|
next big thing will be a dr.wright client with GA as the lead developer.
mark my words!
|
|
|
|
Soo if this is Nakamoto real he can moove his coins into some wallet and sign a message making the proof that he really is the person he claims to be,does this has already been confirmed?I havent read all the pages im trying to get updated ,just someone let me know if this is the person under bitcoin,if is or not i wanna say thanks for bitcoin.
what we know for sure there is an agenda! |
|
|
|
|
interesting fact in the book "Digital Gold" from Popper.
Gavin Andresen returned early 2010 from Australia. he claims he heard from Bitcoin thrue a website called InfoWorld.
anybody heard from this article on InfoWorld? maybe he meet mr. wright not for the first time in london.
|
|
|
|
I believe the closest we have to Satoshi these last years, is this: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010238.htmlThat particular email is not known to be hacked (but we can't say for sure that it isn't), there is no spoofing involved, and he also had to register and verify the email to the mailing list: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010329.htmlhttps://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010327.htmlhttps://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010334.htmlThe writing style and essence of what is written does not have any troll like qualities like the spoofed "I'm not craig wright, we are all satoshi" message that appeared a few months later. The August one isn't spoofed, it is serious and consistent in writing style, while also trying to "sneak in" some comment of concern for bitcoin itself - as far as node incentives go. Kind'a like, since I broke my silence, let me also say this that is bothering me for a while. As far as I'm concerned it is legit with very high probability. Which, in turn, would imply that if I'm right then Satoshi was alive a few months ago. It would also imply that Craig Wright writing with one space, instead of two, is fraudulent, and that no writing style change has occurred for Satoshi, despite the passing of time since 2010. SN biggest mistake? Gavin Andresen!! let us watch what is coming next from mr. wright. with the logic above in mind it is not "big blocks". |
|
|
|
And if you are so sure that this guy is Satoshi would you care to take a (say 10 BTC) bet on it?
What would you take as irrefutable proof ? in real there is nothing! if SN already passed away his family could have access to all including the true PGP private key. |
|
|
|
Scanned last few pages and didn't see anyone posting this: The Bitcoin affair: Craig Wright 'to move' Satoshi coinhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36193006 Craig Wright's spokesman told the BBC that he would "move a coin from an early block" belonging to the crypto-currency's inventor "in the coming days". So what happens if he actually does it? Proof good enough? how will mr. wright prove that HE moved the coins and not Gavin Andresen or anyone else? Maybe SN handed over some of the early blocks? or SN is already passed away and now Gavin or mr. wright try to get some blocks from the family of SN. Satoshi is dead? not very unlikely. hal finney passed away unfortunetly. satoshi died from a heart attack when gavin told him he was going to meet with the FBI. mr. wright must be sure that SN is not able anymore to reveal his true identity. otherwise the agenda of mr. wright has a high risk of failure. so it is very likely that mr. wright knows the true identity of SN. for me it's also clear that gavin andresen knows the true identity of SN. otherwise he would not cooperate with mr. wright's agenda. Core stick to your plans. big drama is coming. |
|
|
|
Scanned last few pages and didn't see anyone posting this: The Bitcoin affair: Craig Wright 'to move' Satoshi coinhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36193006 Craig Wright's spokesman told the BBC that he would "move a coin from an early block" belonging to the crypto-currency's inventor "in the coming days". So what happens if he actually does it? Proof good enough? how will mr. wright prove that HE moved the coins and not Gavin Andresen or anyone else? Maybe SN handed over some of the early blocks? or SN is already passed away and now Gavin or mr. wright try to get some blocks from the family of SN. Satoshi is dead? not very unlikely. Hal Finney passed away unfortunetly. |
|
|
|
Scanned last few pages and didn't see anyone posting this: The Bitcoin affair: Craig Wright 'to move' Satoshi coinhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36193006 Craig Wright's spokesman told the BBC that he would "move a coin from an early block" belonging to the crypto-currency's inventor "in the coming days". So what happens if he actually does it? Proof good enough? how will mr. wright prove that HE moved the coins and not Gavin Andresen or anyone else? Maybe SN handed over some of the early blocks? or SN is already passed away and now Gavin or mr. wright try to get some blocks from the family of SN. EDIT: why this announcment w/o action? is there some preperation needed? |
|
|
|
For the records, Does it proof that im the inventor of the dollar if i got the first dollar note?
Well if the Dollar was a cryptocurrency where it was very well known that the first dollar made was made by the inventor and hasn't moved hands as seen on a public ledger, then yes. It does. Cant wallets/keys change hands? I miss a double proof, for example ISP records. While writing i read laudas comment, interesting too. Pushing post anyways ... That takes things too far, there would be no way to verify anyone. Essentially I think the owner of the genesis block unless publically stating he has bought the private key should be regarded as satoshi. This would be the biggest hurdle. But to overcome any residual doubts it would be reasonable to also ask a person who provided a Genesis block signature to provide other information that Satoshi would know. Gavin himself (!!!) gave a good rundown on what would constitute proof in his mind a month or two ago, and it included things like providing details from his private emails to Satoshi in 2009-2011. So it would be reasonable to ask for data like that, to be confirmed by the appropriate people, as supplemental proof. But the Genesis block signing would still be key. they issue here is: Gavin Andresen's reliability is gone completely forever! |
|
|
|
mr. wright moechte als naechstes ein paar coins bewegen von denen man annimmt sie sind eigentum von SN. in two weeks!  Na dann müsste das wahrscheinlich einer der ersten 70 Blöcke sein. Eine Nachricht mit einem entsprechenden Key zu signieren würde auch schon reichen. So könnte man auch mit dem ersten Block beweisen das man SN ist. der typ soll liefern und zwar pronto und dann kann er seinen ruhm haben oder für immer in der versenkung verschwinden! bei so einem sensiblen thema wie der identität von SN und dem damit verbundenen zugriff auf das vermögen von SN hört bei mir der spass auf. sollte es sich endgültig als unwahrheit herausstellen sind für mich auch die zwei anderen typen welche sich von ihm benutzen liessen verbrannt. die können gleich mit ihm den hut nehmen und sich aus der cryptoszene verabschieden. |
|
|
|
mr. wright moechte als naechstes ein paar coins bewegen von denen man annimmt sie sind eigentum von SN. in two weeks! |
|
|
|
ich bin gespannt was jetzt demnaechst aus dem lager hearn andresen ver kommt nachdem sie jetzt verstaerkung vom meister himself bekommen habe. was immer auch die intention von mr. wright war an die oeffentlichkeit zu gehen, die naechsten wochen duerften ungemuetlich fuer ihn werden. man wird versuchen in einen fachlichen dialog mit ihm zu kommen und seine sachkenntnis mit der von SN vergleichen. nachdem wohl wahrscheinlich ein seiner blogposts ein dreistes plagiat ist ahne ich nichts gutes fuer mr. wright. auch sein twitter statement ueber die skalierbarkeit von ca. 340 GB bloecken erscheint laecherlich. mr. wright wir sind gespannt! it's time to deliver. |
|
|
|
Wobei ich schon seit einiger Zeit die begründete Vermutung habe, dass Craig vermutlich nicht völlig daneben liegt. Meinst, dass er wirklich gestorben ist? Sicherlich war es dann aber nicht an Altersschwäche... Nein, eher an den Folgen einer Infektion. meinst du wirklich "Sie" haben sich damit so Mühe gegeben es nach einer Infektion aussehen zu lassen? was hat das jetzt mit Bielefeld zu tun? stecken "Sie" da auch dahinter?  |
|
|
|
Wobei ich schon seit einiger Zeit die begründete Vermutung habe, dass Craig vermutlich nicht völlig daneben liegt. Meinst, dass er wirklich gestorben ist? Sicherlich war es dann aber nicht an Altersschwäche... Nein, eher an den Folgen einer Infektion. du meinst ne Polonium-210 infektion?  |
|
|
|
kann mir jemand erklären, welche relevanz diese ganze scheisse auf den preis hat?
Das müsste investoren doch am allerwertesten vorbeigehen wer nun schlussendlich das ganze erfunden hat...
Wenn er es ist, hat evtl. Zugriff auf 1 Millionen Coin´s und das Finanzamt möchte einen großen Teil davon. Sollte er zahlen müssen, müsste er Coin´s verkaufen. Was das bei der Menge für den Kurs bedeutet kann sich ja jeder wohl selbst ausmalen!!!! hä? kommt das finanzamt auch, wenn es weiß, dass ich seit dem kurs von 200$ per unze 1 Tonne gold daheim liegen hab? Solange er es hält fällt doch keine steuer an, oder hab ich da was verpasst? das hat mit dem angeblichen Bitcoin vermögen überhaupt nichts zu tun. Wright hat eine vergangenheit von welcher man nicht sagen kann, dass sie blütenweiss ist. |
|
|
|
I have the proofs. Signed messages will be released soon.
proof or it didn't happen TM |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
