So do you really think Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto?

[keepdoing]

NO

[/quote]

PS... more like oneLESSxmr.
I'd change my user name to avoid ridicule.  xmr will go to zero, unless you and your 5 friends that hold it want to keep play trading.  Just because it is possible to create a gazillion useless altcoins doesn't mean it is wise to.  Altcoins are all mostly just pyramid schemes.

[keepdoing]

Odds are that Craig = Satoshi.

NO
he lied about his degree
he lied about building his supercomputer together with SGI (if he even has one)

No - you are simply quoting assumptions, and misdirection.  He's got a lot of degree's so if one of them is misquoted then that just a non-issue. 

proof it

And in regards to SGI, it is a PROVEN, FACTUAL Supercomputer.  And SGI itself has clearly acknowledged its existence and offered the simple, and very plausible, explanation in which it was simply built through the purchase of grey market parts.

again proof it. the statement from SGI i have read did not say he has one. they just said he did not buy one from them (but HE claimed he has built it together with them....so he lied)

But this is WAY above your intelligence capability. 

ROFL

"Prove".  not proof.

Go look at the 500 list.  Look at owner records.  Track owner records.  And with that PROOF, your theory goes POOF.

POOF!

[onemorexmr]

"Prove".  not proof.

Go look at the 500 list.  Look at owner records.  Track owner records.  And with that PROOF, your theory goes POOF.

POOF!

besides that i learned that its not too hard to fake an entry on that list i did never say he did not have a supercomputer. i just said he lied about building it together with sgi.

[keepdoing]

besides that i learned that its not too hard to fake an entry on that list i did never say he did not have a supercomputer. i just said he lied about building it together with sgi.

Well look at you backpedaling. 

See how easy this was?  And it can be done across the board with almost all the rumour/gossip/assumptions surrounding Craig/Satoshi.

You can just go down the list regarding the "Proof".  In the end it all ends up being not quite what it is insinuated to be. 

And I love your backpedal style..... You plant a suggestion that maybe the entry is faked.  Then you cover your butt with a statement that you aren't actually suggesting it doesn't exist.  Then you go back on the attack and accuse him of being guilty of lying about something (which is only a possible interpretation of the evidence - and not even a very likely interpretation).

How did that go again..... POOF! 

[onemorexmr]

besides that i learned that its not too hard to fake an entry on that list i did never say he did not have a supercomputer. i just said he lied about building it together with sgi.

Well look at you backpedaling. 

See how easy this was?  And it can be done across the board with almost all the rumour/gossip/assumptions surrounding Craig/Satoshi.

You can just go down the list regarding the "Proof".  In the end it all ends up being not quite what it is insinuated to be. 

And I love your backpedal style..... You plant a suggestion that maybe the entry is faked.  Then you cover your butt with a statement that you aren't actually suggesting it doesn't exist.  Then you go back on the attack and accuse him of being guilty of lying about something (which is only a possible interpretation of the evidence - and not even a very likely interpretation).

How did that go again..... POOF! 

backpedalling?
maybe you should learn to read:

Odds are that Craig = Satoshi.

NO
he lied about his degree
he lied about building his supercomputer together with SGI (if he even has one)

why do you still think its him is beyond me (well except you think that this news is the reason for the last price spike or you are craig; or both)

i did never edit that quoted post... so you for yourself what i have written.
but at least no i know why you still think he is satoshi... you only read what you want and not what is written 

[maokoto]

I do not believe he is him. His interest in claiming to be Satoshi, and the fact he does not provide the most simple proofs (signature, etc) is paradoxical.

If I want to show myself as myself, I would use the simplest proofs, not the complex ones (showing degrees and Bitcoin knowledge).

[keepdoing]

i did never edit that quoted post... so you for yourself what i have written.
but at least no i know why you still think he is satoshi... you only read what you want and not what is written 

I repeat... backpedaling.  The clear implication was the denial of the supercomputer story.  Again, perhaps this is above your intelligence level.  But I doubt it.  I think you are well aware of what the implications of your language are.  You start with the scary "He Lied!!!" then tie in the supercomputer.  

It is the same M.O. in all the evidence against Craig.  Big scary statement.... vague attachment to a subject.... allow people to jump to conclusions.  

But when pushed for specific facts / possibility of alternative theories... backpedaling on the solidity of the overall implications.

Here is an interesting test for you.  I will star with your statement that you never claimed he didn't have a supercomputer.  Lets stick with that for a second.

So, #1 - Are you man enough to admit that it is POSSIBLE that Craig is running / in control of a Globally Top 20 Ranked Supercomputer?

#2 - If you can admit to #1, can you admit that it is possible that he has indeed been using it to model bitcoin scalability issues for the past years?

#3 - Are you man enough to admit that if #1 & #2 are possible, then it is possible that he may be in a position to soon be releasing Very Important information in relation to the entire Bitcoin Tecnology?

Again, I just want to see if anyone out there is man enough to admit that it is POSSIBLE.  Because I don't see anyone willing to absolutely with 100% certainty state that Craig's SGI Supercomputer doesn't exist.

I mean - show some guts you whimps.  Is it POSSIBLE Craig has a supercomputer - regardless of whether you misrepresented his statements of SGI involvement, or whether he flat out lied about it.  And if it IS possible, then is it POSSIBLE that he's telling the truth about using it for Bitcoin modeling?  And if that is possible, then is it possible that regardless of wheter he is Satoshi or not - that this could have big implications.

I guess the bottom line is that you can't play both sides of the fence.  Either take a stance that the Supercomputer absolutely 100% does NOT exist, or admit all these things are possible?

[CIYAM]

Yup - I think you should look into the "teapot theory" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot).

So if you're not *man enough* to admit there can't be a teapot out there then I guess there is - eh?

Seriously - the guy is a fraud - it is obvious to pretty much everyone apart from some people that probably also think there are teapots orbiting the sun.

[keepdoing]

I do not believe he is him. His interest in claiming to be Satoshi, and the fact he does not provide the most simple proofs (signature, etc) is paradoxical.

If I want to show myself as myself, I would use the simplest proofs, not the complex ones (showing degrees and Bitcoin knowledge).

More misdirection and confusion.... Craig never went out claiming he was Satoshi.  Wired and Gizmoto supposedly dug up documents and outed him against his will.  

I want to see a single incidence of Craig himself publically coming out after the stories were released and saying, "Yes, I am Satoshi".  Never happened.  He never wanted to be outed.  Now he is simply trying to figure out how to release his info - whether he has to prove Satoshiness, or can he release and pretend it is coming from the originally anonymous Satoshi - and everyone pretends none of this ever happened and we keep playing the game of Craig/Satoshi.

One thing is for sure.... Wired / Gizmoto released info no one, including Craig/Satoshi, wanted released.

Problem is.... you can't put the genie back in the bottle.  It is what it is.  Quit stalling.  Move on.  

The real issue is Bitcoin needs hte knowledge this man has because Bitcoin must scale and rise to challenge R3CEV/Hyperledger soon, or risk dropping forever into 2nd position.  IF R3CEV/Hyperledger succeeds,a nd IF they decide to introduce their own Fiatcoin - then Bitcoin may be regulated into an illegal blackmarket currency, or it may be allowed to survice as "digital silver" the 2nd place coin.  But their is a RISK - a POSSIBILITY - that Bitcoin loses everything if certain issues aren't addressed rapidly.

[EdenHazard]

i dont think he is real satoshi nakamoto,because i dont know who really he is,and donw know about his story,and why is he use "nakamoto" if he really satoshi nakamoto,oh this is make me confuse,and start from now idont really care about Craig and Nakamoto,i just care about bitcoin

[Slark]

Without SOLID proofs (Ssatoshi's original keys, signed message from one of his oldest addresses etc.) I refuse to accept anyone who claims to be Satoshi.
Other evidence can be fabricated quite easy as we see in Wright case, example: entry of his blog supposedly dated 2009 was manipulated and added at later date.

[keepdoing]

Without SOLID proofs (Ssatoshi's original keys, signed message from one of his oldest addresses etc.) I refuse to accept anyone who claims to be Satoshi.
Other evidence can be fabricated quite easy as we see in Wright case, example: entry of his blog supposedly dated 2009 was manipulated and added at later date.

I will repeat, I want to see a single incidence of Craig himself (OR ANYONE SO FAR) publically coming out after stories were released identifying them as Satoshi, and saying, "Yes, I am Satoshi.  It is me.  I admit it.".

Quit inferring that Craig/Satoshi is like touring the globe promoting himself as Satoshi.  So dishonest.  I think one of the biggest factors pointing to Craig = Satoshi, is the complete lying and manipulative pictures being painted.

Everytime I see people posting "Craig Wright keeps claiming he is Satoshi", it simply increases my belief it might be him.  I mean, why else would everyone have to resort to dramatic overexageration and lying - unless there was something more to the story. 

How's that old saying go.... "I think thee protests too much"

[onemorexmr]

Here is an interesting test for you.  I will star with your statement that you never claimed he didn't have a supercomputer.  Lets stick with that for a second.

So, #1 - Are you man enough to admit that it is POSSIBLE that Craig is running / in control of a Globally Top 20 Ranked Supercomputer?

#2 - If you can admit to #1, can you admit that it is possible that he has indeed been using it to model bitcoin scalability issues for the past years?

#3 - Are you man enough to admit that if #1 & #2 are possible, then it is possible that he may be in a position to soon be releasing Very Important information in relation to the entire Bitcoin Tecnology?

Again, I just want to see if anyone out there is man enough to admit that it is POSSIBLE.  Because I don't see anyone willing to absolutely with 100% certainty state that Craig's SGI Supercomputer doesn't exist.

i have no problem admitting 1 and 2.
i doubt 3 but yes, it is possible - but this has nothing to do with 1 and 2. you, me and anyone else can say very important things about bitcoin technology. a supercomputer does not qualify for that.

[ajareselde]

Here is an interesting test for you.  I will star with your statement that you never claimed he didn't have a supercomputer.  Lets stick with that for a second.

So, #1 - Are you man enough to admit that it is POSSIBLE that Craig is running / in control of a Globally Top 20 Ranked Supercomputer?

#2 - If you can admit to #1, can you admit that it is possible that he has indeed been using it to model bitcoin scalability issues for the past years?

#3 - Are you man enough to admit that if #1 & #2 are possible, then it is possible that he may be in a position to soon be releasing Very Important information in relation to the entire Bitcoin Tecnology?

Again, I just want to see if anyone out there is man enough to admit that it is POSSIBLE.  Because I don't see anyone willing to absolutely with 100% certainty state that Craig's SGI Supercomputer doesn't exist.

I would admit that it's possible, but very unlikely to be true. imho your point doesn't have value; the same would be for me to say that it's possible that
you can generate identical wallet as someone else - once again it would be possible, but not probable at all.

Here are some fact for you; Satoshi didn't move any of his known coins, which you can hardly say for C.W. , and there was story how C.W invested in gold,
which under no circumstances Satoshi would do; why invest in something you are fighting against..

[keepdoing]

i have no problem admitting 1 and 2.
i doubt 3 but yes, it is possible.....

I would admit that it's possible........

Sort of speechless how easy that was.  Simple truthful discussion about possibilities, without any drama.  In regards to what actually ends up coming out of this... I reckon time will tell.  My thinking is that Craig = Satoshi will eventually be pretty much apparent to all, and proved.  But I may be wrong.  I am open to that possibility. 

[onemorexmr]

i have no problem admitting 1 and 2.
i doubt 3 but yes, it is possible.....

I would admit that it's possible........

Sort of speechless how easy that was.  Simple truthful discussion about possibilities, without any drama.  In regards to what actually ends up coming out of this... I reckon time will tell.  My thinking is that Craig = Satoshi will eventually be pretty much apparent to all, and proved.  But I may be wrong.  I am open to that possibility. 

please dont misquote me and change the meaning of what i said:

i doubt 3 but yes, it is possible - but this has nothing to do with 1 and 2. you, me and anyone else can say very important things about bitcoin technology. a supercomputer does not qualify for that.

actually if satoshi come back his opinion should not be valued more than anyone else's. its a decentralized consensus system which doesnt need any leader. IMHO a leader could even destroy it - just because it can be a single point of failure. luckily i think current bitcoin ecosystem is leader resistant ;-)

but i think i get a feeling what your agenda is: you stated you have one and we should find out... so lets give me a try:
the whole craig-story is made up by some bigger btc fund (or only craig itself) which wants the following:
 - influence on bitcoin (eg the scaling simulation and the important things about bitcoin technology you mentioned)
 - higher price (not sure why price should be higher if satoshi is found, but if current rise is fabricated by them they would only do that if they think the price would rise even higher)

i cant prove it... its just a guess ;-)

[calkob]

To be honest from all the articles i have read i havent been convinced yet that he is definatly not Satoshi.  however does it really matter, i think bitcoin is better off if satoshi is never identified.  the link to a single man could be bad for its image, and the whole mystery thing is great also.   

[lolgato]

Its 100% bullshit hes just an attention seeking businessman.

[Luqman]

Nope, I think this issue has been cleared few days ago that proved Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto.. I think its not really important to know who is Satoshi Nakamoto, just my though indeed

[larem]

Without SOLID proofs (Ssatoshi's original keys, signed message from one of his oldest addresses etc.) I refuse to accept anyone who claims to be Satoshi.
Other evidence can be fabricated quite easy as we see in Wright case, example: entry of his blog supposedly dated 2009 was manipulated and added at later date.

I will repeat, I want to see a single incidence of Craig himself (OR ANYONE SO FAR) publically coming out after stories were released identifying them as Satoshi, and saying, "Yes, I am Satoshi.  It is me.  I admit it.".

Quit inferring that Craig/Satoshi is like touring the globe promoting himself as Satoshi.  So dishonest.  I think one of the biggest factors pointing to Craig = Satoshi, is the complete lying and manipulative pictures being painted.

Everytime I see people posting "Craig Wright keeps claiming he is Satoshi", it simply increases my belief it might be him.  I mean, why else would everyone have to resort to dramatic overexageration and lying - unless there was something more to the story. 

How's that old saying go.... "I think thee protests too much"

Totally agree with this.

IMO, it sounds more like he is a very early miner with potential development involvement, but I don't know if he is or is not Satoshi.  To me, the reason he could be is because he never publicly claimed to be.  Though, he still stands to gain a lot if he was outed, and my alternate opinion is that he is the 'hacker' that outed himself. 

If he were the real Satoshi, and wanted people to know, he'd have admitted it. If he weren't, he should do the right thing and admit that. Therefore, one way or another, he's still lying by omission.