Bitcoin Forum
May 19, 2019, 01:59:22 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Gmaxwell proves Craig Wright is a fraud  (Read 19016 times)
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 05:39:47 PM
 #41

Please stop talking about this lunatic  Roll Eyes

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
1558274362
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1558274362

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1558274362
Reply with quote  #2

1558274362
Report to moderator
Get signals when whales enter & exit a market 74% average win rate
full binance integration
TRY NOW!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3388
Merit: 5521


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 05:52:07 PM
 #42

Were hash algorithms 1 through 11 added to any well known OpenPGP implementation before 2009?

All software would have supported it, and it even would have been possible to manually force GPG into creating a key with those preferences in 2008.

But we already have a key for Satoshi. Everyone knows that it's accurate. It was created on Oct. 30, 2008, and it used the default GPG cipher preferences at the time.

Now we're asked to believe that Satoshi had a secret additional key also created on Oct 30, 2008, but it used the default cipher preferences of today's version of GPG. Why would Satoshi create two keys on the same day with different cipher preferences (one of which is conveniently the default for modern GPG versions), and keep one totally secret? It's theoretically possible, but it makes no sense. By far the most likely explanation is that it was back-dated (easily possible with stock GPG) in order to trick gullible people into believing that this person is Satoshi. The other "evidence" is similarly worthless: Satoshi never used satoshin@vistomail.com (only satoshi@vistomail.com and satoshin@gmx.com), and the blogs were obviously back-dated as well.

I am very disappointed in the community for (largely) being fooled by this obvious imposter.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
keepdoing
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 101


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 06:17:55 PM
 #43

Were hash algorithms 1 through 11 added to any well known OpenPGP implementation before 2009?

All software would have supported it, and it even would have been possible to manually force GPG into creating a key with those preferences in 2008.

But we already have a key for Satoshi. Everyone knows that it's accurate. It was created on Oct. 30, 2008, and it used the default GPG cipher preferences at the time.

Now we're asked to believe that Satoshi had a secret additional key also created on Oct 30, 2008, but it used the default cipher preferences of today's version of GPG. Why would Satoshi create two keys on the same day with different cipher preferences (one of which is conveniently the default for modern GPG versions), and keep one totally secret? It's theoretically possible, but it makes no sense. By far the most likely explanation is that it was back-dated (easily possible with stock GPG) in order to trick gullible people into believing that this person is Satoshi. The other "evidence" is similarly worthless: Satoshi never used satoshin@vistomail.com (only satoshi@vistomail.com and satoshin@gmx.com), and the blogs were obviously back-dated as well.

I am very disappointed in the community for (largely) being fooled by this obvious imposter.
And I am very disappointed in you, although that was always a pretty low bar for me to begin with. 

I won't waste to many words except to say that everything you just typed is not "anti-Proof".  You've taken a small sampling of the overwhelming facts, and in the end reduced it to a question mark.... "Why would Satoshi blah blah blah HuhHuh?" 

Bottom line is that you don't know how he thinks, or why he might have done what he did, or what possible long term options he may have been considering.  So in the end you are simply another equal voice in the crowd - yet with a recognizable name - with nothing but your desire to not believe.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 504

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 06:21:10 PM
 #44

Were hash algorithms 1 through 11 added to any well known OpenPGP implementation before 2009?

All software would have supported it, and it even would have been possible to manually force GPG into creating a key with those preferences in 2008.

But we already have a key for Satoshi. Everyone knows that it's accurate. It was created on Oct. 30, 2008, and it used the default GPG cipher preferences at the time.

Now we're asked to believe that Satoshi had a secret additional key also created on Oct 30, 2008, but it used the default cipher preferences of today's version of GPG. Why would Satoshi create two keys on the same day with different cipher preferences (one of which is conveniently the default for modern GPG versions), and keep one totally secret? It's theoretically possible, but it makes no sense. By far the most likely explanation is that it was back-dated (easily possible with stock GPG) in order to trick gullible people into believing that this person is Satoshi. The other "evidence" is similarly worthless: Satoshi never used satoshin@vistomail.com (only satoshi@vistomail.com and satoshin@gmx.com), and the blogs were obviously back-dated as well.

I am very disappointed in the community for (largely) being fooled by this obvious imposter.

+1 it's like we're in the twilight zone.

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
RodeoX
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2954
Merit: 1117


The revolution will be monetized!


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 06:35:04 PM
 #45

I have learned that at these forums the most provocative, intriguing, and conspiratorial possibility is always the correct assumption. No homework or facts required. It's always aliens or a secret cabal of mysterious players.
This type of thinking should give Satoshi years of cover.  Wink

 

 

The gospel according to Satoshi - https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
Free bitcoin in ? - Stay tuned for this years Bitcoin hunt!
NorrisK
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1003



View Profile
December 09, 2015, 06:56:43 PM
 #46

Craig = Satoshi.  You can't fake most of the facts, and most of those facts fit.  AND the amount of innacurate information, exageration and FUD being propogated is growing so exponentially it is ridiculous.  This is all just conspiracy theory nonsense and drama because "Satoshi" was more fun to believe in as a purely idealistic vision - than to look at through the lens of reality.

Sort of like the whole Jesus concept.  If Jesus really were to come back, today, the first thing religion would do is beat the crap out of him and nail him up to another cross all the while screaming hysterically that he was an fraud.

LOL - same thing going on here.... Seems tech weenies are still just a step evolved above the apes, even with all your loft idealistic talk.  Your "Tech Jesus" has returned, and you scream to crucify him Smiley  Flippin monkeys.  Just when you think there is actual evolution occurring.  ROFL

LOL LOL - Oh the Hysteria Smiley

That's not true. Just like in maths, you only need 1 case that doesn't match the facts to prove that your theory is incorrect.

A massive mistake like this is enough to prove he is doing this for all kinds of reasons, except for being satoshi..
keepdoing
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 101


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 07:13:18 PM
 #47

Craig = Satoshi.  You can't fake most of the facts, and most of those facts fit.  AND the amount of innacurate information, exageration and FUD being propogated is growing so exponentially it is ridiculous.  This is all just conspiracy theory nonsense and drama because "Satoshi" was more fun to believe in as a purely idealistic vision - than to look at through the lens of reality.

Sort of like the whole Jesus concept.  If Jesus really were to come back, today, the first thing religion would do is beat the crap out of him and nail him up to another cross all the while screaming hysterically that he was an fraud.

LOL - same thing going on here.... Seems tech weenies are still just a step evolved above the apes, even with all your loft idealistic talk.  Your "Tech Jesus" has returned, and you scream to crucify him Smiley  Flippin monkeys.  Just when you think there is actual evolution occurring.  ROFL

LOL LOL - Oh the Hysteria Smiley

That's not true. Just like in maths, you only need 1 case that doesn't match the facts to prove that your theory is incorrect.

A massive mistake like this is enough to prove he is doing this for all kinds of reasons, except for being satoshi..
A massive mistake like what???  Are you suggesting that the Reddit supposition by GMaxwell is definitive "Non-proof"?   Or are you referencing something else?  A) that is not conclusive, and B) it is based on a single small portion of the "Evidence" - that being a text of a purported message from Craig.  Even if GMaxwells argument = fact - it only proves that a single small part of evidence offered is false.

I have 5 cards in my hand.  4 are Aces.  The 5th card is a 2 of clubs.  Now, if I just lied about the 2 of clubs, and it is actually a 5 of diamonds, that doesn't prove that I don't still have the 4 Aces.

C'mon Ken.  You're better than that.
BillyBobZorton
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1019


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 07:16:06 PM
 #48

Both parties have got good arguments. Then again all those "email evidence" is nothing because anyone can Photoshop email evidence, it has been done a thousand times before in the past, this is why math is all that matters at the end of the day.
NorrisK
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1003



View Profile
December 09, 2015, 07:18:47 PM
 #49

Craig = Satoshi.  You can't fake most of the facts, and most of those facts fit.  AND the amount of innacurate information, exageration and FUD being propogated is growing so exponentially it is ridiculous.  This is all just conspiracy theory nonsense and drama because "Satoshi" was more fun to believe in as a purely idealistic vision - than to look at through the lens of reality.

Sort of like the whole Jesus concept.  If Jesus really were to come back, today, the first thing religion would do is beat the crap out of him and nail him up to another cross all the while screaming hysterically that he was an fraud.

LOL - same thing going on here.... Seems tech weenies are still just a step evolved above the apes, even with all your loft idealistic talk.  Your "Tech Jesus" has returned, and you scream to crucify him Smiley  Flippin monkeys.  Just when you think there is actual evolution occurring.  ROFL

LOL LOL - Oh the Hysteria Smiley

That's not true. Just like in maths, you only need 1 case that doesn't match the facts to prove that your theory is incorrect.

A massive mistake like this is enough to prove he is doing this for all kinds of reasons, except for being satoshi..
A massive mistake like what???  Are you suggesting that the Reddit supposition by GMaxwell is definitive "Non-proof"?   Or are you referencing something else?  A) that is not conclusive, and B) it is based on a single small portion of the "Evidence" - that being a text of a purported message from Craig.  Even if GMaxwells argument = fact - it only proves that a single small part of evidence offered is false.

I have 5 cards in my hand.  4 are Aces.  The 5th card is a 2 of clubs.  Now, if I just lied about the 2 of clubs, and it is actually a 5 of diamonds, that doesn't prove that I don't still have the 4 Aces.

C'mon Ken.  You're better than that.

Looks like you just don't want to beleive it is not him because you finally thought you could give satoshi a face and name.
Let him post with his orignial key, and we will all shut up right away and I will also admit my mistake to you.

Until then, he is not satoshi to me.
Lauda
GrumpyKitty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2212
Merit: 1997


Red Trust Queen™️


View Profile WWW
December 09, 2015, 07:25:28 PM
 #50

Look at Nick Szabo's reaction when she asked, "Who are you...?" and they pan the camera over to her... I think he smelled the bullshit way in advance or he knows more than what
-snip-
Could you tell me at which part this exactly is? I don't want to waste my time on "Dr. Craig Idiot". I smelled bullshit the second that I've read the news about this. People like this should be put on the shame list for all eternity.

AndreasMAntonopoulos:
Quote
Yawn. Gawker-style "journalism" in the tech sector. I'm waiting for the Nakamoto sex tapes.
That would be interesting.  Roll Eyes

.FORTUNE.JACK.
      ▄▄███████▄▄
   ▄████▀▀ ▄ ██████▄
  ████ ▄▄███ ████████
 █████▌▐███▌ ▀▄ ▀█████
███████▄██▀▀▀▀▄████████
█████▀▄▄▄▄█████████████
████▄▄▄▄ █████████████
 ██████▌ ███▀████████
  ███████▄▀▄████████
   ▀█████▀▀███████▀
      ▀▀██████▀▀
         
         █
...FortuneJack.com                                             
...THE BIGGEST BITCOIN GAMBLING SITE
       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄█████████████████▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄
 ▄██
█████████▀███████████▄
██████████▀   ▀██████████
█████████▀       ▀█████████
████████           ████████
████████▄   ▄ ▄   ▄████████
██████████▀   ▀██████████
 ▀██
█████████████████████▀
  ▀██
███████████████████▀
    ▀█████████████████▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
#JACKMATE
WIN 1 BTC
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████▀█████▀██████████
███████▀░░▀░░░░░▀░░▀███████
██████▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░▐██████
██████░░░░██░░░██░░░░██████
█████▌░░░░▀▀░░░▀▀░░░░▐█████
██████▄░░▄▄▄░░░▄▄▄░░▄██████
████████▄▄███████▄▄████████

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████▀
BARR_Official
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630
Merit: 500


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 07:43:24 PM
 #51

Craig Wright could have been impersonating satoshi for almost 2 years, in order to con private investors. 

"Only you know I'm the creator of Bitcoin, don't tell anyone.  I have a billion dollars worth of bitcoins, but I can't use them until 2020.  That's why I need all your money for this Bitcoin Bank.  You can trust me, I'm already a billionaire."

That would explain why he created fake evidence in 2013 but kept it secret.  This public exposure could have come from his over-excited investors, or maybe he's throwing his net a little wider to see how much more he can get before it falls apart.

Burning Altcoins for Redemption and Reduction - http://barr.me
RoadTrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1005


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 07:53:54 PM
 #52

Am I the only one to have noticed how hard keepdoing keeps pushing everyone to accept that Wright is Satoshi? I smell hidden (not particularly) agenda Roll Eyes
keepdoing
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 101


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 08:02:10 PM
 #53

Am I the only one to have noticed how hard keepdoing keeps pushing everyone to accept that Wright is Satoshi? I smell hidden (not particularly) agenda Roll Eyes
Yes Smiley  Yes I do Smiley
rtrtcrypto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 627
Merit: 500


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 08:07:37 PM
 #54

Yes.

The razor appears strong here.

All other clowns with their "proof" on ignore list.

Were hash algorithms 1 through 11 added to any well known OpenPGP implementation before 2009?

All software would have supported it, and it even would have been possible to manually force GPG into creating a key with those preferences in 2008.

But we already have a key for Satoshi. Everyone knows that it's accurate. It was created on Oct. 30, 2008, and it used the default GPG cipher preferences at the time.

Now we're asked to believe that Satoshi had a secret additional key also created on Oct 30, 2008, but it used the default cipher preferences of today's version of GPG. Why would Satoshi create two keys on the same day with different cipher preferences (one of which is conveniently the default for modern GPG versions), and keep one totally secret? It's theoretically possible, but it makes no sense. By far the most likely explanation is that it was back-dated (easily possible with stock GPG) in order to trick gullible people into believing that this person is Satoshi. The other "evidence" is similarly worthless: Satoshi never used satoshin@vistomail.com (only satoshi@vistomail.com and satoshin@gmx.com), and the blogs were obviously back-dated as well.

I am very disappointed in the community for (largely) being fooled by this obvious imposter.
CoinCube
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1037



View Profile
December 09, 2015, 08:08:22 PM
Last edit: December 10, 2015, 05:01:32 AM by CoinCube
 #55

Craig Wright could have been impersonating satoshi for almost 2 years, in order to con private investors.  

"Only you know I'm the creator of Bitcoin, don't tell anyone.  I have a billion dollars worth of bitcoins, but I can't use them until 2020.  That's why I need all your money for this Bitcoin Bank.  You can trust me, I'm already a billionaire."

That would explain why he created fake evidence in 2013 but kept it secret.  This public exposure could have come from his over-excited investors, or maybe he's throwing his net a little wider to see how much more he can get before it falls apart.

This is certainly possible. The data so far indicates one of the follow is true.

1) Craig Wright is Satoshi

or
 
2) This is a conspiracy involving multiple individuals in different countries trying to convince us that he is.

or

3) This one of the longest cons ever and Craig Wright started laying the groundwork to convince people he was Satoshi back in 2013.

Personally based on the information presented in the wired and gizmodo article #1 seems possible lots of compelling circumstantial evidence there. However #3 is also possible especially if you can establish a definite profit motive for setting up such a fraud in 2013.    

Edit: Some evidence that there may have been a financial motive involved can be found here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1281650.0
Data provided by Gmaxwell and backdated keys also point towards #3

iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2114
Merit: 1065


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
December 09, 2015, 08:21:45 PM
 #56

Can someone offer a non-reddit explanation on this PGP backdating evidence?

Thx

This guy delivers a reasonable analogy:

Quote
Same mistake as the bytecoin scam with their pdf allegedly from 2012, but compiled with a TeX version released in 2014

Like let's say you compress a file with a version of 7zip that hasn't even been released yet, yet you claim you used this version back in the time when it didn't even exist. He was using software that doesn't match the date of existence of said software... that would be a simple explanation. But this is even worse since are talking PGP keys.

Same mistake as the CBS scam with Dan Rather peddling documents allegedly from the 70s "proooving" Dubya was a draft dodger, but were typed in MS Word.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy

tl;dr anachronism


██████████
█████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████████████████████████████
████
████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
████████████████████████████
██████
███████████████████████████
██████
██████████████████████████
█████
███████████████████████████
█████████████
██████████████
████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████
█████████████████
██████████

Monero
"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine
whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." 
David Chaum 1996
"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
Buy and sell XMR near you
P2P Exchange Network
Buy XMR with fiat
Is Dash a scam?
NorrisK
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1003



View Profile
December 09, 2015, 08:22:47 PM
 #57

Craig Wright could have been impersonating satoshi for almost 2 years, in order to con private investors. 

"Only you know I'm the creator of Bitcoin, don't tell anyone.  I have a billion dollars worth of bitcoins, but I can't use them until 2020.  That's why I need all your money for this Bitcoin Bank.  You can trust me, I'm already a billionaire."

That would explain why he created fake evidence in 2013 but kept it secret.  This public exposure could have come from his over-excited investors, or maybe he's throwing his net a little wider to see how much more he can get before it falls apart.

This is certainly possible. The data so far indicates one of the follow is true.

1) Craig Wright is Satoshi

or
 
2) This is a conspiracy involving multiple individuals in different countries trying to convince us that he is.

or

3) This one of the longest cons ever and Craig Wright started laying the groundwork to convince people he was Satoshi back in 2013.

Personally based on the information presented in the wired and gizmodo articles I lean towards #1 lots of compelling circumstantial evidence there. However #3 is not impossible especially if you can establish a definite profit motive for setting up such a fraud in 2013.    

Or 4) he is seeing stuff. He might have lost his mind somewhere during his life and actually believes he is satoshi..
It probably happened in 2013 when he started laying the foundations to prove his claim.
meono
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 100


View Profile
December 09, 2015, 08:31:32 PM
 #58

Am I the only one to have noticed how hard keepdoing keeps pushing everyone to accept that Wright is Satoshi? I smell hidden (not particularly) agenda Roll Eyes

LOL only if his name is changed to keepsucking, it would be perfect
YarkoL
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 997
Merit: 1008



View Profile
December 09, 2015, 08:34:34 PM
 #59


I am very disappointed in the community for (largely) being fooled by this obvious imposter.

The skeptics have been clear majority in the forum
poll
right from the start, and on Reddit too.

People love drama. But I'm disappointed that
Gwern, whom I've always held in high regard, fell
for this.

“God does not play dice"
John999
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1569
Merit: 1008



View Profile
December 09, 2015, 08:45:15 PM
 #60

Craig Wright could have been impersonating satoshi for almost 2 years, in order to con private investors. 

"Only you know I'm the creator of Bitcoin, don't tell anyone.  I have a billion dollars worth of bitcoins, but I can't use them until 2020.  That's why I need all your money for this Bitcoin Bank.  You can trust me, I'm already a billionaire."

That would explain why he created fake evidence in 2013 but kept it secret.  This public exposure could have come from his over-excited investors, or maybe he's throwing his net a little wider to see how much more he can get before it falls apart.

This is certainly possible. The data so far indicates one of the follow is true.

1) Craig Wright is Satoshi

or
 
2) This is a conspiracy involving multiple individuals in different countries trying to convince us that he is.

or

3) This one of the longest cons ever and Craig Wright started laying the groundwork to convince people he was Satoshi back in 2013.

Personally based on the information presented in the wired and gizmodo articles I lean towards #1 lots of compelling circumstantial evidence there. However #3 is not impossible especially if you can establish a definite profit motive for setting up such a fraud in 2013.    

For #3 I don't really get what would be the point. Pretending to be Satoshi (and therefore to own 1 million bitcoins) would IMO cause a lot of problems for too little rewards.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!