POLL Is Craig Wright Satoshi Nakamoto?

[iCEBREAKER]

The Wired article was interesting and sometimes almost convincing.
If he is a fake, then the real Satoshi is glad to have some fool grab a bunch of attention.

Well there is Dave Kleiman, the guy who died, it's possible he was the driving force even though plenty about his final circumstances doesn't add up either.

An obsessive, reclusive genius with his own supercomputer(s)?  The mysterious death of his closest(?) associate?

The next season of All My Bitcoins is going to be even more exciting than the thrilling Great Blocksize War story arc.

Every time I think 'this can't possibly get any more dramatic, engrossing, and entertaining' the writers pull a rabbit out of their hat.

Also: "Tessier-Ashpool@AnonymousSpeech.com."

ROFLMAO   

Gavin Andresen GitHub Commit Access Revoked
http://themerkle.com/gavin-andresen-github-commit-access-revoked/

With all of the drama surrounding to supposed reveal of the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto, a lot of news is not getting the attention it deserves. Gavin Andresen has allegedly validated Craig Wright’s claims as being Satoshi, but at the same time, his commit access to Bitcoin Core’s Github project has been removed.

[YarkoL]

In light of the recent revelations by Ian Grigg (http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001593.html)
I'm now considering it a possibilty that "Satoshi Nakamoto" was indeed a team of individuals where
Craig Wright played a crucial part. (If that turns out true I will apologize profusely to Gwern!)

If so, then Wright's bizarre play of both presenting himself as Satoshi and at the same time
pulling out the rug under such claims might be a part of some elaborate cloak and daggers game.

[SparkedDev]

https://www.nikcub.com/posts/craig-wright-is-not-satoshi-nakamoto/

and

https://github.com/patio11/wrightverification


Some things to read

[bob123]

Until there is no proof via signed keys / messages i dont think its him.

[Searing]

Until there is no proof via signed keys / messages i dont think its him.

If  it is HIM however....he stated he was in this with that one guy who died (wheelchair) I forget the name and also Hal Finney (also passed) thus if they did set it up as he
says in a trust till 2020 and he is Satoshi..not sure I want to be in BTC when he can get his hands on 1/2 Billion (or more then) worth of BTC ....he seems bitter ..if he is
Satoshi he seems 'pissed' he was outed....he could go FU and flush the works ..and viola $1.20 btc again

of course we are all 'insane' for doing this and also pissed...so why should Satoshi be any different.....

then he also has tax troubles in Australia and in the usa your tax troubles 'go away' if you just pay..probably works the same way there

2021 Australian tax auction of 450 million BTC ..that also would suck

anyway the guy will cash out a significant portion of his BTC if he is Satoshi ASAP imho in 2020 ....if for no other reason then to keep the idiot's at bay who will
lurk/stalk him till then...one way to end it all could be take your 1/2 billion usd (hell by then maybe 1 billion) and flush the works and walk

that would show everybody that you were "Satoshi the Anarchist' indeed!!!

would be hard to be bugged about BTC if you sold it all and nuked the project.......no Satoshi needed..because BTC would be badly crippled at best

(frigging nightmare on crypto street action)

later

[Wapinter]

What do you think?

http://www.wired.com/2015/12/bitcoins-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-this-unknown-australian-genius/

To me seems legit...

There should be another option "I dont care who real Satoshi is" in this poll as it is really irrelevant for many like me.Whether Satoshi stays anonymous or comes out in public,it doesn't makes me love bitcoin less and that's what matters

[nioc]

In light of the recent revelations by Ian Grigg (http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001593.html)
I'm now considering it a possibilty that "Satoshi Nakamoto" was indeed a team of individuals where
Craig Wright played a crucial part. (If that turns out true I will apologize profusely to Gwern!)

If so, then Wright's bizarre play of both presenting himself as Satoshi and at the same time
pulling out the rug under such claims might be a part of some elaborate cloak and daggers game.

Interesting.  He makes many assertions and those lead one to believe he knows intimate details about the creation of btc.

[JustDie]

the result is probably yes ,

https://www.facebook.com/NowThisNews/videos/1054261164664007/

the video is clear from investigation 

lets wait the sign message

[yefi]

In light of the recent revelations by Ian Grigg (http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001593.html)
I'm now considering it a possibilty that "Satoshi Nakamoto" was indeed a team of individuals where
Craig Wright played a crucial part. (If that turns out true I will apologize profusely to Gwern!)

If so, then Wright's bizarre play of both presenting himself as Satoshi and at the same time
pulling out the rug under such claims might be a part of some elaborate cloak and daggers game.

What direct knowledge does he have? He wasn't even part of the team he describes. And all this "I confirm" means nothing. Hey, I confirm that Newt Gingrich is Satoshi.

Let's see some actual proof. All these arguments from authority or appeals to emotion don't mean jack.

[monsanto]

In light of the recent revelations by Ian Grigg (http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001593.html)
I'm now considering it a possibilty that "Satoshi Nakamoto" was indeed a team of individuals where
Craig Wright played a crucial part. (If that turns out true I will apologize profusely to Gwern!)

If so, then Wright's bizarre play of both presenting himself as Satoshi and at the same time
pulling out the rug under such claims might be a part of some elaborate cloak and daggers game.

My thinking has gone in the other direction.  I was entertaining the idea that he might be Satoshi, in large part because gwern person seemed convinced.  I also didn't understand the $54 million tax rebate angle.  It seems Wright may have set up several shell companies, and had them do make believe business with each other, and then filed for some kind of special rebate with the Australian government worth millions.  Being Satoshi would allow him to muddy the waters and claim he has money to back up all these companies (and possibly attract further investment).  Pretty convoluted but IMO it is more likely at this point that he has no connection with Satoshi at all and is just a con artist (he really is an artist at it).

[spendabit]

Nope. This Wright guy is vain. Look at Satoshi's posts on this forum and there is no sign of that vanity.

That was before the project was a "success" though and there was oodles of work yet to be done. Search the posts and you will find the one that blurs the line.

To me he shows conflicting signs of pride, ownership, honesty, drive, vision and a believed right to privacy.

[mtnsaa]

In light of the recent revelations by Ian Grigg (http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001593.html)
I'm now considering it a possibilty that "Satoshi Nakamoto" was indeed a team of individuals where
Craig Wright played a crucial part. (If that turns out true I will apologize profusely to Gwern!)

If so, then Wright's bizarre play of both presenting himself as Satoshi and at the same time
pulling out the rug under such claims might be a part of some elaborate cloak and daggers game.

What direct knowledge does he have? He wasn't even part of the team he describes. And all this "I confirm" means nothing. Hey, I confirm that Newt Gingrich is Satoshi.

Let's see some actual proof. All these arguments from authority or appeals to emotion don't mean jack.

I would be very surprised if he's not Satoshi after all these very respectable sources (journalists, police investigations, etc) aimed at him being Bitcoin's creator. Not sure why he would claim such title after all these years unless the police and tax collectors are after him. It's very clear (to me at least) he's doing this because he is forced to come clean after a deal he made with the authorities.

[Chris_Sabian]

Not at all

[btcjoin14]

Probably nope, Honestly i am not convinced

[yefi]

I would be very surprised if he's not Satoshi after all these very respectable sources (journalists, police investigations, etc) aimed at him being Bitcoin's creator. Not sure why he would claim such title after all these years unless the police and tax collectors are after him. It's very clear (to me at least) he's doing this because he is forced to come clean after a deal he made with the authorities.

If they are so eminently respectable, why did they use his software, his computer and his message to sign the blocks 1 and 9? Do you know that the authors of Electrum have said that no .asc was downloaded from a British IP on the date Craig was meant to have proven his identity? But rest safe, because you have Rory Cellen-Jones from the Beeb to allay all doubt. And who could not trust in Gavin, who seems to think he knows Satoshi's personality, despite never meeting him in person and despite Satoshi never once revealing any personal detail about himself. Yes, rest safe indeed. 

[Boosterious]

22 peoples answering the poll with "yes,no doubt" i think they dont read any news after BBC start post news about Craig is not satoshi nakamoto,anyway i'm not believe that Craig is founder of bitcoin and man behind bitcoin,he need more and extraordinary proof to claim that he was satoshi.

[BitcoinHodler]

22 peoples answering the poll with "yes,no doubt" i think they dont read any news after BBC start post news about Craig is not satoshi nakamoto,anyway i'm not believe that Craig is founder of bitcoin and man behind bitcoin,he need more and extraordinary proof to claim that he was satoshi.

anybody who is saying no doubt is trolling whether they say yes or no.

the fact is, nothing is clear at the moment but the things we have seen so far point to some shady behind the curtains activity that has some other goal than what meats the eye.

i voted probably not because the facts against his claims are bigger, and i don't see any reason why he would announce himself as satoshi massively and publicly in 3 big news sites and doesn't provide proof the normal way and now he says i don't need to prove it because it is true!!!!

[torontoluxuryhomes]

No is not Satoshi Nakamoto.... why send a fake signature ?

[mindrust]

No, no doubt.

He is a liar. He wants to be famous and he made it. Yesterday i didn't know that name even existed and now his name is known world-wide. Good job everyone.

[coins101]

22 peoples answering the poll with "yes,no doubt" i think they dont read any news after BBC start post news about Craig is not satoshi nakamoto,anyway i'm not believe that Craig is founder of bitcoin and man behind bitcoin,he need more and extraordinary proof to claim that he was satoshi.

Yes, no doubt.

Get over it.