May 03, 2016, 01:50:34 PM

Quote from: pawel7777 on May 03, 2016, 01:44:51 PM

Scanned last few pages and didn't see anyone posting this:

The Bitcoin affair: Craig Wright 'to move' Satoshi coin
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36193006

Quote

Craig Wright's spokesman told the BBC that he would "move a coin from an early block" belonging to the crypto-currency's inventor "in the coming days".

So what happens if he actually does it? Proof good enough?

how will mr. wright prove that HE moved the coins and not Gavin Andresen or anyone else? Maybe SN handed over some of the early blocks? or SN is already passed away and now Gavin or mr. wright try to get some blocks from the family of SN.

Satoshi is dead?

Gyrsur

legendary

Activity: 2856

Merit: 1518

Bitcoin Legal Tender Countries: 2 of 206

Quote from: pawel7777 on May 03, 2016, 01:44:51 PM

Scanned last few pages and didn't see anyone posting this:

The Bitcoin affair: Craig Wright 'to move' Satoshi coin
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36193006

Quote

Craig Wright's spokesman told the BBC that he would "move a coin from an early block" belonging to the crypto-currency's inventor "in the coming days".

So what happens if he actually does it? Proof good enough?

how will mr. wright prove that HE moved the coins and not Gavin Andresen or anyone else? Maybe SN handed over some of the early blocks? or SN is already passed away and now Gavin or mr. wright try to get some blocks from the family of SN.

EDIT: why this announcment w/o action? is there some preperation needed?

ie007cheung

full member

Activity: 185

Merit: 100

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 01:18:27 PM

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14743468

(what I think might possibly happen next)

If true then the whole story will become even more interesting.

pawel7777

legendary

Activity: 2436

Merit: 1561

Scanned last few pages and didn't see anyone posting this:

The Bitcoin affair: Craig Wright 'to move' Satoshi coin
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36193006

Quote

Craig Wright's spokesman told the BBC that he would "move a coin from an early block" belonging to the crypto-currency's inventor "in the coming days".

So what happens if he actually does it? Proof good enough?

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14743468

(what I think might possibly happen next)

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 2298

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 01:04:00 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on May 03, 2016, 01:02:48 PM

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 12:03:41 PM

Quote from: Cuidler on May 03, 2016, 11:59:50 AM

There are no facts I know of why Gavin Andresen's creditability should take any hit so far.

The fact that Gavin has said he believes this guy to be Satoshi when his false signature claim was debunked within hours shows that Gavin has lost all credibility (where is Gavin's response to the debunking?).

The evidence that Gavin (allegedly) saw was not the debunked signature. Gavin has claimed to have seen a signed message from the address that received the coinbase transaction for the block subsidy from block "1".

If this can be proven to be true then I would say that Wright is reasonably satoshi.

If it was true (that he could produce a valid signature) then why would you go to the effort of posting such a hoax on your website?

It has been speculated that Wright was providing journalists a way/method to verify a signed message (believe it or not, very few people have the technical understanding of encryption to understand what a signed message really means).

Quote

And why doesn't Gavin just post the public key and signature?

(hint - he can't)

It has been said that Gavin was not able to keep the signed message.

Quote

You should perhaps be considering Occam's razor here (the simplest explanation being that Craig Wright does not have the private keys he is claiming to have).

That is possible, maybe even probable. I am not currently convinced that Wright is satoshi, however I don't think it is possible to disprove this either. I am willing to keep an open mind and consider additional evidence as it comes out.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: adamstgBit on May 03, 2016, 01:08:37 PM

he was only giving an example of how to verify a sig not provide proof of being satoshi

I think you should just look at Coblee's post (no need for the big song and dance and especially showing a bunch of console stuff that is meaningless to 99.9% of people).

This is simply typical misdirection.

And if you are so sure that this guy is Satoshi would you care to take a (say 10 BTC) bet on it?

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 01:02:38 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on May 03, 2016, 01:00:31 PM

Core doesn't like Satoshi's ideas.

Well if you think that Satoshi's ideas are Craig Wright's then it might be wise of him not to lie about providing the hash of a Sartre document which he supposedly signed with a "copy and pasted" signature from the blockchain.

And someone who is prepared to be so deceitful is not the kind of Satoshi that I think any of us actually want to support (apart from Gavin it seems).

he was only giving an example of how to verify a sig not provide proof of being satoshi

he's setting the stage

Satoshi is not amused

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Quickseller on May 03, 2016, 01:02:48 PM

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 12:03:41 PM

Quote from: Cuidler on May 03, 2016, 11:59:50 AM

There are no facts I know of why Gavin Andresen's creditability should take any hit so far.

The fact that Gavin has said he believes this guy to be Satoshi when his false signature claim was debunked within hours shows that Gavin has lost all credibility (where is Gavin's response to the debunking?).

The evidence that Gavin (allegedly) saw was not the debunked signature. Gavin has claimed to have seen a signed message from the address that received the coinbase transaction for the block subsidy from block "1".

If this can be proven to be true then I would say that Wright is reasonably satoshi.

If it was true (that he could produce a valid signature) then why would you go to the effort of posting such a hoax on your website?

And why doesn't Gavin just post the public key and signature?

(hint - he can't)

You should perhaps be considering Occam's razor here (the simplest explanation being that Craig Wright does not have the private keys he is claiming to have).

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 2298

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 12:03:41 PM

Quote from: Cuidler on May 03, 2016, 11:59:50 AM

There are no facts I know of why Gavin Andresen's creditability should take any hit so far.

The fact that Gavin has said he believes this guy to be Satoshi when his false signature claim was debunked within hours shows that Gavin has lost all credibility (where is Gavin's response to the debunking?).

The evidence that Gavin (allegedly) saw was not the debunked signature. Gavin has claimed to have seen a signed message from the address that received the coinbase transaction for the block subsidy from block "1".

If this can be proven to be true then I would say that Wright is reasonably satoshi.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: adamstgBit on May 03, 2016, 01:00:31 PM

Core doesn't like Satoshi's ideas.

Well if you think that Satoshi's ideas are Craig Wright's then it might be wise of him not to lie about providing the hash of a Sartre document which he supposedly signed with a "copy and pasted" signature from the blockchain.

And someone who is prepared to be so deceitful is not the kind of Satoshi that I think any of us actually want to support (apart from Gavin it seems).

adamstgBit

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1037

Trusted Bitcoiner

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 12:30:34 PM

Don't you think that it is strange that none of the core devs fell for this charade?

(my guess is that you're a Gavin supporter)

Core doesn't like Satoshi's ideas.
i think its likely that even if Satoshi's identity is verified, they will not care about anything he says.
core has there own ideas and they will shoot down any idea that Satoshi might have and say " thats an appeal to authority " while they use their authority to forever change bitcoin as we know it.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

You're entitled to your high opinion of Gavin as I am entitled to my much lower opinion of him.

It is his acts of attempted coups with constant changing of what he supports (initially blocks to grow exponentially and then when that isn't supported then to grow a little less and then when that isn't supported...) that really lost him credibility in my eyes (and his willingness to work with anyone who doesn't even understand Bitcoin so long as they will support him).

His continued involvement with the very much discredited Bitcoin Foundation was another nail in the coffin but this latest ridiculous thing (associating himself with a now proven liar - and we are talking a rather big lie in pretending to sign something with Satoshi's private key which clearly he did not do) simply is too much for him to really ever regain any credibility in my eyes.

Cuidler

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 12:30:34 PM

Don't you think that it is strange that none of the core devs fell for this charade?

(my guess is that you're a Gavin supporter)

Yes, Gavin likes to involve publictly much more than others, plus I guess he was too much curious to check if Craig Wreight is really Satoshi. Maybe his ego played a role as well, as he was one of the few who knew Satoshi from private correspondence.

I am Gavin supporter because his opinions and mine are similar in so high % of the time, so unless it become proven by facts Gavin acted maliciously (I can not imagine Gavin would do it knowing the signature given proves someone just attempting to impersonate Satoshi with publictly know info - it would be just suicide thinking no one would catch this fact) then he get no cut from his credibility from myselves.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Cuidler on May 03, 2016, 12:28:18 PM

Everybody can be fooled by con artist especially in privacy and without given enought time to think about facts thoroughly, we are all humans no matter how smart in some area you are.

He has had enough time to respond to things and so far has elected not to (beyond a brief admission that "it is possible" he could have been tricked).

As for maintaining Bitcoin code he hasn't done that for years.

His agenda has been to try and wrest control back of the project (after he willingly had given up that anyway) for the last couple of years so it isn't surprising that a con-man who seems to be very pro huge blocks would be someone whose audacious claims he doesn't thoroughly verify himself.

Don't you think that it is strange that none of the core devs fell for this charade?

(my guess is that you're a Gavin supporter)

Cuidler

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 12:03:41 PM

Quote from: Cuidler on May 03, 2016, 11:59:50 AM

There are no facts I know of why Gavin Andresen's creditability should take any hit so far.

The fact that Gavin has said he believes this guy to be Satoshi when his false signature claim was debunked within hours shows that Gavin has lost all credibility (where is Gavin's response to the debunking?).

Someone who (still?) likes to call himself the Chief Bitcoin Scientist (although he should not be using such a title as he doesn't even have commit access to the repo now) should lose all credibility for simply being so easily fooled.

Everybody can be fooled by con artist especially in privacy and without given enought time to think about facts thoroughly, we are all humans no matter how smart in some area you are.

I dont remember Gavin to be Cryptographic specialist at all btw, but he obviously has great experience and proven skills to mantain Bitcoin core.

Credibility is not lost with one silly mistake if this was the case, we all would have zero credibility already and this is the reason any Bitcoin code is tested and reviewed by more people - nothing wrong to submit code for testing with bugs as long as these are not maliciously intended to by exploited later if not found - hopefully you see the difference why his credibility as Bitcoin developer is still the same

tmfp

legendary

Activity: 1932

Merit: 1737