New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux • Hacker News Board

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#41

Post by vkou » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 5:44 PM UTC

jimbob45 wrote: post #14

avs733 wrote: post #7

So sincere question...does this matter? What is added to the social value of bitcoin or cryptocurrency in general? I'm not asking to just dismiss it...just why we are perpetually having/focusing on this discussion is intriguing to me

He would reach mythical status if he were found to have upended both the cryptographic industry and financial industry as well as run a multi-continental crime empire.

> if he were found to have upended both the cryptographic industry and financial industry

How exactly has he up-ended the financial industry?

None of the differences in how 99.9% of the world pays for things, over the past 10 years, have anything to do with BTC.

How has he upended the cryptographic industry? Nobody actually building products, or using cryptography for useful things is basing it off BTC.

BTC created a new financial market, sure. It has not 'upended' industries that solve actual problems.

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#42

Post by gwbas1c » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 5:46 PM UTC

Reads like a conspiracy theory.

That being said, as much merit as the theory has, there's far too much allusion to circumstance to believe this.

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#43

Post by jki275 » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 5:47 PM UTC

mrkramer wrote: post #35

duskwuff wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Craig said in of his interviews that he has a bank statement of bitcoin.org domain purchase Which still doesn't prove anything, beyond that he bought a domain name. (Or, to be even more cynical, that he got something that looks like a domain name purchase to show up on a bank statement.)

He bought bitcoin.org domain in 2008 and by credit card. If bank statement says that then he can be considered at least being a part of Satoshi group or even Satoshi himself.

Those things do not follow from one another, even if he could so prove. Which he has not done.

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#44

Post by function_seven » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 5:48 PM UTC

mrkramer wrote: post #32

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Craig Wright is not Satoshi, that is absurd. Research it more and come back to us. If he ever wanted to prove it he could easily do so by moving any of the early coins etc. Instead of his fraudulent signatures added after the fact and all his other shenanigans.

By moving Satoshi's coins he is not proving him being Satoshi, he is only proving that he has a private key of Satoshi's wallet. If I steal your Bitcoin wallet's private key and I move your coins does that mean I am you? Probably not. Craig said in of his interviews that he has a bank statement of bitcoin.org domain purchase so I am eager as much as everyone to see the bank statement.

True, but his inability to move those coins does cast doubt on his claim. It's the one thing we know Satoshi has the ability to do, and Wright can't do that.

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#45

Post by Hasknewbie » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 5:48 PM UTC

the_watcher wrote: post #30

dmix wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the "new evidence" mentioned in the headline?

The only "new" bit of verifiable information is that a link to Paul Le Roux's Wikipedia page appears unredacted in a document presented by Wright in which most other specific names are redacted because he claimed their exposure could put him at risk (implication being that he helped put criminals away). Everything else just starts from "Le Roux may be Satoshi" and employs conspiracy theorist logic to get there ("He u…

As ridiculous as it is, that's still more researched than that idiotic Newsweek article...

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#46

Post by lugg » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 5:49 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #41

jimbob45 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He would reach mythical status if he were found to have upended both the cryptographic industry and financial industry as well as run a multi-continental crime empire.

> if he were found to have upended both the cryptographic industry and financial industry How exactly has he up-ended the financial industry? None of the differences in how 99.9% of the world pays for things, over the past 10 years, have anything to do with BTC. How has he upended the cryptographic industry? Nobody actually building products, or using cryptography for useful things is basing it off BTC. BTC created a…

Name one major bank not working on blockchain tech right now.

I guess an upending isn't a totally accurate description but I haven't seen banks this motivated to innovate in a long time.

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#47

Post by mlcrypto » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 5:51 PM UTC

bepvte wrote: post #23

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Craig Wright is not Satoshi, that is absurd. Research it more and come back to us. If he ever wanted to prove it he could easily do so by moving any of the early coins etc. Instead of his fraudulent signatures added after the fact and all his other shenanigans.

Craig Wright is commonly known as "Faketoshi" in the community due to how much he claims he is Satoshi.

Another theory says that is the perfect way to hide in plain sight if you were the real Satosh

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#48

Post by N_trglctc_joe » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 5:55 PM UTC

bena wrote: post #18

jimbob45 wrote: post #2

Why say Paul Solotshi instead of Paul Le Roux, a name everyone is far more familiar with? None of the evidence presented was compelling. It was circumstantial at best. Save yourself the five minutes it takes to read this article.

"Circumstantial" does not mean "weak". Circumstantial evidence is often strong enough and compelling enough to determine court cases. Circumstantial evidence is often better than direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence: Stuff like DNA, fingerprints Direct evidence: Bob's memory of the event. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence But please, continue using "the evidence is circumstantial" as if it mea…

This is a really good point. Direct evidence of Satoshi's identity can only be in the form of someone claiming to be him, and that just wouldn't be credible. Circumstantial evidence is all we're going to get; even somebody spending Satoshi's BTC wouldn't be direct evidence since, as the article points out, someone else could have obtained (and be in the process of cracking) his hard drives.

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#49

Post by sneak » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 5:59 PM UTC

avs733 wrote: post #7

So sincere question...does this matter? What is added to the social value of bitcoin or cryptocurrency in general? I'm not asking to just dismiss it...just why we are perpetually having/focusing on this discussion is intriguing to me

I wondered this for most of a decade myself.

It turns out that human beings absolutely depend on narrative stories to understand and relate to the things in their world.

Narratives, of course, have characters. Characters without identity are like an itch that must be scratched, because the narrative is central to integrating the thing the narrative is about (bitcoin) into a normal human being’s life. We are social animals and cannot truly consider the “what” independent of the “who”. (Even the “why” is related to the “who”, because it relates to the motivations of the character in the narrative).

The other bit of wisdom I was able to intuit out of this conclusion is that it is absolutely essential to make sure you are constantly crafting and promulgating your own narrative to everyone you know or who might know or know about you. Humans are so narrative-desperate that they will fill in and manufacture a narrative for you (which may or may not reflect any objective reality whatsoever) if they are not provided one in advance.

Tell your own story, loud and often, otherwise others will invent one and tell it for you.

Re: New Evidence Suggests Satoshi Nakamoto Is Paul Le Roux

#50

Post by tlrobinson » Thu, Jun 06, 2019, 6:01 PM UTC

api wrote: post #24

nostrademons wrote: post #3

I'd still bet on Hal Finney, RIP.

If so that means the creator of the first true cryptocurrency is currently frozen in liquid nitrogen awaiting potential revival in the future, which is even more evidence that we are in fact living in a cyberpunk novel. All we need now is a Rastafarian operated space station at one of the Lagrange points.

> If so that means the creator of the first true cryptocurrency is currently frozen in liquid nitrogen awaiting potential revival in the future

Perhaps with the private key for ~1 million Bitcoin locked in his brain. An excellent incentive to revive him.