Earlier quoted context omitted.
He is.
Could you elaborate?
[deleted]
I’m Sorry
41–50 of 189 posts
Re: I’m Sorry
#42[deleted]
Re: I’m Sorry
#43Re: I’m Sorry
#44Sounds like a suicide note from a distraught individual to me, leaving aside the lack of Satoshi's grammar. I do not know enough about his background to contact the police for a well-being check; does anyone here?
This was my first thought as well. I hope someone can confirm he's safe. Whether it was true or not, it's not worth anyone's well-being.
Re: I’m Sorry
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just saw his BBC interview http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36213580 and his body language (for whatever this is worth) is worse than most politicians. Rhythm, eyes.
I thought he was quite convincing in that performance. In fact, what tipped me off was just how convincing he was, the way a conman would be. What about his body language tipped you off?
The convoluted way to answer 'Satoshi, is you'. Long pause, look away, answer sideways, pivot back eyes still close, still no eye to eye contact.
Feels like a lot is going on in his mind. Maybe he can't express everything he wants too. Maybe he's just acting over its abilities.
Re: I’m Sorry
#46What a load of shit! He can't cryptographically prove something without courage?! WTF
"Your skepticism prevented me from providing evidence to allay those concerns".
The thing is if he uses actual proof like the community wanted him to there would no longer be any skepticism. So the only reason to not do it is because you can't do it.
Re: I’m Sorry
#47If the real Satoshi is still around, he musst be cringing at all this. The man can't even accurately describe how SHA256 works, yet claims to be the mastermind behind all this. Geee Craig, stop playing silly games. Sign the message or simply stfu.
> The man can't even accurately describe how SHA256 works, yet claims to be the mastermind behind all this.
On the other hand: It is clear from Bitcoin's source code that Satoshi Nakamoto did not understand Merkle trees that well: Just read the detailed comment at
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/a6a860796a44a2805a58...
Re: I’m Sorry
#48I believe the guy is Satoshi.
People were expecting the next Jesus Christ and now everyone's so disappointed that "Satoshi" is just an average geek with human weaknesses - not the messiah everyone expected.
Had he started a Unicorn startup, nobody would have even thought to question it, but now that the myth of Satoshi has been blown to astronomic proportions, people refuse to believe that their guru is just a "simple" guy who makes mistakes and is clumsy at PR.
Look at the source code of bitcoin-0.1 and you'll notice that Satoshi was an average C++ programmer who wrote sloppy code - yes it was a prototype - but it wouldn't have stood a chance if other people hadn't gotten involved to develop it into what Bitcoin is today.
Besides, if you look at the code, he wasn't even sure he was creating a currency - it looked like he was trying to create a marketplace, complete with products and chat.
Interestingly, a lot of people treat him like a fake prophet - and are proverbially crucifying him for not being able to perform the "miracle" of making a transaction from block 9.
---
He's not Jesus and he's not Buddha, he's just a programmer who had a brilliant idea and now tries to claim his invention.
But then again, maybe I'm wrong and Craig Wright is just an idiot compromising his reputation and career for a "moonshot" and a minute of glory. That would be totally stupid for a guy who has a family and a company and who's a cryptographer - to make a fool out of himself like this. Unless, what he claims is true..
Who knows, in the end it doesn't really matter that much.
Re: I’m Sorry
#49Forgive me as I'm a newbie to bitcoin and only ever seen it from the outside and watched a few things. I only know who Satoshi is because of the mass amounts of people wanting to know who this mysterious man really is. But my question is, why does it matter if Craig Wright is or isn't? I mean I can understand being upset that he lied about it if he really isn't for attention, but what if he is? The dude is literally being ripped apart left and right by everyone and anyone.
Whether Satoshi is finally identified or not, what difference will it make? I honestly don't understand the deafening attacks at Wright at first for being "outted" as a potential to be Satoshi and now when he says he is.
Re: I’m Sorry
#50He had promised to do the impossible -- cryptographically prove he had access to early coins which he did not in fact have. He had carefully developed two scam-proofs of this.
One scam proof was deployed on his blog where he claimed to sign a Sartre text with a key from bitcoin block 9. He carefully did not give the exact input text, only a supposed hash of the text. The hope was anyone trying to replicate would assume their problem was an incorrect source text. And there was proof that the given hash value was signed by the key. But that did not survive internet scrutiny; it was noticed that the signature came from an old bitcoin transaction. Instead of signing the hashed Sartre text as claimed, it signed the old transaction.
The other scam proof was presented in private to reporters and bitcoin developers Jon Matonis and Gavin Andresen. Here Wright supposedly demonstrated the ability to sign arbitrary messages using keys from bitcoin blocks 1 and 9. This scam succeeded: both Andresen and Matonis were convinced. But they were not allowed to keep copies of the evidence, to prevent the trick from being exposed. One speculation is that Wright was able to substitute a doctored version of the Electrum software used for the verification. But without evidence to examine outside of Wright's control, the exact details of the scam are still hidden.
But now Wright is out of ideas. His public-consumption scam failed, and his private controlled-scenario scam can't be more widely replicated.
So this message is his way of backing out, trying as much as possible to save face and keep open the possibility of claiming the Satoshi Nakamoto identity again later.