Satoshi Nakamoto Is Probably This Unknown Australian Genius?

Post by alfiedotwtf » Wed, Dec 09, 2015, 1:48 AM UTC

nickpsecurity wrote: post #99

daveguy wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except is that really the scoop of the century? Do people really care that much? If the media would just leave the real guy alone we could have the added benefit of preventing false self-marketing too. How about we just ignore all these "the real satoshi!" articles?

It's already in Wired, has 212 points on Hacker News, and who knows what value to people assessing him in academia or business sectors. Altogether, enough people care for it to matter to a tech egomaniac. Not "scoop of the century" or anything, though.

Post by mortehu » Wed, Dec 09, 2015, 1:51 AM UTC

chroma wrote: post #55

[deleted] wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

I think Gizmodo's is a much less rigorous article than the Wired one. It mostly consists of accusations and circumstantial evidence. Every early player in Bitcoin development has these in spades. In a world where Craig Steven Wright is not Satoshi, we'd see the exact same tenuous evidence. In contrast, the Wired article stays close to the facts (GPG keys, email addresses, IPs, etc) and hedges its bets. Wright might b…

Post by Steko » Wed, Dec 09, 2015, 1:53 AM UTC

tlrobinson wrote: post #33

This looks more like a trail of deliberately planted evidence to make us think he's Satoshi. The email/tweet/transcript quotes almost suggest sort of multiple personality disorder where he believes he's Satoshi.

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Dec 09, 2015, 1:57 AM UTC

Analemma_ wrote: post #6

So far there have been multiple Satoshi Nakamoto reveals which, of course, never panned out. To their credit Wired is hedging their bets, saying Wright could be a determined hoaxer and even providing some countervailing evidence to their own theory. Good journalism, that. Having said that, I looked over the article and this seems to be the most convincing Satoshi Nakamoto theory thus far. There's no need to jump to a…

Post by nickpsecurity » Wed, Dec 09, 2015, 1:59 AM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #104

nickpsecurity wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a U.S. organization that goes after financial crime world-wide. I just gave it as an example. Point being, many types of money moving require careful laundering to prevent traces for financial or other prosecution. It's why most crooks focus on trying to steal straight cash if they're here in U.S.. A guy with an easily-moved, unregulated, semi-anonymous stash of millions is a much easier target and the governmen…

Let's say someone stole Satoshi's stash. To convert it to non-Bitcoin value, they would have to spend it or transfer it. Wouldn't people notice that the famous Satoshi block is suddenly in play? And the point at which it is converted to real value is the point at which a criminal investigation would begin. I don't understand why Satoshi's stash of bitcoins is any easier to spend untraceably than any other store of va…