Live data from Hacker News

Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

economist.com

121–130 of 289 posts

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#121
Reposting my other comment:

I think Wright is just a smooth-talking conman with some crypto experience. I'm betting he met Gavin and other (unfortunately, merely "supposed" at this point...) experts in person, talked shop for a while, then took out his laptop and staged verifying the signature of blocks 1 and 9 with dummy commands. (Edit: Gavin actually claimed it was a clean computer, not one that Wright brought. Disregard that.)

The Economist actually states this directly:

>Mr Wright has also demonstrated this verification in person to The Economist—and not just for block 9, but block 1. Such demonstrations can be stage-managed; and information that allows us to go through the verification process independently was provided too late for us to do so fully. 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).

Relevant bit:

>Such demonstrations can be stage-managed; and information that allows us to go through the verification process independently was provided too late for us to do so fully.

For Gavin's demonstration, he claims Wright validated the signatures on a "clean" computer, with the implication that it could not be staged.

>Part of that time was spent on a careful cryptographic verification of messages signed with keys that only Satoshi should possess. But even before I witnessed the keys signed and then verified on a clean computer that could not have been tampered with, I was reasonably certain I was sitting next to the Father of Bitcoin.

So, either the clean computer wasn't really clean, or Gavin's complicit in the scam, or Wright does have Satoshi's private keys and may be Satoshi.

Either way, why would Satoshi want to prove it yet only demonstrate proof to a few people in private rather than putting a message and signature online for anyone to verify?

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#122
post #29

Didn't they debunk this guy as a hack? /r/bitcoin pretty much destroyed him when he popped up last time

Link please, 'dis gon b gud'? EDIT: This thread breaks all records of butthurt downvoters not only in this branch but also in general. Wow.

I can't actually find the link, but he was some special panelist on a stream last year.. A lot of people were asking who the hell he was, and he was claiming at the time to be a researcher with a heavy involvement with bitcoin, and at the same time either the Australian Federal Police, or Australian Tax Office were raiding his properties looking for damning evidence...

He had taken federal funds for research purposes and miss-appropriated them.

I can't find the original articles, sorry... Here's some links though

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-09/bitcoin-suspected-foun...

http://www.coindesk.com/documents-offer-clues-to-alleged-bit...

https://delimiter.com.au/2015/12/15/lawyer-says-craig-wright...

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#123
post #26

EDIT 2: Debunked! The signature in Wright's post is just pulled straight from a transaction on the blockchain. Convert the base64 signature from his post (MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VTC3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4=) to hex (3045022100c12a7d54972f26d14cb311339b5122f8c187417dde1e8efb6841f55c34220ae0022066632c5cd4161efa3a2837764eee9eb84975dd54c2de2865e9752585c53e7cce), and you get th…

Can you explain why the signature matching one in the blockchain disproves the theory? I imagine the signature must also be somehow related to his private/public key pair otherwise his blog is just junk cryptography and would have been easily debunked anyway?

Signatures are unique to the message that's being signed, otherwise they'd be useless.

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#124
"One of the most useful lessons I learned from working at Facebook had nothing to do with technology: Doubt the media. Always doubt the media."

(https://medium.com/@blakeross/don-t-outsource-your-thinking-...)

I'm happy to see that The Economist, at least, has a healthy sense of skepticism.

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#125
post #26

EDIT 2: Debunked! The signature in Wright's post is just pulled straight from a transaction on the blockchain. Convert the base64 signature from his post (MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VTC3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4=) to hex (3045022100c12a7d54972f26d14cb311339b5122f8c187417dde1e8efb6841f55c34220ae0022066632c5cd4161efa3a2837764eee9eb84975dd54c2de2865e9752585c53e7cce), and you get th…

That's an interesting position. The question is: why creating this hoax in the first place? If anything, the price of bitcoin has been negatively impacted by this. http://www.coindesk.com/price/ What would it be one's motivation behind this?

Why would a ... let's call him a grey area entrepreneur - try to convince people he's sitting on lots of money? I can think of some reasons.

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#127
post #96

This is a hoax I think. And also Gavin supporting it is weird. The Signature in the blog post, is, in fact a signature from this transaction: 828ef3b079f9c23829c56fe86e85b4a69d9e06e5b54ea597eef5fb3ffef509fe Relevant Reddit Comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hf4s2/craig_wrigh...

> This is a hoax I think. And also Gavin supporting it is weird.

Is it?

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#128
post #26

EDIT 2: Debunked! The signature in Wright's post is just pulled straight from a transaction on the blockchain. Convert the base64 signature from his post (MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VTC3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4=) to hex (3045022100c12a7d54972f26d14cb311339b5122f8c187417dde1e8efb6841f55c34220ae0022066632c5cd4161efa3a2837764eee9eb84975dd54c2de2865e9752585c53e7cce), and you get th…

That's an interesting position. The question is: why creating this hoax in the first place? If anything, the price of bitcoin has been negatively impacted by this. http://www.coindesk.com/price/ What would it be one's motivation behind this?

Fame, fortune from books, speaking fees, directorships at blockchain startups..

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#129
post #108
post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe he didn't fool Gavin. Maybe somebody forced Gavin to release that statement.

Maybe Gavin's acct was hacked?

Unlikely. He would have used his other accounts or private keys to let us know by now. He tweeted something less than an hour ago.

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#130
post #42

Of course he wants to be left alone: he didn't pay taxes. Also of course there is no real public proof as he's not Satoshi.

He wouldn't owe any taxes. At least, not any income tax. The coins were worthless when he first mined them, and so there wouldn't have been any tax due. If he were to sell the coins now, he might incur a capital gains tax, depending on where he lives.

The tax fraud doesn't have anything to do with Bitcoin. The top comment explains it more, but it was clear from earlier news about him as well.
Post reply on HN