Craig Wright relents aka Satoshi (air quotes) in Public Apology!

[jackg]

This seems odd.
Why would he attempt to do this and then back out quickly?
Hopefully he will change his mind or may be releasing information in stages.

I was wondering why he tried to destroy Bitcoin in its first few stages by accessing private keys,unless of course they were his own.

[1715241453]

1715241453

[1715241453]

1715241453

[1715241453]

1715241453

[1715241453]

1715241453

[sirazimuth]

so who remembers that game show "To Tell the Truth"?

My name is Satoshi Nakamoto and I created Bitcoin!....
My name is Satoshi Nakamoto and I created Bitcoin!....
My name is Satoshi Nakamoto and I created Bitcoin!....

LMFAO!!

[coins101]

come back satoshi. please. please.

it's already dull around here, based on the past few days events

[kn_b_y]

I guess I have a few theories on that, if he actually did have personal knowledge, but nobody here seems to believe anything I say so I'm not going to waste my time saying them    

Don't be so hard on yourself. I find your opinions much more stimulating than chopstick's.

I find it interesting that chopstick back-pedals from:

Am I completely off base here??

Yes, your whole post is delusionary speculative nonsense.

to:

Am I completely off base here??

You might be right about some things, but wrong about others.

Who knows, in the future he/she might even change it to:

Am I completely off base here??

I'm sorry. And goodbye.

[BitcoinPenny]

I hope he moves some coins anyway. Just to add to the drama!

LOL That would be awesome, wouldn't it?

Chris

[maokoto]

It is indeed very strange that he goes back so fast. It is for certain that this last message is by craight wright?

[virtualdn]

This makes me believe even more that he is not Satoshi.

[Jhanzo]

It is indeed very strange that he goes back so fast. It is for certain that this last message is by craight wright?

well, I certainly don't see him denying it. so yeah.

I was wondering why he tried to destroy Bitcoin in its first few stages by accessing private keys,unless of course they were his own.

can anyone elaborate on this? wtf does accessing private keys means?

[jackg]

It is indeed very strange that he goes back so fast. It is for certain that this last message is by craight wright?

well, I certainly don't see him denying it. so yeah.

I was wondering why he tried to destroy Bitcoin in its first few stages by accessing private keys,unless of course they were his own.

can anyone elaborate on this? wtf does accessing private keys means?

Private keys are what control accounts.

It is like a password for your bitcoin address. Still a similar style to a Bitcoin address but, with access to a private key, you can acces an account.

If he managed to "crack" the private key of other users, he would be capable of stealing their bitcoin untraceably and without their knowledge until they looked at their wallet to see that it was gone.

[Jhanzo]

It is indeed very strange that he goes back so fast. It is for certain that this last message is by craight wright?

well, I certainly don't see him denying it. so yeah.

I was wondering why he tried to destroy Bitcoin in its first few stages by accessing private keys,unless of course they were his own.

can anyone elaborate on this? wtf does accessing private keys means?

Private keys are what control accounts.

It is like a password for your bitcoin address. Still a similar style to a Bitcoin address but, with access to a private key, you can acces an account.

If he managed to "crack" the private key of other users, he would be capable of stealing their bitcoin untraceably and without their knowledge until they looked at their wallet to see that it was gone.

LMAO I thought you were talking about something that actually happened. never mind.

[kn_b_y]

apparently the email conversations Craig had with them were extremely convincing. That is something that is extremely difficult to fake - coming off as being the exact same person as they talked to 5 years ago, just as a general feeling.

I don't understand that part. The Satoshi era is before my time, but I have gone back and read some of his old posts here, and he came across to me as someone with a good command of the English language. Where-as Wright comes across as not very articulate in his blog. Does anyone else feel the same way?

I agree.

Satoshi's posts seem open and read clearly.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3;sa=showPosts

Craig Wright's site (https://web.archive.org/web/20160502203753/http://www.drcraigwright.net/posts/) didn't.

• Try getting a contextual menu, and you see a dialogue box with terse message reporting, 'Sorry, not sharing images!'
• All code snippets are published as images. Perhaps he doesn't like sharing his code easily either - or is he afraid of web-crawlers?
• Littered with tacky brochurish images of the man - betraying a narcissistic streak, perhaps.

I suppose these are all matters of taste. And will be excusable to some people.

What is not excusable is his plagiarism mentioned this week on this forum (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1457039.msg14734784#msg14734784).

See here:
https://medium.com/@jprichardson/did-satoshi-steal-my-blog-post-76a68cdda4f3#.t4h9a0m94

And compare:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160502203810/http://www.drcraigwright.net/generating-bitcoin-address/
(from CW's blog published a week or so ago)
and
http://procbits.com/2013/08/27/generating-a-bitcoin-address-with-javascript
(posted by developer JP Richardson nearly three years ago)

Some still say he's Satoshi. They also need to admit that the man is a rogue too.

[jackg]

It is indeed very strange that he goes back so fast. It is for certain that this last message is by craight wright?

well, I certainly don't see him denying it. so yeah.

I was wondering why he tried to destroy Bitcoin in its first few stages by accessing private keys,unless of course they were his own.

can anyone elaborate on this? wtf does accessing private keys means?

Private keys are what control accounts.

It is like a password for your bitcoin address. Still a similar style to a Bitcoin address but, with access to a private key, you can acces an account.

If he managed to "crack" the private key of other users, he would be capable of stealing their bitcoin untraceably and without their knowledge until they looked at their wallet to see that it was gone.

LMAO I thought you were talking about something that actually happened. never mind.

I kinda was

I believed that I could do this. I believed that I could put the years of anonymity and hiding behind me. But, as the events of this week unfolded and I prepared to publish the proof of access to the earliest keys, I broke. I do not have the courage. I cannot.

Breaking private keys or "cracking" them that I stated above is unlawful unless you can definiively prove that it is your own.
It means that he could potentially steal from people's wallets without their notice.

[Jhanzo]

I kinda was

I believed that I could do this. I believed that I could put the years of anonymity and hiding behind me. But, as the events of this week unfolded and I prepared to publish the proof of access to the earliest keys, I broke. I do not have the courage. I cannot.

Breaking private keys or "cracking" them that I stated above is unlawful unless you can definiively prove that it is your own.
It means that he could potentially steal from people's wallets without their notice.

I'm sure that's not what you think it means.
he's not saying he broke the keys. he's saying he hesitated and changed his mind. notice the comma in there?

[Kyt Dotson]

This burnout happened a lot faster than I expected. From stem to stern, it's only been about four days?

He put together an elaborate media affair designed to coincide with Consensus 2016, using NDAs for media outlets, Andresen and Matonis, to act as information embargoes. Posted a confusing revelation blog post that included a terrible tutorial on how to sign a message with a Bitcoin  block private key (in a post that at first seemed to imply he was going to reveal his ability to do so). He then promised to move coins...

Finally, he posts an angry apology citing that people have started rumors about him that are false -- and that some of them he has proven false (without citing which rumors or how he addressed them) -- and withdraws suddenly.

He did a lot of groundwork for such a rapid flameout.

[jackg]

I kinda was

I believed that I could do this. I believed that I could put the years of anonymity and hiding behind me. But, as the events of this week unfolded and I prepared to publish the proof of access to the earliest keys, I broke. I do not have the courage. I cannot.

Breaking private keys or "cracking" them that I stated above is unlawful unless you can definiively prove that it is your own.
It means that he could potentially steal from people's wallets without their notice.

I'm sure that's not what you think it means.
he's not saying he broke the keys. he's saying he hesitated and changed his mind. notice the comma in there?

But there is a full stop after it so that cannot be?
I feel that in this case, the comma was used to replace "that" so I assume that he did actually break the initial keys.
If he did there may be many purposes for this:
  • Securing the network further
  • Testing if he could break the
  • Trying to disrupt the network to see what it can handle
  • Forgetting the keys of his addresses that were not saved anywhere.
  • Or just trying to hack others' accounts (less likely probably)

[jackg]

This burnout happened a lot faster than I expected. From stem to stern, it's only been about four days?

He put together an elaborate media affair designed to coincide with Consensus 2016, using NDAs for media outlets, Andresen and Matonis, to act as information embargoes. Posted a confusing revelation blog post that included a terrible tutorial on how to sign a message with a Bitcoin  block private key (in a post that at first seemed to imply he was going to reveal his ability to do so). He then promised to move coins...

Finally, he posts an angry apology citing that people have started rumors about him that are false -- and that some of them he has proven false (without citing which rumors or how he addressed them) -- and withdraws suddenly.

He did a lot of groundwork for such a rapid flameout.

It is actually about 3 days! (even faster as information was released on 2nd and it is now the 5th)
It may have been a plan to get more people to use Bitcoin if they know more about it.
Also, his post in anger was clearly not in anger and was clearly well staged as it was split into four uniformed paragraphs of his fairly bleak website. Also, considering I found that he posts this less than 6 months since his house and business preesis was raided for (tax checks), how well it coincided with a paper that was released by two private investigators who traced the Bitcoin network back to him.

[coins101]

I don't care what you all say....he is Satoshi.

[Syke]

If I were the real Satoshi Nakamoto and I wanted to come forward, would I want to enter such a hostile place? Yes, Craig brought this on himself, with the piss poor attempt at fooling the community with the

" so called " proof he brought to identify himself, but it still a aggressive attitude towards someone who might have been Satoshi.

There was never any "might have been Satoshi". It was an aggressive attitude towards an obvious scam/fraud attempt. I for one am proud of the community in such hostility. WTG Team Bitcoin.

Whoever can sign a genesis-block message will get huge support from the community. It's that simple.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Man this whole thing is just bizarrely bizarre.   There's no other way to say it.  I am disappointed that satoshi was not outed but I still have hope.

[Alley]

Amazing to me how unresponsable these media outlets are.  Zero fact checking.   They all just want to be the first to report satoshi is found without even checking to see if it's true.