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

41–49 of 49 posts

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#41

Post by [deleted] »

simplicio wrote: post #39
fweespee_ch wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To me that's just bizarre. It's like Trump saying he'd be a great president and Obama meeting with him and saying he's the real deal, it'd just wouldn't happen. It would happen if Gavin was Satoshi. Gavin attempts to permanently deflect things on to a smooth talking conman with liquidity problems to maintain his privacy. Hell, he could even give Wright some of the bitcoins as payment for the cover.

But then why not give Wright some convincing evidence to share in public, rather than this weird round-about of using BS public evidence, and then claiming to have seen "secret" convincing evidence? This doesn't only make the case for Wright being Satoshi weaker in the public eye, but draws attention to Gavin. Hardly "deflecting things"

[deleted]

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#42

Post by daveguy »

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…

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

Prestige. The following of thousands of bitcoin enthusiasts.

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#44

Post by bitmapbrother »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't Craig Wright initiating a Bitcoin transaction from Satoshi's wallet to a retailer, of a reporter's choosing, be all the proof you would need to validate his claims? If he has access to Satoshi's wallet then that's all the proof he needs.

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#45

Post by isp »

cjbprime wrote: post #31
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…

Gavin's made a statement now: == 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 Offi…

My theory: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11612261 (I believe Gavin is telling the truth, but was duped by sleight-of-hand.)

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#47

Post by mlvljr »

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?

Claim you're selling all your coins tomorrow, but instead borrow some money and buy as much as you can (while the price is dropping) :)

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#48

Post by smcl »

vintermann wrote: post #10
varjag wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Economist piece alleges Gavin sat through the Wright's demonstration in person and attested it was legit. So either his brain was hacked too or the staff of The Economist is in far reaching conspiracy. Well or the whole hacking story is a BTC factional drama.

Or Gavin just isn't James Randi, and wasn't prepared to uncover deliberate fakes. Wright could very easily faked a demonstration on his own machine. Last time, when Andy Greenberg (who ought to have known better, and in some ways looked like he did) bought the Wright story, I remember thinking maybe he did it for ideological reasons. I.e, he might know Wright isn't Satoshi, but be happy for attention thrown that way,…

Is it possible that the Economist reporter didn't know Gavin, and Wright also provided a fake Gavin too? Getting slightly far fetched, but from what I've read so far nothing would surprise me ...

Re: Craig Wright's signature is worthless

#49

Post by Lanzaa »

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…

My bet is that Gavin was payed for his statement.
Post reply on HN