Topic: Craig "Faketoshi" Wright saga continues. His team turns against him. - page 3. (Read 1150 times)

I feel like we've had this conversation before.  Gavin alludes to the notion that Faketoshi isn't satoshi, but never seems to say it outright. 

Even the update on his own blog feels like a cop-out:


He can't seem to bring himself to say "Craig Wright is not satoshi".  Is that not weird?

To me the question is rather: "Can there be a sane person who is convinced he is Satoshi?". We often see cases like Craig, as there are too much to gain by being such a liar. This guy requested to receive the 1fee coins, just because he made up a story and fought tooth and nail to force that view on the protocol using the law.

But, there really isn't anything to gain by believing this trash. I'm genuinely curious how some were convinced.

Getting bribed is an important mistake. You can't trust someone who is getting paid to lie. And if he wasn't really paid to say that crap, and was honestly convinced, then you can't trust him either as he's lacking technical expertise severely.

He's definitely NOT a villain, merely unpopular and generally unliked by some people or sub-groups within the Bitcoin community, not only because he announced that Craig Wright "is Satoshi Nakamoto", but also because,

- He went to the C.I.A. headquarters in Langley, which might have scared Satoshi. Why did he go there?

- He proposed that Bitcoin hard fork to bigger blocks with Bitcoin-XT. The community was split on that proposal, which the people who supported bigger blocks left to join the altcoins BCash and its fork BCash SV.

So I can be Satoshi too. This is fantastic, I always wanted fame.


I like the way you put those arguments. I don't know why it is not so obvious to all the people who believe him. In fact, I don't know how Gavin was convinced. Seriously! In times like this I keep asking myself if there is something I don't understand, because things go out of my common sense. But, I have come to conclusion that as BlackHatCoiner said, being bribed seems a good excuse.


We have all made mistakes. If he has sincerely changed his mind, it is good for him and I respect that.

But! This is not a mistake that can be easily forgotten. As o_e_l_e_o stated above, all those questions prove that there is something deeper that we ignore. He was, in my opinion and I may be wrong, very easily convinced that CSW was Satoshi. He didn't even seem to be suspicious at all. I mean, we know that Gavin took the leading development role from Satoshi himself (via email). Did CSW do anything (anything at all), to prove that he was the person that gave Bitcoin's development to Gavin? Did he provide any proof of having talked to him back in 2010? If not, then how was he convinced so easily?

Let me repeat though. If he has sincerely changed his mind, it is good for him and I respect that. But id doesn't change the past.

Gavin made a mistake. He has come out several times in the years since that mistake and stated that he does NOT believe Craig Wright is satoshi but for some reason people just keep pointing out his mistake and making  him out to be a villain for it. It’s really weird to watch. Without Gavin, Bitcoin wouldn’t have been as successful as early on as it was. He’s a legend and should really be acknowledged as such.

I'm not defending Andresen by any means, but if you read the emails between him and CSW prior to their meeting in London, it is clear that Gavin already believes at that point that CSW is Satoshi. The meeting in London is not to convince a non-believer, but rather to seal the deal for someone who is already 99% of the way there. Given that every human on Earth suffers from confirmation bias to some degree, perhaps Gavin simply saw what he wanted to see. That doesn't excuse his complete failure of critical thinking, however.

If you want to read the emails in question, they were submitted as evidence during the Hodlonaut trial in Norway. The evidence pack is available as a zip file Greg Maxwell archived here: https://web.archive.org/web/20221001141835/https://nt4tn.net/scammer-craig-wright/3qqpv3.zip. The emails are in Appendix 15 (Bilag 15.pdf in Norwegian). You might also be interested in the NDA CSW made Gavin sign about the signing session in Bilag 13.

The signing session itself was an absolute sham. Here are the two very trivial lines of code which you need to add to Electrum to make it produce fake valid signatures for any key pair you like. Then all CSW had to do was get this fake version of Electrum on the laptop they were using to verify his signature. Now, instead of using the laptop Gavin had brought with him, CSW used a laptop produced by a member of his team, in a location he had chosen and previously had access to, to download Electrum and perform the verification. I'm sure I don't need to point out the dozen or so problems with that process. Why was CSW allowed to control the device being used? Why not use Gavin's laptop? Why was CSW allowed to choose which wallet software to use? Why not use Bitcoin Core? Why was Electrum downloaded over an untrusted network which CSW had access to (and therefore trivial to perform a man-in-the-middle attack and download his fake Electrum client)? Why wasn't the Electrum download verified? Why did the setting up of this laptop take, in Gavin's words, "many hours, I don’t recall how many hours, but it took much longer than expected"? Why, when Gavin asked to perform the verification on his own laptop, did CSW refuse and make stupid excuses?

Well, we all know why. But why didn't Gavin? I mean, we tell newbies on this forum not to trust any downloads and verify everything themselves. Gavin is supposed to be an expert.

I have missed this part. Yeah it makes sense, having got bribed. However, sometimes, when I feel like something is definetely wrong, I try to think about it from the other ones' perspective. Having said that, there is a strong question in my mind. "Can someone be so arrogant and stupid, to try to convince people he is someone who he isn't ?" . Apparently and evidently yes, but... It feels so wrong, if you get what I mean.

Now, to the more technical aspect of the conversation. I can't imagine how a software engineer like G. Andresen could simply lie like that. Apart from it being unethical, it also insults our knowledge and common sense. If Craig Wright had access to Satoshi's PK, he would simply sign in front of everyone. Period! Everything else is for morons. (Forgive my lang).

I don't know about J. Matonis, but he did claim he proved it to Gavin. But, the worse part is that Gavin himself claimed he saw the evidence: https://piped.video/watch?v=W1f5Ms5heMM. "I think that for me, he proved it beyond reasonable doubt". Gavin also wrote it in a blog post in 2016 that he trusts CSW: http://gavinandresen.ninja/satoshi. In both the video and his page, he claims he was shown cryptographic evidence. I thought the private keys were compromised by a hacker, or lost. How could he do that? And even if he did, why not showing to everybody out there a signed message?  

As you can view from the page update, he's now believing the opposite and he doesn't want to talk about it anymore. Seems like someone got bribed to outright lie.  

His reputation is was worth as much as he was paid for this. Now more? Zero.

I have read that, thanks. Is it true that CSW claims he proved G. Andresen and J. Matonis that he can sign with the PK linked to the addresses of the first bitcoin blocks (aka Satoshi's PK)?

No, not at all.

The most recent development in the COPA case was a judgement on various application passed last week, viewable here: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2023/2408.html

If you scroll right to the end of that judgement, the judge lays out a revised timetable for the rest of the trial. The main hearings aren't due to start until January.

Wasn't the COPA case closed? That's what I thought, that COPA have officially won the case.


Why weird? Twitter (or X) is a place where anyone (literally anyone) can say anything (literally anything) they want. The level of misinformation on Twitter is phenomenal. I don't talk about inaccurate info, but rather about huge lies that can have severe consequences which are much more serious. Personally I closed Twitter due to the fact that I was seeing how easy it was to lie and gain followers based on lies. This is a very serious problem in general.

There are still people who blindly believe his nonsense, that he is Satoshi. I see BSV maxis on Twitter who believe him, so weird. Maybe they don’t but it suits the narrative to protect their shitcoin value. He is losing court cases regularly now, it won’t be long before he is a mere blip on the radar of bitcoins illustrious history & soon future. There have been many fraudsters & snake oil salesmen since bitcoin was created, there aren’t many more conniving & devious, maybe even desperate as Craig Wright. He’s irrelevant but soon will just be a distajt bar memory.

So, looks like CSW has changed his legal team yet again, now moving to a firm called "Shoosmiths". Not clear if this is because Ayre pulled the funding from Travers Smith, or perhaps they (like multiple previous legal teams) realized that CSW is a fraud and all his "evidence" is forgeries. Or perhaps CSW fired them since they were unwilling to lie in court. Who knows?


Note that this is for the Coinbase case and not the COPA case. As far as I know, there has been no word yet if Travers Smith are also dropping out of the COPA case. I guess time will tell.

I hope not to weaponize one of Bitcoin's most popular CoinJoin apps against it. Tin-foil hat on, but knowing what the BCash SV people's Modus Operandi, they will probably try to co-opt the Samourai developers. I believe they successfully did it to Nassim Taleb, because why would a smart man like him join Craig Wright? 🤔

Plus, Craig Wright likes to sue people that have admin control/own webservers' that host the Bitcoin white-paper for "intellectual rights violations", no? He should sue Patrick McHenry.

https://mchenry.house.gov/uploadedfiles/bitcoin.pdf


Breaking down political barriers.

 

The thing you have to be slightly careful of is who the video is made by.  Ayre's propaganda outlet, CoinGeek, have uploaded videos to YouTube to cover that trial (along with other subjects), which are full of misrepresentations and spin.  Avoid these ones unless you enjoy being lied to. 

I hope so too, otherwise I will stop using Samourai, Sentinel and Dojo server, which, so far, I like a lot.


I read all of it, including the reddit posts by gmaxwell as o_e_l_e_o suggested. Good information and I am glad CSW lost the case.

By the way, I think you can find the whole trial on YouTube in case anyone wants to.

Finally, I kinda like this https://cryptocloaks.com/product/space-cat-figurine/ and I will order it. I saw that the seller sent 50% of the sales to support hodlonaut's trial back then. Pretty cool figurine.

To all of you:
I am curious to know all your thoughts on Gavin Andresen who claimed that CSW signed in front of him But he was given the chance to be a core developer by satoshi himself.

That's why I said half way though 2016, by June his claims were well and truly debunked and dead in the Bitcoin community.  He went on to sucker bcashers for a while.

He was briefly nChain's CEO but dropped out. I tried contacting him several times after trying to see if he had changed his position, including forwarding him posts by Wright fraudulently claiming to be involved in the formation of the Bitcoin foundation (which Jon would have known first hand was a lie) but I heard nothing in response.

If he's still involved he's in deep cover.

Last I heard he was backing Samurai Wallet.  I hope they wouldn't accept funding from/through someone involved with faketoshi.

Not really shocking considering how long could someone stay with a person who claims to be someone they are not? I mean at first you may try to help him, hell at first you may even believe him, but slowly you will realize that this is going to a point where he might literally hurt himself trying to prove to the world that he is someone who he is not and that is going to end up being a bigger trouble.

I believe that he should be doing something else, give his time to something that will benefit the world, and he could even start a charity at this point. That way, people who still trust him and believes in his cause could donate to him, and he will spend his time helping someone, which would rebuild his entire reputation as well. It's really a smart move.

I will return to this post once I have some merit to send. Thanks, very well explained.

I believe 2015 was when Faketoshi was first "introduced" to the community when he joined Nick Szabo and other Bitcoiners in a panel through live stream. There were some people, the big blockers, who insist that it was Nick Szabo who introduced him as Satoshi, which is simply not true.

Plus was the community ignoring him from 2016 to 2018? It was a nocoiner friend of mine that texted me that "Satoshi's real identity was discovered" after early news of Gavin Andresen and Faketoshi's "private signing sessions" was everywhere during 2016. That's probably when the community started talking about him.


The name that never gets mentioned is, Jon Matonis. How important is he in the anti-Bitcoin apparatus launched by Faketoshi?