Creator of Bitcoin digital cash reveals identity | Hacker News Reader

Creator of Bitcoin digital cash reveals identity

bbc.com

105 pointsjoewalker22 comments

We merged (most of) this thread into https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609611, which was the first submission of the story and (now) points to what looks like the most substantive news article posted so far.

The fact that Craig didn't go to a media outlet/reporter with any real computer expertise like Ars etc. makes me suspicious (GQ? REALLY?).

He says he doesn't want publicity (GQ?? REALLY?!).

When he was first explored as a potential Satoshi awhile back, when a "hacker" supposedly broke into his computer and leaked emails linking him to Bitcoin, there was reason to believe that it wasn't true.

There is also a tax case and a legal case around this.

More from a few months ago here: http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-frie...

Okay so evidence is mounting that it's true, but I always had a theory about who Satoshi was and why he went silent (he passed away a few years ago).

Skip the short BBC article – The Economist has a full profile here: http://www.economist.com/news/briefings/21698061-craig-steve...

EDIT: Mods merged the thread with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609611, which is the Economist story. I can't seem to delete this comment, for some reason.

Yup. Attached is the HN submission. Seems legit. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609708

and Gavin Andresen confirms http://gavinandresen.ninja/satoshi

Yes. Gavin assisted Economist's write up:

"Still, as far as we can tell he indeed seems to be in possession of the keys, at least for block 9. This assessment is shared by two bitcoin insiders who have sat through the same demonstration: Jon Matonis, a bitcoin consultant and former director of the Bitcoin Foundation, and Gavin Andresen, Mr Nakamoto’s successor as the lead developer of the cryptocurrency’s software (he has since passed on the baton, but is still contributing to the code)." [1]

[1] - http://www.economist.com/news/briefings/21698061-craig-steve...

> Still, as far as we can tell he indeed seems to be in possession of the keys, at least for block 9.

That's some crappy wording. We are going all these lengths (crypto and stuff) to then be uncertain: "seems". "at least".

Concrete proof is required.

I think the media got duped on this. Again.

Check out Economist's write up. Lots of detail. Not just the 5 minute video.

http://www.economist.com/news/briefings/21698061-craig-steve...

HN sub: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609708

Lots of text. Where's the signature?

Here: http://www.drcraigwright.net/jean-paul-sartre-signing-signif...

I read that. He doesn't give the message that is signed (just the digest and a screen shot of a small portion of the file). Without the actual data, this can't be verified.

IFdyaWdodCwgaXQgaXMgbm90IHRoZSBzYW1lIGFzIGlmIEkgc2lnbiBDcmFpZyBXcmlnaHQsIFNhdG9zaGkuCgo=

> 'IFdyaWdodCwgaXQgaXMgbm90IHRoZSBzYW1lIGFzIGlmIEkgc2lnbiBDcmFpZyBXcmlnaHQsIFNhdG9zaGkuCgo='.decode('base64')

> ' Wright, it is not the same as if I sign Craig Wright, Satoshi.\n\n'

That's just a base64 encoded message.

All that's needed is a single signature. Everything about this is absurd. It just seems he's clearly exploiting this to gain some fame to promote his company.

tl;dr - it is Craig Wright.

This is a good TLDR, why is this downvoted?

because it might not be

"tl;dr" doesn't mean truth, it means it's a succinct summary of what the article claims.

Dupe of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609629

Actually this was submitted 2 minutes earlier but the other took the lead in upvotes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com