Craig Wright to move coins from an early (associated with the genesis?!) block? - page 4.

owm123

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Quote from: ?? on ??

If he can actually move coins from the genesis block then I will openly admit he is Satoshi and just be disappointed that my mind have fantasized a better man than what Craig is appearing to be, but like most people here I very much doubt that will be the case.

It cant be coins from the geneiss block as they are unspendable (http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/10009/why-can-t-the-genesis-block-coinbase-be-spent). At best it can be the next block 1 or block 9.

cjmoles

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1017

There's too much funny stuff going on in this space so a single transaction from an early block would no longer be sufficient validation in my mind. Now, there has to be an extra layer of validation added to overcome all the apparent "trickery" that's been exposed to date.

I think I would accept a compound transaction from block #1 to block #9 and from block #9 back to block #1 as sufficient evidence as to who controls the private keys to Satoshi's stake in the project. This would at least establish that more than one private key, known to be generated by Satoshi Nakamoto, is in play. It would increase the weight of the evidence, and reduce the likelihood that the keys were somehow hacked into existence.

EDIT:

To be concise, the above would only prove to me that Wright holds the private keys to Satoshi's stake, not that he is, in fact, Satoshi. That's where Gavin's assessment comes into play here. If Wright proves he holds the keys && if others confirm that Wright is privy to information only contained within private communications between themselves and Satoshi Nakamoto, then maybe Wright might be justified in having the opportunity to turn down his Nobel Prize, like his idol did, Jean-Paul Sartre.

galbros

legendary

Activity: 1022

Merit: 1000

Quote from: spartak_t on May 03, 2016, 01:33:04 PM

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on May 03, 2016, 12:20:24 PM

.....

My personal opinion is that Dave Kleiman was most likely to be Satoshi Nakamoto (he is now dead...).
This is an interesting read in case you missed it:
http://gizmodo.com/the-strange-life-and-death-of-dave-kleiman-a-computer-1747092460

Thanks for this.

I am thinking maybe Dave Kleiman was Woz to Craig Wright's (self perceived) Jobs. Craig is trying to cash in but if he could move the coins he would have done so already.

Not sure how he bamboozled Gavin, but maybe I'd say he was Satoshi too for a free trip to London.

2015Bubble

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: Kprawn on May 03, 2016, 11:17:28 AM

Well, even if he can move some of the early coins... it still does not prove that he is Satoshi. Let's say {conspiracy theory incoming} that some agency got hold of him very early on in the game and they seized

his documents... and waited for the opportune time to use it. Nobody back then, thought Bitcoin would become this big. Satoshi might have left these experimental information on pieces of paper or saved it in

digital form, and they only NOW were able to retrieve it. Craig like the Bond look and might be working with these agencies and Gavin to slowly ease into this position, until everyone believes this and then start

slowly selling off this wealth... Roll Eyes

No worries I will personally murder gavin because I'm 100% long.
Bitcoins will make or break me.

(fantasy fiction post, no need to raid my house and rape me in the arse)

Spoetnik

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1011

FUD Philanthropist™

Quote from: ?? on ??

If he can actually move coins from the genesis block then I will openly admit he is Satoshi and just be disappointed that my mind have fantasized a better man than what Craig is appearing to be, but like most people here I very much doubt that will be the case.

This echos my sentiment exactly.. well said sir !

Like come on guys, you really want this guy to be Satoshi ?

spartak_t

legendary

Activity: 1960

Merit: 1176

@FAILCommunity

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on May 03, 2016, 12:20:24 PM

.....

My personal opinion is that Dave Kleiman was most likely to be Satoshi Nakamoto (he is now dead...).
This is an interesting read in case you missed it:
http://gizmodo.com/the-strange-life-and-death-of-dave-kleiman-a-computer-1747092460

chek2fire

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 1142

Ιntergalactic Conciliator

Looking to buy coins from early blocks. Will pay 5x current market.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hop3z/looking_to_buy_coins_from_early_blocks_will_pay/

Grin

ebliever

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1036

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on May 03, 2016, 12:20:24 PM

This could be the most interesting angle to this whole story. By himself Wright just looks like a fumbling fraud. But the Kleiman angle gets interesting and raises many questions, for any journalists out there that want to do some meaningful investigation. (*Grabs more popcorn*)

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

Dabs

legendary

Activity: 3416

Merit: 1912

The Concierge of Crypto

I want him to move coins from 100 of the first 300 blocks. That's only 5000 BTC from the first 2 or 3 days of mining which was worth pennies or less at that time.

Alternatively, sign messages using 100 bitcoin addresses that appear within the first 300 blocks.

Any block but block zero is no good unless he has a lot of those blocks.

"I, Craig Wright, am Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of bitcoin." - just do it like the way Charlie Lee did it for Litecoin.

Now do it with the genesis block address, or if not, do it with 100 addresses within the first few days.

Anything that is NOT the genesis block address is not conclusive proof, but 100 out of the first 300 is very good and very likely that he is indeed Satoshi, because who else mined in the first few days of bitcoin?

ibminer

legendary

Activity: 1789

Merit: 2535

Goonies never say die.

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 11:08:12 AM

Quote from: spartak_t on May 03, 2016, 11:03:03 AM

However, if he is indeed Satoshi he can move coins associated with the genesis block. The question is: What if Wright provide a solid proof that he is Nakamoto? I see it as a problem...

Then why lie and copy and paste Satoshi's signature pretending that he created it from the hash of a Sartre document?

For someone trying to prove they are Satoshi it would have been very simple just to provide a signed message rather than all the nonsense and plain lies that this guy has been publishing.

In addition, Satoshi himself is going to know how to prove who he is. He is going to know that nobody is going to accept the first set of proof Wright provided.

I haven't heard this Wright guy mention a genesis block at all, just an "early block"... and I can almost feel some type of long, drawn out BS explanation of why its impossible for him to do anything with the genesis block or maybe some made up story about a hack a long time ago that happened on his personal Windows PC... Satoshi would also never pose for a picture like this jackass does on his blog site. His grin reminds me of a British version of the dos equis guy.

"I don't always provide real proof, but when I do, its BS. Stay thirsty my friends."

--Encrypted--

copper member

Activity: 924

Merit: 1007

hee-ho.

Quote from: Kprawn on May 03, 2016, 11:17:28 AM

Well, even if he can move some of the early coins... it still does not prove that he is Satoshi. Let's say {conspiracy theory incoming} that some agency got hold of him very early on in the game and they seized

his documents... and waited for the opportune time to use it. Nobody back then, thought Bitcoin would become this big. Satoshi might have left these experimental information on pieces of paper or saved it in

digital form, and they only NOW were able to retrieve it. Craig like the Bond look and might be working with these agencies and Gavin to slowly ease into this position, until everyone believes this and then start

slowly selling off this wealth... Roll Eyes

moving some coins from the early blocks wouldn't prove anything unless the address is known to be owned by satoshi. there's always conspiracy theories, but without a single proof they'll just remain as theories.

spartak_t

legendary

Activity: 1960

Merit: 1176

@FAILCommunity

Quote from: Kprawn on May 03, 2016, 11:17:28 AM

Well, even if he can move some of the early coins... it still does not prove that he is Satoshi. Let's say {conspiracy theory incoming} that some agency got hold of him very early on in the game and they seized

his documents... and waited for the opportune time to use it. Nobody back then, thought Bitcoin would become this big. Satoshi might have left these experimental information on pieces of paper or saved it in

digital form, and they only NOW were able to retrieve it. Craig like the Bond look and might be working with these agencies and Gavin to slowly ease into this position, until everyone believes this and then start

slowly selling off this wealth... Roll Eyes

I now intend to ask Snowden on Twitter about this. Grin

Kprawn

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1074

Well, even if he can move some of the early coins... it still does not prove that he is Satoshi. Let's say {conspiracy theory incoming} that some agency got hold of him very early on in the game and they seized

his documents... and waited for the opportune time to use it. Nobody back then, thought Bitcoin would become this big. Satoshi might have left these experimental information on pieces of paper or saved it in

digital form, and they only NOW were able to retrieve it. Craig like the Bond look and might be working with these agencies and Gavin to slowly ease into this position, until everyone believes this and then start

slowly selling off this wealth... Roll Eyes

kik1977

hero member

Activity: 593

Merit: 505

Wherever I may roam

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 11:07:04 AM

Quote from: kik1977 on May 03, 2016, 11:01:54 AM

I agree he simply needs the signature, without the need to move coins (although that would be easier to understand to many - i.e. journalists). On the other hand, I know the first 50 bitcoins mined in block #0 cannot be moved, as any transaction referencing them as inputs would be rejected. Am I wrong?

You're not wrong about the 50 BTC - but other coins have been sent to the same address - those could be moved (as those txs are indexed).

Ok CIYAM, got it now, I misunderstood your post. Thanks for the clarification

kik1977

hero member

Activity: 593

Merit: 505

Wherever I may roam

Quote from: spartak_t on May 03, 2016, 11:03:03 AM

However, if he is indeed Satoshi he can move coins associated with the genesis block. The question is: What if Wright provide a solid proof that he is Nakamoto? I see it as a problem...

Ok, you mean he can move coins that were sent TO the address that received the first 50 bitcoins ( 1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa - which would mean 16.1804909) but NOT the 50 bitcoin, do I get it right?

spartak_t

legendary

Activity: 1960

Merit: 1176

@FAILCommunity

Quote from: Amph on May 03, 2016, 11:07:35 AM

the title is misleading, he said from the early blocks, not genesis block, in fact they are unspendable exactly

I just changed the title...

Quote from: CIYAM on May 03, 2016, 11:08:12 AM

Quote from: spartak_t on May 03, 2016, 11:03:03 AM

However, if he is indeed Satoshi he can move coins associated with the genesis block. The question is: What if Wright provide a solid proof that he is Nakamoto? I see it as a problem...

Then why lie and copy and paste Satoshi's signature pretending that he created it from the hash of a Sartre document?

For someone trying to prove they are Satoshi it would have been very simple just to provide a signed message rather than all the nonsense and plain lies that this guy has been publishing.

I really don't know... tbh, this is my only hope that he's lying, because otherwise, I will repeat, we will be in trouble.

fenican

hero member

Activity: 1395

Merit: 505

If he moves some coins from an early block and he's convinced Gavin he's Satoshi I think that is convincing enough proof.

The original Bitcoin code wasn't particularly clean C++, had lots of flaws, and borrowed huge amounts of existing technology so what we may find is that a fairly average technician, but certainly a visionary, was the father of Bitcoin. That would not be that surprising - look at Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, etc... they weren't really genius coders and were very flawed human beings but both built billion dollar empires.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: spartak_t on May 03, 2016, 11:03:03 AM

However, if he is indeed Satoshi he can move coins associated with the genesis block. The question is: What if Wright provide a solid proof that he is Nakamoto? I see it as a problem...

Then why lie and copy and paste Satoshi's signature pretending that he created it from the hash of a Sartre document?

For someone trying to prove they are Satoshi it would have been very simple just to provide a signed message rather than all the nonsense and plain lies that this guy has been publishing.

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

Quote from: --Encrypted-- on May 03, 2016, 10:30:57 AM

I thought the first 50BTC are unspendable? just move coins from the address 1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa instead. coins from an early block wouldn't prove much because there's no guarantee that the address belongs to satoshi.

the title is misleading, he said from the early blocks, not genesis block, in fact they are unspendable exactly

if indeed he can do that he is probably satoshi

Topic: Craig Wright to move coins from an early (associated with the genesis?!) block? - page 4. (Read 5035 times)