Topic: Definitive PROOF that Satoshi Nakamoto is about to be exposed because ... - page 2. (Read 4392 times)

satoshi wont need to worry about governments hating bitcoin, otherwise charlie lee and Butterin would be locked up
id say satoshi's worse fear is people thinking he has 1m coins making him nearly a billionaire, and suddenly having strangers from around the plant begging him for donations or trying to become his best friend while touching up his pocket hoping to find a hardware wallet with 20,000 privkeys

or
all the drug dealers that lost out in silkroad or all the gamblers that lost out in dodgy dice games and exchang hats threatening him to pay them, something for their loses

Somethings remains secret forever and its good they remain secret. For example if Satoshi Nakamoto reveals himself maybe his life maybe threaten and there are still lots of people and Govt. Institutions which hate bitcoin and do not want it to grow. Its better for bitcoin itself that this secret remains a secret.

Perhaps now you can see what I did there: If a seasoned editor like Pete Rizzo can pass off a rumor stemming from a closed-door meeting as being news, I, a Dumb-ass, can pen a thread with "definitive PROOF" in its title expanding upon his extraordinary exposé, then trump this thread with yet another thread in re a sensationalized story currently making the rounds - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/speaking-of-sensationalized-news-1767039.

Ok what I said is harsh. Maybe the word stupid is the wrong word to use, I should have used farfetched. I believe this is another wild goose chase just like what the journalist for Newsweek did. She pointed to Dorian Nakamoto which turned out to be the wrong.

Also do not forget that this is a huge gamble for Pete Rizzo. The outcome of this story will make or break his career. I like him and his articles, please do not get me wrong. But this article honestly made my eyes roll and say "This again?" in my head. Or maybe it was the thread title having "definitive PROOF" that made me have high expectations.

In re the author of http://www.businessinsider.com.au/aussie-technologists-are-opening-the-worlds-first-bitcoin-based-bank-this-year-2014-2 (keyword: [email protected])

Now that Liz Tay has a kid, she don't get around as much as she used to: http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=Travel&Number=11861389&Searchpage=1&Main=11754442&Words=+liz.t&topic=&Search=true#Post11861389

Speaking of Business Insider: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-bitcoin-is-the-new-gold-btcc-2017-1

Why do people believe that if Satoshi come to public,bitcoin will be in danger?
A lot of Altcoin devs are known to public yet these Altcoin are not only popular but prosepering as well.
Satoshi may have reasons not to disclose his identity but even if he did,bitcoin will not disappear.

gleb, did you also remember the original gizmodo/wired "tip off" was from craig wright himself. asking all the media to sign a NDA until he was out of australia and in the uk before release

and craig wright done the same again later on to another bunch of people when he done the signature fail reveal

as well as the bit inbetween where craig wright was 'introduced' to the community by a select few people before anyone knew him.

(even back then i thought it all seemed like orchestrated and fake media drama)


(spoiler: craig himself was the tipster)

all because craig wright was under legal pressure due to questions over his empty tulip trust and was being harassed by australian government to prove its value. (due to the dmorgan ltd saga of aus$54m of government funding)
he needed to get the australian government off his back by trying to suggest his tulip trust actually held real assets(it doesnt). and also create yet another business backed by the (in reality empty) tulip trust

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/aussie-technologists-are-opening-the-worlds-first-bitcoin-based-bank-this-year-2014-2

here is wired's recanting their belief craig was satoshi
https://www.wired.com/2015/12/new-clues-suggest-satoshi-suspect-craig-wright-may-be-a-hoaxer/

I know most of us want to know who Satoshi really is, it will create exitement in the space but going forward it might hinder the progress of Bitcoin, for me the Bitcoin community has outgrown Satoshi and most people will take his opinion has the voice of the almighty Satishi speaking and must be done

If one of them was Satoshi it would've been very easy to prove it. When he created the cryptocurrency and then tried to hide himself.. he knew the day will come when he will have to prove it. The "fight", the competition between the people that are claiming to be the BTC owners are all about the money they can make out of this "reveal"..

There are many potential contestants to be the real Satoshi Nakamoto but all who have claimed that they are Satoshi Nakamoto have failed to prove that they are the right person. Craig Wright has shaken the bitcoin y industry with his claim and evidence or proof that he is the rightful creator of bitcoin but failed in the last moment. In the end Satoshi Nakamoto remains a mystery and it never be unveiled.

as a bitcoin enthusiast i don't want Satoshi identity to be revealed because it is the proof that anonymity can be achieved with bitcoin too.

but topic of Satoshi has always been important to two groups of people
1) shit news sites to post click bait
2) FUDsters to scare people with Satoshi moving his big stash!

"This time, however, there is said to be a potential twist to the story relating to an unknown entity that may have a claim to the intellectual property created by that group"


o rly?

 

Let me see if I got this straight. It took you five minutes to read a short article that takes most every other English speaking person in the world no more than one minute to read. On top of that, in the same sentence you expressed wasting your life by reading it in spite of clearly known to all reading this reply that you indeed got paid for your efforts via posting about your dreadful experience which includes a paid sig campaign below the fold that you're participating in, ergo not a waste. How close am I?

In case you read a different article, the following is the article in question in its entirety:




Albeit not stupid, I'll give you one guess as to who penned the following article back in December 2015: http://www.coindesk.com/police-raid-home-of-alleged-bitcoin-creator-craig-wright/ HINT: He attended University of Massachusetts located in Amherst where Gavin Andresen currently resides, and has extensive experience managing teams of journalists and copywriters, guiding editorial content and larger product vision.

That is the first Pete Rizzo article that I think is stupid and useless. Unless he already has the follow up story and has a solid lead on who Satoshi really is, I am quite disappointed that he came up with that article. He made me waste 5 min.s of my life by reading it.

Then you never read the op.

Humm i was not seeing things like this. I am not so much surprised finally to see guys changing their hat. It makes me think about an adage saying "to understand most of the things, follow the money".


i may need to re-read because i have not see somewhere in this disscussion  satoshi would reveal himself

Good read this thread was. I never had any doubt that satoshi would reveal himself at some point. Now seem like the best point too because bitcoin is about to take off in a major way.

yep many of the devs are dropping their ethical code hats and instead reaching for their richboy club jackets.
it all started changing in 2013-2014.
less actual code rules to protect bitcoin but more features to cause economic utility to degrade under the guise of security and utility, purely to sway the argument that bitcoin cant grow.. while strangely suggesting that a sidechain alt can grow.

EG - explaining like your 5
billy bitcoin cant drive down the his own street because road developers have been speaking with officials and have put a 10mph speed limit on the billy's road. and smeared frightening posters on the street to scare people into thinking that car crashes will happen if billy and his neighbours sped up even at a safe small speed increase.

but the road developers built a second road, exactly the same that allows sammy sidechain and people who pay a fee, can drive as fast as they like on this other road.
same tarmac. same twists and turns in the streets. but higher speed limits.

so while sammy sidechain and neighbours use their road. the road developers want to inform billy bitcoin that all residents should not ask other road developers increase the speed limit. but instead to move people out the street and into the leased accommodation of sammy sidechains street.

the other option is to get billy bitcoins street residents to put their children into foster care where the parents can only see the kids once a month, blaming the need of a speed limit on the children

yet sammy sidechain street, exactly same as billy bitcoin street becomes the main route through town and the children can play in the road because there is no actual issues with the roads.

soon enough sammy sidechain starts charging people to return/visit billy bitcoin street, making it cost money to use billy bitcoin street. so that the value of property declines on billy bitcoin street and gains value on sammy sidechain street. even though the properties were like-for-like in the beginning.

now people in billy bitcoin street want to move out to where the higher value property can be sold. and so they move into sammy sidechain street.
exchanging their 1 bitcoin bedroom property for a 1sidechain bedroom property. which gives them more value.

no way would they dare return to billy bitcoin street now. and billy bitcoin street becomes a derelict wasteland

^
wrote as if the reader was 5, to show the future intentions of these corporate paid devs

About the quote talking about the  Satoshi Roundtable conference...

I saw this week in title something like "Satoshi Roundtable conference Bildeberg...". At first before clicking on it I thought it was a clickbait , then I started to read the article. Seen the introduction I thought that it was just a joke first. Then continue reading I thought it's a satirical article. But look like not. I have not finished to read this article and not searched more about this group meeting. I never heard about this but I think it's going to against the ideology of the bitcoin. I find it funny if we have a "Bildeberg bitcoin group" or not so much

I agree - It's not important - so many wonderful startups are carrying on the story - developing some really cool tech off the back of blockchain, it would be better to champion them imo