Satoshi | Hacker News Reader

Satoshi

gavinandresen.ninja

157 pointskenOfYugen31 comments

Shouldn't proof would be as simple as somebody moving 1 bitcoin known to be linked to Satoshi? All else is myth, anecdote and manipulation. Show us the money :)

Nah, 1 bitcoin is excessive... only need to move 1 satoshi right? :)

Right, but the guy is a billionaire, he could show off a bit :)

Last time I watched a video of Craig, I was so completely convinced he was not the type of person to be Satoshi.

Now, given this blog post, what I'm wondering is: maybe Satoshi offered his private keys to this guy to avoid problems in the future, and so that they stop chasing him?

EDIT: s/sold/offered/ (because I believe Satoshi doesn't have the need to sell anything these days)

> maybe Satoshi sold his private keys to this guy to avoid problems in the future?

That's the best theory I've heard so far. That would explain why he chose a weak verification message (the Sartre quote, instead of a message that proves the signature to be recent). The real Satoshi would have chosen a different proof, but Wright doesn't know any better.

From reading the blog post referenced here it seems Craig signed other messages besides the JPS one to Gavin Andresen and other people

>The real Satoshi would have chosen a different proof

How could you know what the real Satoshi would do?

The Bitcoin genesis block includes a newspaper headline from that day to prove that it wasn't constructed earlier ('premined').

> How could you know what the real Satoshi would do?

mappum is - or has access to - the real Satoshi of course!

> why he chose a weak verification message

So far, he hasn't published the verification message in full, and no signature either. The ones in the blog are dummies.

I the oddest thing for me is that Satoshi spent all this time hiding and then posts a huge blog to prove it's him.

> then posts a huge blog to prove it's him.

He was forced to. He doesn't want to be public, and he wishes he didn't have to be.

This is plain untrue. As explained in The Economist article, this Wright guy began approaching a (well-known and respected) author about writing is biography months before the first outing in December. There would be nothing to tell in his biography if he's not Bitcoin's inventor.

He may be or not be Bitcoin's inventor (I strongly suspect he isn't) but in both cases he really wanted to be known, at least starting in mid-2015.

> He was forced to. He doesn't want to be public, and he wishes he didn't have to be.

What evidence is there for this?

Perhaps the real Satoshi can no longer hide as before but rather wants to hide in the group of wannabe-Satoshis by appearing to have been dismissed as a fake Satoshi.

Not saying it's not odd, but have you seen this video of Wright?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZNtbAFnr-0

If he is Satoshi, and what he's saying about being forced to reveal his identity now is true, it would make sense to provide the minimum that the threateners would accept, knowing that the community wouldn't buy it. That video is really odd. (FWIW I don't believe this claim is or isn't true, I'm waiting for more info.)

> "Craig signed a message that I chose ("Gavin's favorite number is eleven. CSW" if I recall correctly) using the private key from block number 1.

> That signature was copied on to a clean usb stick I brought with me to London, and then validated on a brand-new laptop with a freshly downloaded copy of electrum.

> I was not allowed to keep the message or laptop (fear it would leak before Official Announcement).

> I don't have an explanation for the funky OpenSSL procedure in his blog post."

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4hfyyo/gavin_can_you_p...

Turns out Craig is still a fraud. He searched the blockchain for interesting texts signed by Satoshi and then claimed one was proof that he was Satoshi. The Sartre quote has been hanging out on the blockchain for years.

Hmm, can you link to the sartre quote on some public block explorer?

Wait. Are we sure Gavin wrote this? Has Gavin confirmed this anywhere else?

Gavin doesn't mention it on his Twitter account.

Does anyone have a primary source that corroborates this from Gavin?

Somebody could do a NLP analysis on the last post and compare to the rest of his writings to see if there are major discrepancies

Main discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609611

Gavin, if you are wrong about this ...

I hope you are not but it sure looks like it

I wrote a comment saying "This is sketchy as fuck" and was forced to delete it given the number of downvotes. Now that this has been debunked guess who was right..

Generally if you are polite and articulate WHY you are suspicious, people will cut you more slack.

I'm very reluctant to believe Craig Wright is Satoshi, but didn't have firm evidence (because he hadn't released info). Now that it appears the "signature of message" is just a signature from something else, it looks like he's actively a fraud, but I haven't validated it myself.

(The back-dated PGP key and alternate subkey from earlier was super sketch, but could have been someone else.)

You're probably right.

You are right I should've elaborated. To me it reeked of conspiracy, it was odd for both Anderson and Matonis to come out with parallel blog posts endorsing this guy without a solid proof. He could've signed the genisis block and be done with it but no they had to go through all this trouble.

Cryptographic proofs speak for themselves, just release them to the public instead of relying on a centralized authority (Anderson and Matonis) to verify them, which is ironic.

Well, well, your critic was not really worded with a high level of eloquence, but in any case, it's not like the bitcoin community is known for taking any kind of critic anyway. The downvote button always ready for those that don't follow the true path of Crypto and welcome Bitcoin in their hearts as the true mankind savior.

If that was your entire comment, I would have downvoted you, not because I thought you were wrong, but because you didn't add any information and didn't contribute meaningful to the conversation.

Show everybody how you move one of those old Bitcoins in the early blocks. Other than that, this is just a circus.

He is not Satoshi. He is just a fraud like most "entrepreneurs"

Will the real Satoshi please stand up? I repeat, will the real Satoshi please stand up?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com