Pages:
Author

Topic: Guardian squashes Craig Wright's Nakamoto Claim as a scam - page 2. (Read 1313 times)

legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
The only other explanation would be if he only had one wallet from the early days (I find this implausable for someone developing the very fist blockchain coin with testnets and then production testing etc) and had inadvertently lost/forgotten the passphrase.

The original wallet implementation did not have a passphrase (in fact that wasn't added until after Satoshi had disappeared from memory).
hero member
Activity: 983
Merit: 502
You need to remember that Craig Wright has never claimed he is Satoshi Nakamoto.

I get that he may have been in a very small team who chose to collectively call themselves Satoshi Nakamoto.

However David Kleiman did not die extremely suddenly - it is hard to believe that he would not have passed on pass phrases to either trusted members of his close family or even trusted close team members of the Nakamoto team and instead chose to kill his $millions of pounds worth of BTC from the early mining days. The only other explanation would be if he only had one wallet from the early days (I find this implausable for someone developing the very fist blockchain coin with testnets and then production testing etc) and had inadvertently lost/forgotten the passphrase.

Even if this unlikely scenario were true - The BBC and The Economist are not tabloid rags. They would not print stories stating that Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto if he was merely claiming to be part of the original core team who mined the first BTC genesis block on the production network.

This leaves us with two possible scenarios;

1: Craig Wright is a disingenuous Walter Mitty type with ambitions to 'take over' the future direction of BTC.

2: Craig Wright was nobbled during the period of the raids on his house and given no option by the authorities except to stand as the 'head' of BTC and do their bidding. Unfortunately for the authorities he was not close enough to the original core team to have the tools at his disposal to 'prove' his case.

All in my humble opinion, of course!    
legendary
Activity: 3276
Merit: 2442
Of course it is a scam. Satoshi stayed anonymous since 2008... Why would he identify himself now? Nothing big happened to make him go public. Doesn't make any sense. He is just after ez money.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
Quote
Craig "Satoshi" Wright said he was going to move them

hahah this guy is so funny lol. He doesn't need to move any coin to prove it, just sign the fcking message if he has the prive keys

Something is weird. He provided a message and a signature, but there's nothing in the message to indicate that he signed it himself, or when it was signed. It could have been signed months or years ago and there's no way to prove otherwise.

To understand what is really going on, you need to read carefully what Craig Wright has always said and continues to reiterate:

In his initial blog post, Wright noted that “Satoshi is dead... but this is only the beginning.” He also said that he would follow up with a more detailed mathematical explanation for the revelation. Now, the world will likely have to wait for “the coming days”—however long that may be—for more clues.

If I sign Craig Wright, it is not the same as if I sign Craig Wright, Satoshi.

I think this is true, but in my heart I wish it wasn’t.

Since those early days, after distancing myself from the public persona that was Satoshi,

Satoshi is dead.

But this is only the beginning.

You need to remember that Craig Wright has never claimed he is Satoshi Nakamoto. Instead, he has claimed that his former colleague (who died) was Satoshi. He claims he was backing his colleague's the development of Bitcoin.

This Australian Says He and His Dead Friend Invented Bitcoin



David Kleiman, Craig Wright's friend more likely Satoshi Nakamoto

OK so this might get a little meandering but I keep finding tidbits of David Kleiman's life that makes him a far more likely candidate for Satoshi than Wright. So here are some in no specific order.

Remember that Craig Wright had obtained funding for and was running a the largest Supercomputer in Australia. So what Craig has ostensibly done is he is used supercomputer resources to find the inverse of a hash function and then used one of Satoshi old transactions to pretend he has the private key:

The implication is that either Craig Wright has stumbled upon an infinitesimally rare occurrence of an SHA256 collision, or that he had used the signature from block 258 to reverse engineer a hash (the first shown in his blog demonstration) and hoped that nobody would notice. ycombinator user JoukeH noticed.

Realize that he has probably promised to endorse Andresen's block chain scaling preferences and thus probably why Gavin wants him to be Satoshi:

Andresen’s only attempt at an explanation for Wright’s bizarre behavior, he says, is an ambivalence about definitively revealing himself after so many years in hiding. “I think the most likely explanation is that … he really doesn’t want to take on the mantle of being the inventor of Bitcoin,” says Andresen, who notes that his own credibility is at stake, too. “Maybe he wants things to be really weird and unclear, which would be bad for me.”

That uncertainty, Andresen says, seemed to be evident in Wright’s manner at the time of their demonstration. Andresen describes Wright as seeming “sad” and “overwhelmed” by the decision to come forward. “His voice was breaking.

Remember that after his death, David Kleiman's family recovered his USB flash drive and gave it to Craig Wright. Thus likely Craig Wright may have an unpublished transaction but not the actual private key. So he may be about to fool the world into thinking he is Satoshi, or making some proof that he was the man behind the man who was the real Satoshi.
Pages:
Jump to: