Topic: Craig Wright relents aka Satoshi (air quotes) in Public Apology! (Read 8965 times)

When satoshi really would decide to give up anonymity then only for a very good reason. But this guy here probably did not think about such things. He only came out claiming to be satoshi or to claim that he knew him. Satoshi only would do this if he would have something important to say. And even then, he would not reveal his reallife identity. Only proof that he is who he is and claim what he wants.

If his friend really died and he was the immensely rich satoshi then his dead circumstances should be reasked again.

Yet we know he spent weeks of time setting this up. He got people to fly into London. He arranged meetings with journalists from 3 news outlets. He was committed. And Satoshi would know to expect scepticism. He invented Bitcoin, for Pete's sake: he's no fan of authority and he wouldn't expect to be believed just on the say-so of the BBC or Gavin. So it makes no sense for him to be so committed and then to change his mind over a reaction he would have expected from the start.

move where to? your wallet 
I'm joking

I just think he may be tired of bitcoin and wants to take a rest for a moment anyway. You know, people may be sick of something they always do.

Hello Craig Wright if you are reading this don't get unsettled but this won't help you out either
You are in trouble and it you won't get out of it

Haha I couldn't h said it better myself. I could show you but I won't cuz you're all meanies. Next time I guess you'll be nicer to me and my friends.

It's the same for me. I don't have a clue about his intentions. And this way of backing out, trying to sow doubts that he might still be satoshi but only lost the courage to proof it... no surely a hoax. He would have contacted core devs to fix it first otherwise.

You are definitely in the wrong community if you believe that is what Bitcoin is about or should
be about. This is the internet, bitcoin is the currency of the internet, and the internet is not a land
of love, trust, appreciation, and respect. Bitcoin is designed to work in this environment.

The first fundamental purpose of Bitcoin was to make provable that which should not be trusted.
So in other words, Bitcoin was created to counter or prevent human influence and human trust.
You either control the keys or you do not. Satoshi is well aware of this rule. He taught it first.

All that Craig Wright has to do is show some cryptographic proof to the community that can be
reasonably associated with Satoshi in some provable way (sign message with block 0 or 9) and
then we can discuss everything you want to talk and consider, because then and only then is it
worthwhile to even entertain those stories and explanations. The keys do not prove that he is
Satoshi, but the fact that he has them at all, will allow us to listen and take him more seriously.

---

When a police officer pulls someone over for an alleged offense, the officer doesn't request all
reasons and explanations and stories. The officer first wants proof of who you are. After that,
then you can attempt to explain away the alleged offense.

In this case, the Officer (Community) is requesting the alleged Offender (Craig Wright) to provide
his Identification (private key message signing). The offender (person falsely claiming to be Satoshi)
will not comply and instead wants to explain away why he is not an offender. This is inappropriate
and the officer would arrest (flame and doubt) the offender for not complying with the officers
reasonable requests for ID.

You are saying the Officer should not require ID and accept the offenders story as is.

He got the spotlight, all right.
His name was in all the major newspapers across the world, for 2-3 days.
Mission accomplished. 

That's correct.

I think Electrum claimed that no "signature" was downloaded to a UK ip that day, as opposed to "wallet."  But, according to Gavin's description, the signature was transferred between machines via a USB drive, which I find peculiar.    The signed message went from CW's machine, to a USB drive, to newly unwrapped machine in Gavin's control where it was verified.  It had to be done twice because of an accidental omission, which I also find strange.

This reddit post makes it clear it's not the first time Gavin's been bamboozled. It's more likely that there was a bug in Gavin's critical evaluation of Wright's demonstration than there being a bug in Electrum's signed message verification code.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hl5ma/its_certainly_possible_i_was_bamboozled_andresen/d2qk298


There was no download of an Electrum signature file to the UK on Apr 7th when Gavin met Wright, so how can Gavin have checked Wright was using a legit Electrum wallet?

https://mobile.twitter.com/ElectrumWallet/status/727366861592076288

They said they downloaded Electrum, yet no UK IP address did so that day.

It was obvious from the very start that it's a hoax. The guy proved nothing and all he ever wanted was to be on the spotlight.
The dumbest part of the whole thing to me was Gavin's statements about him; how could he ever say that he believes that he is the real S.N ?

Using a private key as evidence to support a claim doesn't mean that it is the only evidence that can be used in every example. It just so happens that it would be strong evidence in this specific example.

You are the only person I've seen taking the extreme view that we must use private keys for everything, while pretending everyone else is doing exactly that.

I know!  We don't need private keys.  We have trusted third parties to validate our claims for us.  All of this private key, trustless ledger stuff is ruining our fractional reserve banking system.  We need to come together as a community to bring back the trusted third parties because we aren't intenomogent enough to make our own financial decisions.

And yet there is another problem haven't seen people talking about enough: Is 'he' the real Craig Wright? I mean, the person who claimed being Satoshi has not proved to be Craig Wright in the first hand ... so nobody can accuse Craig Wright of anything. That 'person' (if a single one person at all)  is supposed to provide proof, some Pks of transactions known to be signed by Craige,  tisn't he? Instead of this he just used regular trust oriented uncertain social belief about him being Craig Wright, unacceptable and irrelevat, such a claim needs pure mathematical proof ... wait ... I am becoming confused about my identity as well ... OMG ... where are my PKs?   

He knows he can relent and be forgotten soon because he gave no real proof he was satoshi. If he had provided something credible, relenting would not solve anything.

It's obvious that he is taking a position in advance to try to get the coins on all those tax heavens like seychelles or whoever they put all those early mined coins at, and it's also obvious this guy is not satoshi, but he was indeed involved in Bitcoin since the early days and mined a lot of it, but guess what, a lot of random people we don't even know also has tons and tons of Bitcoin.

This reminds me of first stage of every magic trick, show the audience the deck of card or whatever else is not rigged.

But I can understand people can be often fooled by scammer pretty easy because they dont expect to deal with one - it happens so infrequently. Even with magician trick, you often can not be sure how exactly the magician fooled you, even though your sure the magician fooled your attention somehow.

perhaps. gavin also said that they verified it on a brand new laptop. it is unclear if gavin knows for a fact that the laptop was indeed "brand new".
of course gavin (plus the other 4(?) people) being fooled is not the only possibility.