Topic: Definitive PROOF that Satoshi Nakamoto is about to be exposed because ... - page 3. (Read 4412 times)

replace to

Attendee at Homer's Roundtable: This is epic! The Australian flim-flam man is about to once again prove that he's Homer. Who here has Bitcoin Magazine on speed dial so that we can relay the news?

Attendee at Homer's Roundtable: we are going to further bastardise homers poetry some more, but we need a distraction 'hey our investor coindesk can you start a rumour about some social nonsense..' maybe even something about homer or The Australian flim-flam man so no one asks about what we are destroying. becasue they will be too busy talking about homers flim flam alter ego

If CW could move "Satoshi" coins, would that be enough? It seems that all he would need is the actual coins to gain the profits he is seeking. What more could receiving the credit for the technology do for him. After all, bitcoin is much larger than the name of the person who launched it. Right? Does it matter who Homer is when considering the Illiad or the Oddesey. Would those books be better if we knew more about Homer's identity?  Not so much.  Who ever moves the "Satoshi" coins gets the bigger prize in this case--it seems to me at least.

To everyone else here who isn't an idiot, this is not how logic works.

CW cannot move any "Satoshi" coins, so he is not Satoshi Nakamoto.... PERIOD. 

If you are, start a thread stating your claim but don't let RawDog know about its existence, else he'll bug out his eyeballs while putting you on your paper.

Hal Finney's children might have an interest in the claim? Maybe? I cannot fathom Hal Finney not being credited as one of the "musketeers."

jon matonis - coindesk contributor

gavin andresen, working on Bloq... Bloq funded by........ barry silbert.

---

-plausible theory-
im 90% sure adam backs name would be mentioned in the who is satoshi drama

it seems reasonable to assume
if only people didnt pick up on the fake sig so fast last year, we would have had the faker craig then proclaim how adam back was cough*his*cough inspiration and the 3rd musketeer.. but it had to be put back for a few months to let the dust settle. mainly because craig got outed as a fraud..

but also segwit couldnt be released in mid 2016 so the code was still resembling the real satoshi's original variables and format. but now segwit is out,(though not activated) would show it to be the complete rewrite of code in adam backs favour to now be an adam back construct.
completely different to satoshis original code. eg MAXBLOCKSIZE BASE and WEIGHT

as a way to try proclaiming bitcoin requires segwit or it isnt bitcoin, ... if this whole drama ends up as having adam back mentioned as a third musketeer.

ofcourse, adam back didnt offer any code between 2008-2013 and even though the reality is that bitcoin has not had segwit for the last 7 years so segwit or its variables/concepts is not bitcoin.. i can see core devs are desperate to retain their corporate grip on bitcoin, so its all plausible

It'd be a sham, in my opinion, if Coindesk is the developer of Bitcoin. I wanted to create a wallet there and you have to input your legal name. I want to be anonymous, not a public Bitcoin user, you know.. these rumors also don't have any real proof though.

he claims he is satoshi, or at the very least he is threatening to move satoshi coins which means having access to the keys.

so can you explain to fools like me how signing the following message from a known satoshi keys is not proof, o wise one!

Its absolutely not fool proof you fool.

Hi this is Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of bitcoin signing a message to prove my identity on 2017-1-28

signing a message with a known key is simple yet fool proof. and after all this time we have not seen any proof.

There is no definitive proof of someone being Satoshi until those genesis blocks are moved.

Satoshi owns a significant quantity of bitcoin that he has never touched.

To prove they're Satoshi, they'll need to transact the bitcoins Satoshi owns.

There is no definitive proof of someone being Satoshi until those genesis blocks are moved.

Satoshi owns a significant quantity of bitcoin that he has never touched.

To prove they're Satoshi, they'll need to transact the bitcoins Satoshi owns.