Bitcoin Forum

ok so maybe u have seen it or not http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36168863
all public news channels suddenly claim Craig Wright is satoshi nakamoto 100%, cuz he signed messages.
NO WHERE ON THE INTERNETZ can we find those signed messages.

I call utter BS.
also gavin andresen confirmed and backed that craig wright 100% is satoshi nakamoto.

so this is very obviously a plot.

do u think the NSA is behind it? no? what is behind it ?
whos behind this and why, what r they hoping for, the nifty boys/gals.

also craig wright and gavin andresen just lost all of their credibility forever

~CfA~

the message he released was:
MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VT C3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4=


what are you missing?.. well:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hflr3/craig_wrights_signature_is_worthless/

here it is explained better

Find first transaction by Satoshi in 2009 :
https://blockchain.info/tx/828ef3b079f9c23829c56fe86e85b4a69d9e06e5b54ea597eef5fb3ffef509fe?show_adv=true

Convert inputscript from hex:
3045022100c12a7d54972f26d14cb311339b5122f8c187417dde1e8efb6841f55c34220ae002206 6632c5cd4161efa3a2837764eee9eb84975dd54c2de2865e9752585c53e7cce

to base64
MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VT C3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4=

(thats it, you done pretty much the only thing that craig done (remember no private key was used with what u just done. nor SHA, nor ECDSA)

this is a 7 year old signature of the transaction encrypted using the private key for: 12cbQLTFMXRnSzktFkuoG3eHoMeFtpTu3S 7 years ago
emphasis: the data is the transaction data(not a personal message).. that is 7 years old!! and publicly available

if he was to sign a message today! the signature, even when signed with the same private key would be completely different
emphasis: signing "my name is bob" would result in a different signature than "My Name Is Bob" even when both messages are signed with the same private key.

so if you see him display:
MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VT C3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4=

he is not signing anything new. he is just literally copying and pasting a 7 year old message(tx) that was signed 7years ago

Quick question — can someone please tell me what has happened to Gavin. When I first discovered Bitcoin,  this guy was a worshipped God, now,  he's an outlaw??

easily paid off to say what is needed

he got extremely greedy, wanted more power, so he wanted to divide Bitcoin but failed hard

yes hes an outlaw just like crack wright - its the truth indeed.  hes still better than crack tho cuz crack is JUST a liar, gavin is also a dev

~CfA~

So to summarise, Wright's evidence is worthless, Gavin's statement is also worthless, and the only tangible evidence to believe (this is not a joke) is a written prove from the BBC — I'm going back to bed.

But I have read people on here saying that Gavin was a very early adopter so he should have saved a lot of coins and money was not the problem here. Perhaps his motives were purely based on desire for more power and the ability to influence the Bitcoin core development as he wishes. Is it money or power or is it something else?

No, not paid off, but possibly genuinely fooled by someone who's a good actor.

None of us have seen the proof that was shown in person to gavin/matonis/ the economist. Therefore, I do not think we should jump to conclusions just yet.

We'll know more in the coming weeks.

Ooo this is so juicy.

Gavin's on record in stating that he has enough coins to retire, expressed during the heated debated of if he should be paid via TBF for his coding service, later revealed he earned over a quarter of a million dollars for his efforts then headed on over to MIT to get paid for his bitcoin related services over there.

you think that gavin would sign a NDA, buy a plane ticket, book a hotel room... for curiosity sake??

In Gavin's own words, he had email conversations with Craig that led him to believe there was a very good chance he might be talking to the real satoshi. This was before he bought the plane ticket.

Coming from someone who spoke extensively with satoshi throughout 2010/2011.

So yes, I'd say there's a very good chance his curiosity got the better of him.

I mean, who wouldn't want to meet the real satoshi if they thought there was a good chance it's actually him?

On Dec 8, 2015 Craig wright was publicly outed as a hoaxer/scammer, 'Gavin-Bloatcoin-Andresen' has ether gone full retard or is colluding with Wright but for what I couldn't say.

Can you provide a link for that, quantus?

lol everyone on this subject is so crazy the bitcoin price is droping though and that worrys me

Gavin lost all his credibility long ago, Craig write has atleast 1 scam accusation that I have seen.

Looks like (as someone else said) a false second coming of the messiah.

I don't belive Craig is Satoshi. He disappeared for a reason so why come out now, with no proff to boot. Nice try but put up or shut up, move some coins or gtfo.

Well hopefully a cryptography proof is given as well, because to trick someone socially with just conversation is much much easier. I would be curious as well if someone shared what only Satoshi an I could know, but still, a signed message is worth much much more.

Hopefully this can be sorted out soon.

I'll just throw this crazy idea out there: what if Gavin is Satoshi and he is using Wright as cover because he wants to be able to sell some of his btc stash.  If Gavin was Satoshi, he might want to sell some of his coins without admitting he was Satoshi, and without creating a market panic.  So he hears about this crazy Wright guy, who for whatever reason wants to claim he is Satoshi.  He realizes if he backs up Wright's story, that when he (Gavin) sells some btc from Satoshi's stash, Wright will be forced to explain it (even though Wright has nothing to do with the sale) giving Gavin the perfect cover and creating helpful confusion.  :o

https://i.imgur.com/dQtr3xP.png

Faketoshi ( let's turn it mainstream so media understands)

Me.  I wouldn't.  

The "Real" Satoshi has no reason to claim that identity.  None.  He absolutely knows why he was using a pseudonym in the first place, and he knows it's too valuable to destroy.  Steve Wright is in no way prepared for the shit storm that would happen to him if his claim were true and he were so inutterably stupid as to provide actual proof of it.

Simple:

1. Bradley Manning came out with these brutal helicopter videos and Wikileaks published them
2. USG tried desperately to dry out Wikileaks by closing their Paypal account which was used for donations
3. Wikileaks decided to accept Bitcoin instead
4. USG first heard about Bitcoin and was pretty angry about this "Bitcoin thing" and how it can be worth more than a Dollar and infiltrate their power
5. They found out about the Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto and used their NSA surveillance program to find the real person responsible for this Bitcoin mess
6. CIA visited Satoshi in person and made clear, that the Dollar is here to stay and Bitcoin has to leave and they made him an offer. Satoshi refused and was terminated without revealing his private keys
7. CIA invites Gavin as being the number 2 on the list. Gavin agrees and he was flipped to take control over the Bitcoin protocol (edit: they probably have shown a picture of Satoshi after termination to convince Gavin pretty quick)
8. After various attempts to fork Bitcoin, he lost his good reputation, but he is there between a rock and a hard place

Jus my tree fiddy

LOL. Gavin has lots of coins. He actually had so much he managed to give away 10,000 BTC via the faucet he set up back in the day to promote bitcoin (which was dispensing 1BTC a go).

So I actually was trying to come up ideas about what the hell is happening and had this thought to. Wright is some mentally unstable guy, and Gavin is using this to divert attention from himself.

But am not sure it's very plausible. I mean, if he was trying to divert attention, why would he jump right in the middle of the whole thing?

My above posting explains the situation he could be in. Why care about your image when your life is on the line?

That's one of the deeper darker theories I have heard.

Satoshi is in zero dark thirty years  ;)

Arguably, he made a bad strategic decision to give up the lead developer role.  If he was still lead dev, he could decide core's priorities between big blocks and seg witness.

This looks pretty bad for his credibility though.

Could you prove this, that's too simple.  "back in the day" Bitcoin was unrecognized, and worthless, give us the address these transactions were sent from, proving it's Gavins, so we can evaluate the price per btc at that time period, and reevaluate the worth of the address (at least what is left in it)  at this time period?

"Back in the day" a group of kids purchased pizza worth about £3.00 for 10,000k btc. I'm really trying hard to see your point.

"What is too terrible to be spoken, must be wept.
 What is too terrible to weep, can only be laughed."

No he couldn't-- the comment betrays a misunderstanding of how Bitcoin and open source development works.  "Lead dev" is not a position of authority, and if he wanted to push in a direction the contributors didn't agree with, he'd find himself where he is now, regardless of what happened there...

Not 0%

tree fiddy satoshi

The news caused some pretty significant price drop, a drop which would have been bigger if what was broadcasted was true but most news outlets still went ahead and published their reports with no substantial fact checking. Craig knew that many major news outlets were gullible and perhaps that's why he contacted several. Whoever knew about this in advance could have benefited by sorting bitcoin or being ready to buy in after the drop for same-day profits. You should also consider that Gavin has most probably signed an NDA as Andreas was asked to do (https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hj1xu/why_i_declined_to_verify_sns_identity_two_weeks/) (and declined) in order to verify Satoshi's identity. If Gavin was gullible enough to do that in the first place, it's likely that he's not allowed to disclose that he was lied to. The rest of Gavin's comments are just attempts to not worsen his public image.

That's worth "tree fiddy" and a Big Wow.
Sorry to hear the real Satoshi could have been murdered by the CIA/NSA, but your story is possible.


























...but he is there between a rock and a hard place.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/ROCK_N_HARD_PLACE.gif

Yeah, it was pretty sweet. I still got more than 20 of Gavin's coins. I guess gavy baby never really thought Bitcoin would amount to much or he wouldn't have been so reckless. I've never really understood why anyone cares who made Bitcoin. I don't know the person that made my microwave but that's not going to stop me from using it or understanding that it works.

He sold his soul to the devil, like rihanna and beyonce

Wouldn't you do the same if you had a barrel of a gun in your mouth?

I somewhere read this idea of Gavin started to be inconsistent as a cry for help or to send a secret message to community. This idea is not so bad, not so bad indeed.

If you had two guys conspiring to do something illegal and one of them got busted by the police and flipped to catch the other one. How could he warn his buddy, knowing that the police will hear every word and read every line? Right, he could tell inconsistent stuff - not too much to catch attention, but enough to send a secret warning. This would bring in a new and interesting meta level.

Hogwash. 

A.  Gavin has no idea who the original Satoshi is and couldn't have flipped him.

B.  Satoshi knows Gavin has no idea who Satoshi is and has no fear of being flipped.

C.  Gavin has no leverage over Satoshi and couldn't get him to do shit if he didn't want to.

E.  Satoshi's Opsec was flawless, but one flaw is all it takes.  It is very difficult to maintain flawless opsec, and very dangerous to risk further action or communication which might break it, especially now when the situation is under much more intense scrutiny than ever before.  Satoshi has no compelling reason to take that risk.  No message Gavin could possibly send would result in Satoshi's risking his opsec to become vulnerable.

D.  Getting to Gavin is therefore completely useless to Los Federales if their goal is getting to Satoshi.

Good. This was the only thing I needed to cut off all these bullshit around this new story. My question is always why now and why this way?
That is not clear to me right now. Thanks anyway

You know what I think?

It's a lot more likely that this is a plot by Anti-Gavin and possibly anti-bigger blocks people than it is a plot by Gavin.

Just think about it, Gavin isn't stupid enough to think he can fool all of the other crypto experts. And why would he put his whole reputation on the line? There must've been other things he would've done.


On the other hand, if this was a plot by the anti-Gavin faction, it actually makes sense.

1. If Gavin realized the "tricks" Craig used (we're assuming Craig is a fake here), nothing would happen. No one would care. He would just be seen as a fake, no one takes any reputation hit.

2. Gavin took the bait, and now he makes a fool of himself, ruining his reputation.

See, in any scenario, the anti-Gavin faction can't lose.



(for the record I think it's just an elaborate hoax by craig, I don't think (at least I hope) there aren't malicious manipulators behind this. But the Gavin accusations are just ridiculous, in my opinion)

I don't think opposition to big blocks would be unanimous and the lead dev gets to break a tie-break.

If his decision was bad enough, then the devs who disagreed with him could fork the client.

The miners seem to be taking a policy that they want to stay with core.  I think this is to a combination of encouraging stability and confidence in the technical expertise of the core team.

This gives the core team significant power in practice, since a fork has to convince the miners that they should be considered the main development team.

Gavin certainly has less power now than he would have if he was lead dev.  If he wants to be able to influence Bitcoin, then giving up that position was a poor move (purely from a strategic point).

Why would he come with this information right now this time besides everyone who has the coins
has them for years.
Why does he want the credits to be the owner of it

Absolutely. You have to consider the fact that this "news" was released during a conference where Gavin was advertising his big-block altcoin scheme. It is clearly thinkable that he wanted to improve his negotiating position by sacking in the merits of having participated in the "discovery" of Satoshi.

Luckily that backfired. Hopefully his commit access to Bitcoin Core will never be restored.

Also one has to ask, if Gavin was willing to sign an NDA in this case, what other NDA's he may have signed...

ya.ya.yo!

I saw this guy yesterday on the news and he was claiming that he is the inventor of the Bitcoin. It is hard to belive because why does he suddenly come out out of nowhere.
It does not matter to me that much if he is the inventor good for him.

I agree. I lost my trust in Gavin a long time ago, after he announced meeting the CIA and shortly after releasing his plans for The Bitcoin Foundation (maybe even the result of his engagement with the CIA). I'm now pretty sure that Gavin was/is influenced by governmental organizations to push an agenda for Bitcoin that allows them to control nodes and transaction flow.

Luckily that has failed until now, thanks to the more ethical Core developers. Btw. Gavin is the only developer (apart from his more extreme rage-quitting fellow Mike Hearn) that constantly tried to extent his power over Core development by introducing himself as the chosen one true Satoshi disciple via frequent media appearances, while other developers had more than equal eligibility to do so, but did not.

ya.ya.yo!

Many who just keep telling "Gavin want take more power" forgot the reality he is the one who gave his power to others voluntarily. So he is very unlikely to want more power, he just have such mentality to try explain his views publictly in his blogs etc., and even helping to create Bitcoin clients incorporating his views - nothing wrong with that at all.

You are clearly delusional.

The GavinworksforCIA conspiracy theories are worse than flatearthers. It doesn't hold up to logic in the slightest.

Are you getting paid to spout this drivel?

Gavin has been very badly used, and continues to be used.  I wonder how he'll avenge himself. 

So was Matonis, but I think he's a lawyer (?), so nobody cares.

This guy Wright is sliding down the sociopath spectrum in the wrong direction. 

I dont think there was any plot here, i think this is just a case of gaving being easily misled which is not very good either. He of all people should be aware of things like this happening . I do also wonder if Craig wright did actually know the real satoshi.

For those of you who are struggling with BBC player check out gavin interview on youtube, he is convinced:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1f5Ms5heMM

I'm not delusional at all. Gavin visited the CIA. That's a fact. Announcing it openly is not making it any better, because the meeting itself was not open to the public. All we "know" about the meeting, is what Gavin told us. And apparently Gavin has no problem with signing NDAs, when he expects personal advantages from it.

Ask yourself: Would Satoshi have visited the CIA on invitation? No! In fact, he disappeared the moment Gavin shook hands with the agency.

Speaking about conspiracy theories: Never heard about the Snowden revelations? The government spies on and tries to manipulate people anytime when it sees the necessity. And Bitcoin certainly is a threat to the established order...

ya.ya.yo!

Agree. At one point (Wikileaks/Manning) Bitcoin must have been classified a national security thing. This changes a lot and opens up a big budget.
Also 1 Billion Dollar in Bitcoin can be a motive for some to commit murder. If somebody knew Kleiman was Satoshi, he could have come up with this idea.