Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Craig Wright's signature is worthless

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 49 posts

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#11

Post by huuu »

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #2

The big question mark for me isn't Wright, it's Gavin. Wright has presented a bunch of bs, no definite proof, and has seemingly not wanted to sign recent or new messages with his PGP key. For all intents and purposes, he's got zero credibility. Then Gavin comes along. A person who worked with Satoshi the longest, communicated with him the most, led the project in practice for years, is a computer scientist and well b…

What if Gavin choose to play with Wright to keep the real identity of Sathosi hidden?

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#12

Post by DonHopkins »

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #2

The big question mark for me isn't Wright, it's Gavin. Wright has presented a bunch of bs, no definite proof, and has seemingly not wanted to sign recent or new messages with his PGP key. For all intents and purposes, he's got zero credibility. Then Gavin comes along. A person who worked with Satoshi the longest, communicated with him the most, led the project in practice for years, is a computer scientist and well b…

He's going to build a chain, and he's going to make the Fed pay for it.

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#13

Post by sarreph »

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #2

The big question mark for me isn't Wright, it's Gavin. Wright has presented a bunch of bs, no definite proof, and has seemingly not wanted to sign recent or new messages with his PGP key. For all intents and purposes, he's got zero credibility. Then Gavin comes along. A person who worked with Satoshi the longest, communicated with him the most, led the project in practice for years, is a computer scientist and well b…

I agree that it is unlikely he was hacked due to the reasons you provided (i.e. no play), but I have a theory that he is the real deal and created a 'phony' proof so that he could wait to sense what the media backlash was (positive or negative) before deciding whether or not to go ahead and provide a 'real' proof or simply just make it look like he is lying.

The proof is complex enough for only the technical community to be able to catch / disprove, but not for much of the mainstream media, which will be forming a general opinion on who Wright is and what this means for Bitcoin.

This helps explain why Andresen is so certain, because he has seen the real proof and is going to "let him decide how much of that story he shares with the world" [0]

[0] - http://gavinandresen.ninja/satoshi

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#14

Post by kbart »

huuu wrote: post #11
IkmoIkmo wrote: post #2

The big question mark for me isn't Wright, it's Gavin. Wright has presented a bunch of bs, no definite proof, and has seemingly not wanted to sign recent or new messages with his PGP key. For all intents and purposes, he's got zero credibility. Then Gavin comes along. A person who worked with Satoshi the longest, communicated with him the most, led the project in practice for years, is a computer scientist and well b…

What if Gavin choose to play with Wright to keep the real identity of Sathosi hidden?

My thoughts too. Satoshi clearly didn't seek publicity, so making some clown to get media attention and meanwhile diverting their resources from seeking the real one sounds plausible. Though one question remains: why now? My guess would be that maybe someone from media or independent researchers might have came too close to the real identity of Satoshi..

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#15

Post by ssharp »

petertodd wrote: post #6
9812192911 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comment of the year: "@Alex_Amsel @petertoddbtc @gavinandresen Nobody thinks to just pick up the phone in this space."

We don't actually have Gavin's phone number; he's not an active Bitcoin Core team member.

I'd say the tweet's sentiment is still on target, if not more on target, given this excuse.

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#16

Post by IgorPartola »

What is the value of uncovering who Satoshi is? Or rather what is the value of being considered Satoshi?

My pet theories: If Wright is Satoshi and wants to hide the fact, a good way to do that is to come off as a fraud

If Wright is not Satoshi but knows who Satoshi is, and wants to protect him, why not just keep quiet? Was someone actually getting close to uncovering the identity and Wright is just trying to muddle the waters?

If Wright is not Satoshi and is actually trying to get people to believe that he is, what would he gain by it?

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#17

Post by CPLX »

IgorPartola wrote: post #16

What is the value of uncovering who Satoshi is? Or rather what is the value of being considered Satoshi? My pet theories: If Wright is Satoshi and wants to hide the fact, a good way to do that is to come off as a fraud If Wright is not Satoshi but knows who Satoshi is, and wants to protect him, why not just keep quiet? Was someone actually getting close to uncovering the identity and Wright is just trying to muddle t…

> What is the value of uncovering who Satoshi is?

Learning the identity of someone with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Bitcoin seems like the obvious one.

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#18

Post by IgorPartola »

CPLX wrote: post #17
IgorPartola wrote: post #16

What is the value of uncovering who Satoshi is? Or rather what is the value of being considered Satoshi? My pet theories: If Wright is Satoshi and wants to hide the fact, a good way to do that is to come off as a fraud If Wright is not Satoshi but knows who Satoshi is, and wants to protect him, why not just keep quiet? Was someone actually getting close to uncovering the identity and Wright is just trying to muddle t…

> What is the value of uncovering who Satoshi is? Learning the identity of someone with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Bitcoin seems like the obvious one.

OK, but what about the opposite: what is the value of pretending to be rich when you are not? I mean, sure you can probably get a free pizza slice here and there, but what can you actually do?

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#19

Post by zekevermillion »

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #2

The big question mark for me isn't Wright, it's Gavin. Wright has presented a bunch of bs, no definite proof, and has seemingly not wanted to sign recent or new messages with his PGP key. For all intents and purposes, he's got zero credibility. Then Gavin comes along. A person who worked with Satoshi the longest, communicated with him the most, led the project in practice for years, is a computer scientist and well b…

Either Gavin was hacked, or he was possessed by aliens. Wright's original evidence was clearly unpersuasive (actually anti-persuasive). Now he has supposedly given secret evidence to more journalists in an attempt to have them vouch for the claim that Wright = Satoshi. If Wright wanted to convince technical people of his claims, he would publish the proof (simple enough to do). My hypothesis is that he doesn't need to convince anyone, except for the gullible banks that have provided credit based on his supposed bitcoin collateral (that he does not actually seem to possess).

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#20

Post by staticelf »

IgorPartola wrote: post #18
CPLX wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the value of uncovering who Satoshi is? Learning the identity of someone with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Bitcoin seems like the obvious one.

OK, but what about the opposite: what is the value of pretending to be rich when you are not? I mean, sure you can probably get a free pizza slice here and there, but what can you actually do?

You don't think that if everyone believed you were Bill Gates, you wouldn't benefit from that?
Post reply on HN