Topic: Has Wired discovered the real Satoshi Nakamoto? (.. this time) - page 24. (Read 24255 times)

It never ceases to amaze me how much discourse and supposition can be posted - before even reviewing all the facts.  My suggestion for everyone interested i this subject is to go to that link, and WATCH every minute of that 1 hour and 15 minute video conference.

I think there were three main takeaways I saw coming from him (although there was more).....

1) Craig Steven Wright (Satoshi???) repeatedly stated that people are missing the big picture, and said it looked like he was soon going to be releasing more white papers to advance some things.

2) He talked about the ability to add Turing language capability as a layer in bitcoin functionality (don't know if I got the erminology exactly correct - but the concept of Turing level capability - similar to Ethereum - was promoted, and more info suggested to be forthcoming)

3) He is currently operating the world's 15th largest Supercomputer, and directly referenced it on the Top 500 list and specifically identified it as "COIN / TULIP", with a larger one soon to be unveiled.  He indicated for the past years he has been using that Supercomputer to run bitcoin scalability models.  In a reference to Banks attempting to continue to pursue private Blockchains, he made a direct comment that HE ALONE had enough computing power to break them.  He didn't say it as a threat - just as a realistic attempt to make a point that it was an unrealistic scenario basically doomed to never realize the potential of what they wanted to achieve.

MY COMMENT ON VALIDITY OF CLAIM:  IF Wired got their facts correct that they published, their conclusion that Wright = Satoshi is very highly probable as being correct.  Also, his demeanor, knowledge and command of the topic - in a panel of very big names - was impressive.   I would say that "Satoshi is back" but in reality it looks like he has been pounding away on his Supercomputer for the past 2 years playing out scalability models.  A more correct analysis MIGHT be that "Satoshi has returned to shepherd Bitcoin to it's next level".  He's been working quitely behind the scenes in preparation for this time we find ourselves - the inevitable crossroads.  

My opinion for what it is worth, and I think things just got very interesting and I think a lot of bankers just got very nervous.

Peace,
- david

it seems legit! i dont know either but this man has something to do with the creation of bitcoin for sure

So it will probably fall all the way back if it turns out to be a hoax, right?

(let me sell my current reserves then LOL).

48:17! Hell, I'm still tryin' to get over the up-to 2:00 mark. Ms Seven just went into detail 'bout pretendin' to be Darla of Our Gang wetting her silk panties due to being in company of "greats" which includes Mr. Wright on the screen as part of the "greats" broadcasting remotely, when all of a sudden she stops he's introduction asking him who the hell he is.  

Prior to reading down to the video link on the Wired article, I couldn't shake the truism that Nick Szabo never seem concerned about how his prior research was woven into Satoshi' white paper, then was taken aback to see him on the panel discussion, now paying attention to his mannerisms during the exchange, the first being a face palm after the "Who the fuck are you?" (paraphrased) question by Ms Seven-cum-Darla.

hmmm, not sure what to think of this but most likely not.

It is generally trivial to create trust documents that creates a trust. On legalzoom, it costs roughly $250 to create the documentation for a living trust. I suspect the trust described in the article is slightly more complex then what legalzoom can offer, however that should give a starting point as to how much it would cost to create such a trust. I would concede that the trust does exist in one way or another.

There are a couple of key points to the trust:

• The coins must remain in the trust until the year 2020
• Wright can borrow against the bitcoins held in the trust for....."to help Bitcon" (this is what the article said in a nutshell)
• The article seems to imply that Wright has the right (no pun intended) to assign his interest in the trust to others

It is also important to note that a trustee has a fiduciary duty to the trust that the terms of the trust are carried out. This means that he has a Duty of Care of the trust's assets, which generally means to insure the non-cash assets against loss, and to invest the trust assets prudently (to protect the trust's assets). The fact that satoshi's coins have not moved since they were mined (for the most part) means that it is extremely unlikely that the trustee has exclusive control over the private keys that "hold" the ~1 million (or whatever amount) bitcoin that is claimed to be held in the trust. To give this person the absolute benefit of the doubt, it is possible that the trustee generated a large number of private keys, calculated the corresponding addresses, and provided those addresses to satoshi/Wright to have the coinbase transactions be sent to when he was mining -- even this theory can be debunked, at least in part by the fact that satoshi did spend some of his bitcoin while he was still around, as well as the fact that it would make little sense to go through that much hassle over something that he realistically had no way of knowing will be as successful as Bitcoin has become.

Another interesting point is that the article implies that Wright can assign/pledge portions of his interest in the trust to others. As implied above, the trust does not have full control over the bitcoin it is supposedly holding, so it would be impossible to perfect any interest in the trust......it would still however be easy to argue that the coins cannot move because "they are held in trust" but I can sell you 50,000 BTC to be delivered to you in 2020 in exchange for 10,000 BTC today. If this trust does actually exist, it would not be difficult to draw up a legal document assigning a 5% stake in the trust, although it would be far from certain that the beneficiaries will ever receive anything come 2020.

tl;dr - this smells a lot like a scam to me.

It could very well be, I always believed that it was a small team.



Hahahah that is brilliant.

Its so easy to prove that he is satoshi. Just move his coins or use his private keys to sign some messages.

I cannot confirm nor deny these claims

He's dreamy. I think he'd make a good husband.

Seems as if he is involved in this company:

http://www.demorgan.com.au/

So after the wired-story, I'm sure the IPO will be pretty successfull...

What evidence do you possess to make this claim? While I've not paid attention in several years, I found the simple increment in the nonce analysis to be quite persuasive.

I don't think anyone knows for certain exactly how many bitcoins Satoshi would have.  It could be less than 1 million, but it also could be more.  Sure Hal Finney did some mining early on, as did others, but a significant amount of the mining to keep the system running was Satoshi.  There have been efforts to analyze the structure of early blocks and make educated guesses about which were mined by Satoshi, which were mined by Hal, and which were mined by others.  Satoshi could have continued mining long after he stopped communicating and if he's alive, he certainly could be mining with ASIC today.


I don't recall reading about that.  Can you please link to the post where Satoshi says that he lost some of his private keys?


He might.  He also might hold more.  Or less.


Maybe it's wrong.  Maybe it's right.  Do you have conclusive evidence about whether or not a "Tulip Trust" exists? If it does exist, do you have conclusive evidence about what it has (or doesn't have) control over?  If it does control the private keys to any bitcoins, do you have conclusive evidence of how many?


That's certainly possible.  I'm not convinced that Wright is Satoshi, but there's enough there to make me wonder about it.  The whole "Tulip Trust" thing very well could be a hoax, but there's still enough there without that to keep me wondering.

After reading the article and now looking back at the video does seem like he could be Satoshi given his responses. Seems he is alluding to himself as the billionaire.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdvQTwjVmrE

Satoshi or not...it's clear Dr. Wright has been in it from day one. If it's him good on him, he certainly has the intelligence and privacy based psychological makeup to introduce something fascinating enough into this world to merit attention at this level. By that I mean a worth while idea that billions of humans can test out. True or false a simple binary response. Bitcoin works or it doesn't. So far so good.

I'm interested in his Bitcoin banking ideas. Bitcoin in so many ways is the path of least resistance in terms of moving money. Bitcoin banks as a place to flex the possibilities of individuals btc holdings is inevitable IMO.

That's just some blog. Anyone can make blog posts with fake dates. The Google cache is from 2015

Listening to his rather impassioned response at 48:17 in the video, he certainly sounds like he was either in at the ground floor, or possibly even responsible for some influence over Bitcoin's design.  But as intriguing as speculation might be, let's leave Satoshi be, whoever they are.  After giving the gift of Bitcoin to us, the least we can do in return is respect their right to privacy.

It would be a weird coincidence if not. The story was published 4:25, and at about this time, the rise started.

Yes, this is true. I think that Satoshi has less than 500k.

Also, AFAIK Satoshi never used [email protected]. Only [email protected]. (And actually his main email was the gmx one which was later hacked.) So wright easily could have registered this email via AS. Though pgp.MIT.edu does no email verification anyway, so he might not even have it.

The blogs are clearly fake.