Gmaxwell proves Craig Wright is a fraud

[RodeoX]

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. 

 

 

[1715026007]

1715026007

[1715026007]

1715026007

[1715026007]

1715026007

[1715026007]

1715026007

[NorrisK]

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  Flippin monkeys.  Just when you think there is actual evolution occurring.  ROFL

LOL LOL - Oh the Hysteria

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]

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  Flippin monkeys.  Just when you think there is actual evolution occurring.  ROFL

LOL LOL - Oh the Hysteria

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]

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]

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  Flippin monkeys.  Just when you think there is actual evolution occurring.  ROFL

LOL LOL - Oh the Hysteria

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]

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:

Yawn. Gawker-style "journalism" in the tech sector. I'm waiting for the Nakamoto sex tapes.

That would be interesting. 

[BARR_Official]

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.

[RoadTrain]

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

[keepdoing]

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

Yes   Yes I do

[rtrtcrypto]

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]

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]

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

Thx

This guy delivers a reasonable analogy:

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

[NorrisK]

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]

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

LOL only if his name is changed to keepsucking, it would be perfect

[YarkoL]

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.

[BARR_Official]

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.

You guys don't understand the motive?


Step 1:  Convince a few rich people that you're satoshi  (you're not satoshi, but you lie)
Step 2:  Convince them that your million bitcoins are locked up until 2020  (you don't have a million bitcoins, but you lie)
Step 3:  They give you millions of dollars to "build a Bitcoin Bank"  (you're not building a Bitcoin Bank, but you lie)
Step 4:  You have millions of dollars  (You never have to work again, and you can buy anything you want)

[BARR_Official]

And step 5: you have all the criminals of the world coming after you because they think you have the equivalent of $400 millions in untraceable money. Yep sounds like a good plan.

Are you saying that criminals don't want money, because other criminals also want money?

[calkob]

Dude was a fucking scammer trying to build a bitcoin bank, its sad that people could think this was real.

like lets face it, most people wold'nt have the computing skills to understand if he was scamming or not, they reliy on experienced people to break it down for them.

[Parazyd]

Good job gmaxwell!

But even without this, I see no reason why anyone would trust Wright to be Satoshi.
Craig Wright is a rich guy. For all I care, he could've easily paid for the Wired article in the first place. Money can do a lot of things.

[rtrtcrypto]

I'm tired of this total fantasy that there is some hidden element always trying to kill the "rich guy with the bitcoins". There are hundreds of billionaires walking around. You run into billionaires in the NYC subway system. Sure they "might be targets" to some extent, but the idea that someone would not try to scam millions of dollars because "the evil criminal masterminds and lizard people are coming for me" is absurd.

More (and mere) paranoia.

And step 5: you have all the criminals of the world coming after you because they think you have the equivalent of $400 millions in untraceable money. Yep sounds like a good plan.

Are you saying that criminals don't want money, because other criminals also want money?