Live data from Hacker News

Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

economist.com

181–190 of 289 posts

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#181

Just remember that The Economist a few years ago published a story on Steorn's Perpetual Motion machine. You don't go to The Economist when you want hard hitting investigative journalism - you go The Economist when you need investor money.

Wikipedia says that the Steorn thing was a paid advertisement. That's a little different to what's going on here.

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#182

Just remember that The Economist a few years ago published a story on Steorn's Perpetual Motion machine. You don't go to The Economist when you want hard hitting investigative journalism - you go The Economist when you need investor money.

It was a (full-page) ad, not a story, not even a "sponsored" one, as the layout was quite distinct: http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/images/steorn_economist_a...

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#185
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?

"I have access to $440M. I just can't touch it until 2020."

Perhaps the oldest con ever. Hence the detailed previous story from him of placing all of Satoshi's stash in a trust.

Re: Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto

#187
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, absolutely. He apparently goes to great lengths to "prove" that he is Satoshi, but when asked to sign a new message, answers "I’m not going to keep jumping through hoops." Um, what? Signing a new message is a minuscule jump through a very large hoop, not something difficult or cumbersome or time consuming. This fact alone is indefensible, smells of fake and should be enough to dismiss the claim.

If you're using a given key daily, yeah, it's not a big hoop. But I imagine Satoshi having his key hidden on an offline computer right now, hidden securely. Taking it out of vault must be a lot of effort.

But if you actually want to prove you're Satoshi, isn't that exactly what you'd do, rather than spend a lot of time on these other 'proofs'? What's the point?
Post reply on HN