Craig Wright Gavin Andresen = PLOT

[futureofbitcoin]

You know what I think?

It's a lot more likely that this is a plot by Anti-Gavin and possibly anti-bigger blocks people than it is a plot by Gavin.

Just think about it, Gavin isn't stupid enough to think he can fool all of the other crypto experts. And why would he put his whole reputation on the line? There must've been other things he would've done.


On the other hand, if this was a plot by the anti-Gavin faction, it actually makes sense.

1. If Gavin realized the "tricks" Craig used (we're assuming Craig is a fake here), nothing would happen. No one would care. He would just be seen as a fake, no one takes any reputation hit.

2. Gavin took the bait, and now he makes a fool of himself, ruining his reputation.

See, in any scenario, the anti-Gavin faction can't lose.



(for the record I think it's just an elaborate hoax by craig, I don't think (at least I hope) there aren't malicious manipulators behind this. But the Gavin accusations are just ridiculous, in my opinion)

[TierNolan]

No he couldn't-- the comment betrays a misunderstanding of how Bitcoin and open source development works.  "Lead dev" is not a position of authority, and if he wanted to push in a direction the contributors didn't agree with, he'd find himself where he is now, regardless of what happened there...

I don't think opposition to big blocks would be unanimous and the lead dev gets to break a tie-break.

If his decision was bad enough, then the devs who disagreed with him could fork the client.

The miners seem to be taking a policy that they want to stay with core.  I think this is to a combination of encouraging stability and confidence in the technical expertise of the core team.

This gives the core team significant power in practice, since a fork has to convince the miners that they should be considered the main development team.

Gavin certainly has less power now than he would have if he was lead dev.  If he wants to be able to influence Bitcoin, then giving up that position was a poor move (purely from a strategic point).

[rektDude]

Why would he come with this information right now this time besides everyone who has the coins
has them for years.
Why does he want the credits to be the owner of it

[yayayo]

also craig wright and gavin andresen just lost all of their credibility forever

Absolutely. You have to consider the fact that this "news" was released during a conference where Gavin was advertising his big-block altcoin scheme. It is clearly thinkable that he wanted to improve his negotiating position by sacking in the merits of having participated in the "discovery" of Satoshi.

Luckily that backfired. Hopefully his commit access to Bitcoin Core will never be restored.

Also one has to ask, if Gavin was willing to sign an NDA in this case, what other NDA's he may have signed...

ya.ya.yo!

[NordicRanger]

I saw this guy yesterday on the news and he was claiming that he is the inventor of the Bitcoin. It is hard to belive because why does he suddenly come out out of nowhere.
It does not matter to me that much if he is the inventor good for him.

[yayayo]

also craig wright and gavin andresen just lost all of their credibility forever

Absolutely. You have to consider the fact that this "news" was released during a conference where Gavin was advertising his big-block altcoin scheme. It is clearly thinkable that he wanted to improve his negotiating position by sacking in the merits of having participated in the "discovery" of Satoshi.

Luckily that backfired. Hopefully his commit access to Bitcoin Core will never be restored.

Also one has to ask, if Gavin was willing to sign an NDA in this case, what other NDA's he may have signed...

ya.ya.yo!

Eh it might be restored, I think there will be debate but definitely there is much less trust. Gavin was never really trustworthy in the first place, wasn't he the reason Satoshi went into hiding? Trying to get him to meet the CIA with him?

I agree. I lost my trust in Gavin a long time ago, after he announced meeting the CIA and shortly after releasing his plans for The Bitcoin Foundation (maybe even the result of his engagement with the CIA). I'm now pretty sure that Gavin was/is influenced by governmental organizations to push an agenda for Bitcoin that allows them to control nodes and transaction flow.

Luckily that has failed until now, thanks to the more ethical Core developers. Btw. Gavin is the only developer (apart from his more extreme rage-quitting fellow Mike Hearn) that constantly tried to extent his power over Core development by introducing himself as the chosen one true Satoshi disciple via frequent media appearances, while other developers had more than equal eligibility to do so, but did not.

ya.ya.yo!

[Cuidler]

Gavin certainly has less power now than he would have if he was lead dev.  If he wants to be able to influence Bitcoin, then giving up that position was a poor move (purely from a strategic point).

Many who just keep telling "Gavin want take more power" forgot the reality he is the one who gave his power to others voluntarily. So he is very unlikely to want more power, he just have such mentality to try explain his views publictly in his blogs etc., and even helping to create Bitcoin clients incorporating his views - nothing wrong with that at all.

[chopstick]

also craig wright and gavin andresen just lost all of their credibility forever

Absolutely. You have to consider the fact that this "news" was released during a conference where Gavin was advertising his big-block altcoin scheme. It is clearly thinkable that he wanted to improve his negotiating position by sacking in the merits of having participated in the "discovery" of Satoshi.

Luckily that backfired. Hopefully his commit access to Bitcoin Core will never be restored.

Also one has to ask, if Gavin was willing to sign an NDA in this case, what other NDA's he may have signed...

ya.ya.yo!

Eh it might be restored, I think there will be debate but definitely there is much less trust. Gavin was never really trustworthy in the first place, wasn't he the reason Satoshi went into hiding? Trying to get him to meet the CIA with him?

I agree. I lost my trust in Gavin a long time ago, after he announced meeting the CIA and shortly after releasing his plans for The Bitcoin Foundation (maybe even the result of his engagement with the CIA). I'm now pretty sure that Gavin was/is influenced by governmental organizations to push an agenda for Bitcoin that allows them to control nodes and transaction flow.

Luckily that has failed until now, thanks to the more ethical Core developers. Btw. Gavin is the only developer (apart from his more extreme rage-quitting fellow Mike Hearn) that constantly tried to extent his power over Core development by introducing himself as the chosen one true Satoshi disciple via frequent media appearances, while other developers had more than equal eligibility to do so, but did not.

ya.ya.yo!

You are clearly delusional.

The GavinworksforCIA conspiracy theories are worse than flatearthers. It doesn't hold up to logic in the slightest.

Are you getting paid to spout this drivel?

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

Gavin has been very badly used, and continues to be used.  I wonder how he'll avenge himself. 

So was Matonis, but I think he's a lawyer (?), so nobody cares.

This guy Wright is sliding down the sociopath spectrum in the wrong direction. 

[Bought]

I dont think there was any plot here, i think this is just a case of gaving being easily misled which is not very good either. He of all people should be aware of things like this happening . I do also wonder if Craig wright did actually know the real satoshi.

[doublemore]

For those of you who are struggling with BBC player check out gavin interview on youtube, he is convinced:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1f5Ms5heMM

[yayayo]

You are clearly delusional.

The GavinworksforCIA conspiracy theories are worse than flatearthers. It doesn't hold up to logic in the slightest.

Are you getting paid to spout this drivel?

I'm not delusional at all. Gavin visited the CIA. That's a fact. Announcing it openly is not making it any better, because the meeting itself was not open to the public. All we "know" about the meeting, is what Gavin told us. And apparently Gavin has no problem with signing NDAs, when he expects personal advantages from it.

Ask yourself: Would Satoshi have visited the CIA on invitation? No! In fact, he disappeared the moment Gavin shook hands with the agency.

Speaking about conspiracy theories: Never heard about the Snowden revelations? The government spies on and tries to manipulate people anytime when it sees the necessity. And Bitcoin certainly is a threat to the established order...

ya.ya.yo!

[AGD]

You are clearly delusional.

The GavinworksforCIA conspiracy theories are worse than flatearthers. It doesn't hold up to logic in the slightest.

Are you getting paid to spout this drivel?

I'm not delusional at all. Gavin visited the CIA. That's a fact. Announcing it openly is not making it any better, because the meeting itself was not open to the public. All we "know" about the meeting, is what Gavin told us. And apparently Gavin has no problem with signing NDAs, when he expects personal advantages from it.

Ask yourself: Would Satoshi have visited the CIA on invitation? No! In fact, he disappeared the moment Gavin shook hands with the agency.

Speaking about conspiracy theories: Never heard about the Snowden revelations? The government spies on and tries to manipulate people anytime when it sees the necessity. And Bitcoin certainly is a threat to the established order...

ya.ya.yo!

Agree. At one point (Wikileaks/Manning) Bitcoin must have been classified a national security thing. This changes a lot and opens up a big budget.
Also 1 Billion Dollar in Bitcoin can be a motive for some to commit murder. If somebody knew Kleiman was Satoshi, he could have come up with this idea.