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

Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

bitcoin.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 287 posts

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#201

Post by lawn »

153791098c wrote: post #192
gruez wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>also he knew adam back was satoshi but couldn't tell anyone because of the NDA he signed (adam had long been compromised at that point). uhh what?

After you watch the socialy bareable video it would probably make more sense. Makes it pretty clear that adam is satoshi (i would say with a 99% certainty). Adam says completely different things about bitcoin today than satoshi did all those years ago. It's not definite that he was compromised but him taking back control over the project with blockstream and the direction he steered it in makes it pretty clear to me.…

Adam Back? The guy who said we should use "tabs" instead of Bitcoin while we waited for Lightning Network to be finished?

I'm not kidding, here's the talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHc81OL_hk4&feature=youtu.be...

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#202

Post by __blockcipher__ »

153791098c wrote: post #192
gruez wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>also he knew adam back was satoshi but couldn't tell anyone because of the NDA he signed (adam had long been compromised at that point). uhh what?

After you watch the socialy bareable video it would probably make more sense. Makes it pretty clear that adam is satoshi (i would say with a 99% certainty). Adam says completely different things about bitcoin today than satoshi did all those years ago. It's not definite that he was compromised but him taking back control over the project with blockstream and the direction he steered it in makes it pretty clear to me.…

And yet you can explain Adam Back/Bitcoin Core/Blockstream's actions much more simply as them being insidious actors that wanted to take over the Bitcoin project in order to promulgate propaganda supporting ridiculously high transaction fees so that they could establish a for-profit company to extract the delta between how high the fees are and how low they need to be for bitcoin to actually be usable.

Sending a message from Satoshi's e-mail is very obviously not proof of identity. Satoshi needs to move coins or sign a message. That's the only acceptable proof.

You claim Adam Back is compromised because the things he writes and does are so contrary to Satoshi and what he believed in that it's the only explanation that would make a universe where Back is Satoshi make sense. I much prefer to believe (with better evidence, btw) that Back is just not Satoshi. Boom, no logical contradictions to resolve.

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#203

Post by lawn »

betterunix2 wrote: post #191
lawn wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they aren't mutually exclusive. In fact sound money should be both a good store of value and a medium of exchange (in other words work well for payments). The problem is that Bitcoin's high fees has made it unsuitable for regular payments, so proponents only have the store of value explanation left.

A good argument can be made that money should not be a long-term store of value, and should only store value long enough to be useful as a medium of exchange. The idea is that it is better to lend your money than to store it, and that the best way for people to "store value" is to be invested in economically productive activities.

You're right!

The key point, no matter which theory you subscribe to, is that medium of exchange is the most important property.

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#204

Post by brohee »

marcosdumay wrote: post #186
CydeWeys wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he didn't expect anybody to do a lot of work to convince him of a basically worthless fact. Being Satoshi seems like the exact opposite of a basically worthless fact. Gavin was just being gullible. Being a good early developer on an important project isn't mutually exclusive with being gullible to social engineering.

What does he lose if he guesses wrong?

Reputation obviously... He'll forever be "the guy who believed Craig"

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#205

Post by betterunix2 »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #14

This is so bizarre. For those that aren't aware, Craig Steven Wright has publicly claimed to be Satoshi but failed to provide cryptographic proof as such, and uses his supposed identity as Satoshi to justify having a bunch of sketchily-acquired Bitcoin (I forget the full details here, it's been years). Even someone without much prior knowledge should be able to trivially deduce that this guy is a fraud: - The real Sa…

The real Satoshi is probably dead. Who just disappears, without any warning, without saying goodbye, when their project is just beginning to take off? What sort of a person never gets involved again, even just to comment, when the project attracts the interest of heads of state? Death or severe incapacitation (stroke, coma, etc.) is the simplest explanation that fits all the things we know about this person. He probably used FDE and his family probably did not know his passphrase or what he was working on, so nobody even knew to announce what happened.

People die all the time -- car accidents, heart attacks, strokes, drug overdoses, etc. Usually you never hear about them. Satoshi was almost certainly not a well-known cryptographer or even someone with significant involvement in the cryptography research community or any related community (the whitepaper screams "enthusiast"), so his death would have likely gone unnoticed.

(Besides being a simple explanation of the evidence, this is also falsifiable -- all Satoshi has to do is spend some of his BTC or sign a message or otherwise unambiguously reappear and we will know I am wrong about this.)

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#206

Post by Melting_Harps »

marcosdumay wrote: post #186
CydeWeys wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he didn't expect anybody to do a lot of work to convince him of a basically worthless fact. Being Satoshi seems like the exact opposite of a basically worthless fact. Gavin was just being gullible. Being a good early developer on an important project isn't mutually exclusive with being gullible to social engineering.

What does he lose if he guesses wrong?

> What does he lose if he guesses wrong?

Total credibility loss in the BTC community.

I could some how look past his indiscretions: calling himself 'chief Scientist' of an open source project, gate-keeping antics for pull requests, attempted forks with Hearn et al, his involvement with the foundation... He was still critical to the project for many years and not beyond redemption as open source project typically fork into other things for experimentation purposes that grow the project in the long term--Linux distros being a prime example.

But when he went public that he bought faketoshi's narrative it was clear he was beyond help, and that his meeting at the NSA was more than what any of us ever assumed and he was so compromised that nothing could help that anymore.

I hope he is mentally well, and I'm sure he has enough money to do what ever he wants in Life if he just kept a fraction of his coins, but other than I never want to see or hear from Gavin ever again.

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#207

Post by garmaine »

throwaway4good wrote: post #164
garmaine wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. There is strait up clear evidence of his fraud. The tricks he used to convince Gavin were revealed later and shown to be fraud—he used slight of hand to reuse a historical block chain signature rather than produce one.

Revealed how? By Gavin Andressen or Craig Wright?

By CW. He later did a blog post showing the same "proof" that he had done in person with Gavin.

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#208

Post by CraigRood »

dylkil wrote: post #139
jonny_eh wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if this is because BTC's use as currency has definitively failed, and is now being used as an elaborate ponzi scheme to extract money from investors.

The failure to raise the block size limit is the very reason bitcoin has failed as a currency. The main people against against raising the block size limit were blockstream and bitcoin core devs. A competing client to Bitcoin core which supported a block size increase was Bitcoin XT. At one stage it had 50% of the market share, until nodes running XT started getting DDoS'd. Then the censorship began, any posts about…

Block size argument has absolutely no relation to Bitcoin failing as a currency. Block size is some weird inside baseball argument that has little real world validity. Truth is, Bitcoin was never in a position to even fail, because it never succeeded in being a currency. Bitcoin only really got any attention because of Silkroad. Without the darkweb market place Bitcoin would be a fun little internet toy.

You can see this reasoning today in chains like Bitcoin Cash, these are cheaper, these do have larger blocks, but they have nowhere near the amount of currency transactions to legitimately call it a currency. These chains don't even pull in any extra load when Bitcoin fees start to creep up.

XT is not really worth talking about. It ended up being a failed power grab. BIP101 failed because both sides failed to work together, instead one side got upset and created a hard fork at the next opportunity. Then attempted to call themselves Bitcoin, knowing full well they didn't have the hash rate and subsequent proof of work.

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#209

Post by GoblinSlayer »

qwytw wrote: post #117
krupan wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin would be an utter failure if it sacrificed security in order to gain speed and efficiency. And make sure to compare how much energy (including the entire military, police forces, FBI, etc.) is used to secure US dollars.

There were 285,418 bitcoin transactions* in the last 24 hours, bitcoin energy consumption is estimated to be around 76.87 terawatt hours per year, which is 0.210603 twh per day. So 0.210603 / 285,418 = 0.000000737874765 which is 737.874765 kWh per transaction. Assuming a price of $0.10 and an average 475g CO2 emitted per kWh, the real cost of a single transaction is $73 and 350kg of CO2. But I suppose that's a price…

Bitcoin mining uses hydroelectricity, that doesn't emit CO2.

Re: Bitcoincore.org removes Satoshi's whitepaper from website after threats from CSW

#210

Post by Thorentis »

He seems like somebody who is very concerned with taking credit for things. And not just in a "hey, I made that!" kind of way, but in a "I will sue people who say I didn't make it. " [0] kind of way.

This alone is enough for me dismiss his claims. Satoshi clearly intentionally wanted to remain unknown. It might be a real name, but it likely isn't. There was plenty of opportunity to reveal himself. Now that BTC is suddenly valuable and Blockchain has taken off, it is inevitable that there will be opportunists who want to personally gain from it. CSW is just one of many.

Not to mention that CSW has made other false claims, such as claiming to hold a PhD when he actually doesn't [1]. There is a lawsuit where his name is titled as "Dr.". Again, alarm bells should be going off for anybody that sees that.

And of course, there is a very simple way to prove he is Satoshi, which is to prove he holds the private key for a known Satoshi public key. But he can't do that, and almost certainly forged multiple keys he claims are Satoshi's [2].

[0] https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-bitcoin-craig-wright-...

[1] https://twitter.com/mashable/status/675193059408265216?s=20

[2] https://www.vice.com/en/article/jpgq3y/satoshis-pgp-keys-are...

Post reply on HN