GAVIN: "I believe Craig Steven Wright is the person who invented Bitcoin"

[franky1]

What I don't get is the USB is carried to London but what is on it is kept a secret from all but a few? Why not just PUBLICLY show us all? What kind of proof is showing someone then saying "Go ask him, he knows".

Come on Craig, show me the bitcoin!

there was no USB stick.. only bribes

the USB stick and laptop snatched away seconds later is the ploy to now backtrack and make people like matonis and gavin look like victims of deception because they could not really double check what they seen on a (pretend) screen.

inshort they were bribed to create a media storm.. im guessing Wright has a court case and wants to submit media stories as evidence tomorrow. and so in a few days it wont matter that gavin back tracks.. by saying there is a chance the story is false as he could not double check it

[mayax]

Gavin has responded on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4hfyyo/gavin_can_you_please_detail_all_parts_of_the/d2plygg

Craig signed a message that I chose ("Gavin's favorite number is eleven. CSW" if I recall correctly) using the private key from block number 1.

That signature was copied on to a clean usb stick I brought with me to London, and then validated on a brand-new laptop with a freshly downloaded copy of electrum.

I was not allowed to keep the message or laptop (fear it would leak before Official Announcement).

I don't have an explanation for the funky OpenSSL procedure in his blog post.

this sounds like the stupidest thing to me.
we are talking about bitcoin here so all those news sites that are spreading this news should start with a signed message from the known satoshi bitcoin addresses or keys.

hiding it and not publishing the singed message publicly sounds to me like a shady thing.

The entire BTC is shady. the black market who is 90% from BTC, to miners and exchangers. almost everything is shady when it's about Bitcoin

[Denker]

Sorry but Gavin's story smells extremely fishy.
It makes absolutely no sense.
So now where Wright revealed himself a second time as Satoshi it shouldn't be any problem to prove to all of us IN PUBLIC!!
I say this is bs and just another attempt to screw the community.

[franky1]

The entire BTC is shady. the black market who is 90% from BTC, to miners and exchangers. almost everything is shady when it's about Bitcoin

lol yet over 200,000 legitimate business accept bitcoin.

you might aswell call FIAT shady because of the street drug deals in detroit and the prostitution on the red-light district. along with all the fiat money laundering in HSBC bank. aswell as the bribes and blackmails of government officials. not only that but the banker bailouts and banker bonuses while simultaneously making millions of people homeless

[jmpFCE2]

the amount of attention this "news" gets in the MSM makes this stink some more

[maokoto]

Maybe fud spread to stop bitcoin price from raising more. I think last one was Hearn leaving when price was also high.

[alyssa85]

What I don't get is the USB is carried to London but what is on it is kept a secret from all but a few? Why not just PUBLICLY show us all? What kind of proof is showing someone then saying "Go ask him, he knows".

Come on Craig, show me the bitcoin!

there was no USB stick.. only bribes

the USB stick and laptop snatched away seconds later is the ploy to now backtrack and make people like matonis and gavin look like victims of deception because they could not really double check what they seen on a (pretend) screen.

inshort they were bribed to create a media storm.. im guessing Wright has a court case and wants to submit media stories as evidence tomorrow. and so in a few days it wont matter that gavin back tracks.. by saying there is a chance the story is false as he could not double check it

Do media stories count as "evidence" in any court?

If, and it is a big IF, this thing is real, then he has done it because he wants to signal that he is about to sell his coins to pay his debts/taxes or whatever. Just moving them would be a complete shock, announcing and then moving not so much - presumably if he wants to sell he cares about not tanking the price before he has off-loaded them.

[RodeoX]

The entire BTC is shady. the black market who is 90% from BTC, to miners and exchangers. almost everything is shady when it's about Bitcoin

lol yet over 200,000 legitimate business accept bitcoin.

you might aswell call FIAT shady because of the street drug deals in detroit and the prostitution on the red-light district. along with all the fiat money laundering in HSBC bank. aswell as the bribes and blackmails of government officials. not only that but the banker bailouts and banker bonuses while simultaneously making millions of people homeless

Maymax is trolling and spamming, just disregard him he is obviously trying to spread FUD.

You can always tell it's BS when someone is confidently claiming something that simply can not be determined. But hey, his FUD has probably made us all a little money if causes anyone to panic sell. So... You go girl.

[OROBTC]

...

This will be fascinating to see if the price of BTC changes much in the coming days should Wright turn out to be real (or not). 

At this point the technology seems to be near-bulletproof, so that should mean that the programming side of Bitcoin remains intact.  This may be a classic case of "BTFD".

[franky1]

Do media stories count as "evidence" in any court?

If, and it is a big IF, this thing is real, then he has done it because he wants to signal that he is about to sell his coins to pay his debts/taxes or whatever. Just moving them would be a complete shock, announcing and then moving not so much - presumably if he wants to sell he cares about not tanking the price before he has off-loaded them.

he has no coins.

the 2009 stash is not his

relax..

and by the way in court all you need to do is provide "reasonable doubt" to not be found guilty. there are a multitude of ways to do it. but showing 20 media outlets publish the story. is sometimes the same as using a police officer as a witness.. yea they can lie but its the reputation of the 'witness' that ends up meaning more then the actual evidence provided.

in the UK many many legal investigations and internal political and criminal reports have been made purely on the bases of media stories used as sources..

[The Sceptical Chymist]

The Bitcoin era as it is, it will be ended very soon. The myth disappeared. BTC is like any shitcoin

Yeah yeah any day now.  People have been predicting the end of the world since the beginning of people. And it hasn't happened yet.

[alyssa85]

Do media stories count as "evidence" in any court?

If, and it is a big IF, this thing is real, then he has done it because he wants to signal that he is about to sell his coins to pay his debts/taxes or whatever. Just moving them would be a complete shock, announcing and then moving not so much - presumably if he wants to sell he cares about not tanking the price before he has off-loaded them.

he has no coins.

the 2009 stash is not his

relax..

and by the way in court all you need to do is provide "reasonable doubt" to not be found guilty. there are a multitude of ways to do it. but showing 20 media outlets publish the story. is sometimes the same as using a police officer as a witness.. yea they can lie but its the reputation of the 'witness' that ends up meaning more then the actual evidence provided.

No court worth their salt would use media reports. They would need Gavin to take the stand to accept his opinion.

in the UK many many legal investigations and internal political and criminal reports have been made purely on the bases of media stories used as sources..

Evidence? I can't think of a single case where a news report was held up in court as evidence. Usually you need something else - testimony under oath, DNA stuff, access to actual paper files or electronic files. There has never been a single case where they have said "Your honour, it is in the newspapers and therefore it is true".

All the judge has to do in this case is order Craig Wright to move his coins to a court escrow address to prove he owns them. If he can't, he doesn't own them. Therefore the only reason I can think of for this circus is that he is intending to actually sell the coins.

[gentlemand]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4hfyyo/gavin_can_you_please_detail_all_parts_of_the/d2pplgm

'Craig: Hi lol
Gavin: Who r u?
Craig: I'm Satoshi.
Gavin: Ok, sign this with the privkey to the coinbase in the genesis block: "I, Craig Steven Wright, am Satoshi Nakamoto. 15 April 2016."
Craig: Nah, why don't I fly you to London and I'll show you.
Gavin: Sounds great! I love London!
Craig: lol
Gavin: lol'

[akumaburn]

This is ridiculous. If I wanted to write a primer on how NOT to unambiguously prove you are Satoshi, in a way causing maximum confusion, this would be it.

Either Craig is able to publish a digital signature of the Genesis block or Block 9 or whatever for EVERYONE to see, or this is another scam. Asking us to rely on trusting a 3rd party (Gavin, etc.) is PRECISELY what bitcoin was designed not to be.

Never underestimate the ability of scammers to provide seeming "proofs" that are invalid. It is perfectly reasonable to ask for published signatures for all to see, and excuses about "being difficult" (in Wright's blog post) don't cut it.

Bingo.

Bitcoin was designed from the ground up to be resistant to manipulation from singular sources.

[futureofbitcoin]

I don't believe this Craig guy, but at the same time I highly doubt Gavin can be bribed like this. I don't think Gavin needs money that badly.

[ebliever]

...

This will be fascinating to see if the price of BTC changes much in the coming days should Wright turn out to be real (or not). 

At this point the technology seems to be near-bulletproof, so that should mean that the programming side of Bitcoin remains intact.  This may be a classic case of "BTFD".

BTC price dropped slightly on this news, but then steadied itself. To be honest I would have expected a bigger reaction. Volume is heavy, but apparently enough people figured out the announcement was hogwash that they rushed to buy and stabilized the price pretty quickly, while getting coins at a slight discount.

My impression from past media frenzies is that Wright's bogus claim will put bitcoin in the news again in a big way for a couple days. And that will be good for the price, as it will lead to increased curiousity and people checking back into it, or checking into it for the first time. Even people who already hold bitcoin will have a slight tendency to buy more simply because it is on their mind more with this media covereage. Unless intensely negative, media coverage will be a good thing for the price in the long run.

[albert11]

GAVIN IS COMPROMISED EXACTLY LIKE THE BBC PROPAGANDA BULLSHIT CHANNEL.


I suggest core don't get too distracted by this, there is an ongoing effort to make bitcoin centralized and it is becoming more and more obvious.

[chek2fire]

Craig: Hi lol
Gavin: Who r u?
Craig: I'm Satoshi.
Gavin: Ok, sign this with the privkey to the coinbase in the genesis block: "I, Craig Steven Wright, am Satoshi Nakamoto. 15 April 2016."
Craig: Nah, why don't I fly you to London and I'll show you.
Gavin: Sounds great! I love London!
Craig: lol
Gavin: lol

[Wewillallbeforgotten]

Do media stories count as "evidence" in any court?

If, and it is a big IF, this thing is real, then he has done it because he wants to signal that he is about to sell his coins to pay his debts/taxes or whatever. Just moving them would be a complete shock, announcing and then moving not so much - presumably if he wants to sell he cares about not tanking the price before he has off-loaded them.

he has no coins.

the 2009 stash is not his

relax..

and by the way in court all you need to do is provide "reasonable doubt" to not be found guilty. there are a multitude of ways to do it. but showing 20 media outlets publish the story. is sometimes the same as using a police officer as a witness.. yea they can lie but its the reputation of the 'witness' that ends up meaning more then the actual evidence provided.

No court worth their salt would use media reports. They would need Gavin to take the stand to accept his opinion.

in the UK many many legal investigations and internal political and criminal reports have been made purely on the bases of media stories used as sources..

Evidence? I can't think of a single case where a news report was held up in court as evidence. Usually you need something else - testimony under oath, DNA stuff, access to actual paper files or electronic files. There has never been a single case where they have said "Your honour, it is in the newspapers and therefore it is true".

All the judge has to do in this case is order Craig Wright to move his coins to a court escrow address to prove he owns them. If he can't, he doesn't own them. Therefore the only reason I can think of for this circus is that he is intending to actually sell the coins.

yea after the afp raided him for his tax issues not long after he was first speculated to be Satoshi they came out and said they firmly believe theres no chance he's Satoshi and probably planted the evidence to distract from his court case so unless there is evidence they can verify then they will be fully aware that hes just trying to do it again

[franky1]

No court worth their salt would use media reports. They would need Gavin to take the stand to accept his opinion.

posts even onsocial media have been used in court cases as evidence
https://smiaware.com/legal/is-social-media-evidence-admissible-in-court/


american law allows it, if the newspaper is deemed reputable:

Federal Rule of Evidence 803(24), the "residual” or "catch-all" exception to the hearsay rule, provides a mechanism by which they may sometimes
be admitted.
  The section reads, in pertinent part, as
follows:
           The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule,
       even though the declarant is available as a witness:
       ....
           (24) Other exceptions.  A statement not specifically
       covered by any of the foregoing exceptions but having
       equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness,
       if the court determines that (A) the statement is offered
-2-
as evidence of a material fact; (B) the statement is
more probative on the point for which it is offered than
any other evidence which the proponent can procure
through reasonable efforts; and (C) the general purposes
of these rules and the interests of justice will best be
served by admission of the statement into evidence.