Definitive PROOF that Satoshi Nakamoto is about to be exposed because ...

[BitcoinHodler]

you what's funny? the fact that he says i don't want the publicity, the news sites say we don't print something we are not sure about, they claim to only say the truth, and all kinds of bullshit but they keep talking about a fraud.

signing a message with a known key is simple yet fool proof. and after all this time we have not seen any proof.

i say we shouldn't feed the trolls, the fraud, and the clickbait articles of news sites unless the next article they write contains the signed message,

[1713552453]

1713552453

[1713552453]

1713552453

[1713552453]

1713552453

[1713552453]

1713552453

[1713552453]

1713552453

[traincarswreck]

signing a message with a known key is simple yet fool proof. and after all this time we have not seen any proof.

Its absolutely not fool proof you fool.

[BitcoinHodler]

signing a message with a known key is simple yet fool proof. and after all this time we have not seen any proof.

Its absolutely not fool proof you fool.

he claims he is satoshi, or at the very least he is threatening to move satoshi coins which means having access to the keys.

so can you explain to fools like me how signing the following message from a known satoshi keys is not proof, o wise one!

Hi this is Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of bitcoin signing a message to prove my identity on 2017-1-28

[traincarswreck]

signing a message with a known key is simple yet fool proof. and after all this time we have not seen any proof.

Its absolutely not fool proof you fool.

he claims he is satoshi, or at the very least he is threatening to move satoshi coins which means having access to the keys.

so can you explain to fools like me how signing the following message from a known satoshi keys is not proof, o wise one!

Hi this is Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of bitcoin signing a message to prove my identity on 2017-1-28

you are obviously too stupid to understand.  trust me, it proves nothing to that regard.

[Darker45]

I thought old people here already knows who Nakamoto is? Heard some and a guy who said he already knows but won't share. 

[20kevin20]

It'd be a sham, in my opinion, if Coindesk is the developer of Bitcoin. I wanted to create a wallet there and you have to input your legal name. I want to be anonymous, not a public Bitcoin user, you know.. these rumors also don't have any real proof though.

[franky1]

It'd be a sham, in my opinion, if Coindesk is the developer of Bitcoin. I wanted to create a wallet there and you have to input your legal name. I want to be anonymous, not a public Bitcoin user, you know.. these rumors also don't have any real proof though.

coindesk is not the developer of bitcoin.. coindesk is just trying clickbait motives to start some distraction techniques to get people involved in kardasian-esq social drama to not be talking about the real roundtable discussions about real code/bitcoin issues.

in short.. real world comparison.
its like if fox news was talking about some celebrity drama.. change the channel immediatly and instead find out what new laws are trying to be passed through the senate secretly. dont waste months discussing the social drama of celebrities on the news... its all a distraction

[OneUnderBridge]

have a couple high-paid competent dudes in the space do his bidding,

jon matonis - coindesk contributor

gavin andresen, working on Bloq... Bloq funded by........ barry silbert.

-plausible theory-
im 90% sure adam backs name would be mentioned in the who is satoshi drama

it seems reasonable to assume
if only people didnt pick up on the fake sig so fast last year, we would have had the faker craig then proclaim how adam back was cough*his*cough inspiration and the 3rd musketeer.. but it had to be put back for a few months to let the dust settle. mainly because craig got outed as a fraud..

but also segwit couldnt be released in mid 2016 so the code was still resembling the real satoshi's original variables and format. but now segwit is out,(though not activated) would show it to be the complete rewrite of code in adam backs favour to now be an adam back construct.
completely different to satoshis original code. eg MAXBLOCKSIZE BASE and WEIGHT

as a way to try proclaiming bitcoin requires segwit or it isnt bitcoin, ... if this whole drama ends up as having adam back mentioned as a third musketeer.

ofcourse, adam back didnt offer any code between 2008-2013 and even though the reality is that bitcoin has not had segwit for the last 7 years so segwit or its variables/concepts is not bitcoin.. i can see core devs are desperate to retain their corporate grip on bitcoin, so its all plausible

Hal Finney's children might have an interest in the claim? Maybe? I cannot fathom Hal Finney not being credited as one of the "musketeers."

[franky1]

Hal Finney's children might have an interest in the claim? Maybe? I cannot fathom Hal Finney not being credited as one of the "musketeers."

hal finney was hal finney..

hal finney was not satoshi.

but yes many people did help or atleast inspire satoshi to do what he did. but none of those names are satoshi

yes hal finney helped alot and many people hold hals involvement to high regard. i rate hal far higher then i would rate adamback for instance.

[Kprawn]

How in the fuck, is it that CRAIG is satoshi when the claim is that multiple people did the whitepaper?

'Who is Satoshi?' story once again relate to the controversial Australian academic and entrepreneur Craig Wright, who last May claimed that he – and as many as four others – contributed to the white paper credited to bitcoin's pseudonymous inventor.

How am I the only person to see how fake that is?

If you are, start a thread stating your claim but don't let RawDog know about its existence, else he'll bug out his eyeballs while putting you on your paper.

Don't let the master Troll, RawDog get you side tracked, he does that to everyone.  .... This will once again turn into a media

circus for someone, like we have seen with Dorian Nakamoto. Why will they not accept the fact that ALL of us is Satoshi Nakamoto.

CW cannot move any "Satoshi" coins, so he is not Satoshi Nakamoto.... PERIOD. 

[traincarswreck]

CW cannot move any "Satoshi" coins, so he is not Satoshi Nakamoto.... PERIOD. 

To everyone else here who isn't an idiot, this is not how logic works.

[iGotSpots]

Does it really matter who she is and does anyone REALLY care anymore?

[OneUnderBridge]

CW cannot move any "Satoshi" coins, so he is not Satoshi Nakamoto.... PERIOD.  

To everyone else here who isn't an idiot, this is not how logic works.

If CW could move "Satoshi" coins, would that be enough? It seems that all he would need is the actual coins to gain the profits he is seeking. What more could receiving the credit for the technology do for him?  After all, bitcoin is much larger than the name of the person who launched it. Right? Does it matter who Homer is when considering the Illiad or the Oddesey. Would those books be better if we knew more about Homer's identity?  Not so much.  Who ever moves the "Satoshi" coins gets the bigger prize in this case--it seems to me at least.

[Gleb Gamow]

CW cannot move any "Satoshi" coins, so he is not Satoshi Nakamoto.... PERIOD.  

To everyone else here who isn't an idiot, this is not how logic works.

If CW could move "Satoshi" coins, would that be enough? It seems that all he would need is the actual coins to gain the profits he is seeking. What more could receiving the credit for the technology do for him. After all, bitcoin is much larger than the name of the person who launched it. Right? Does it matter who Homer is when considering the Illiad or the Oddesey. Would those books be better if we knew more about Homer's identity?  Not so much.  Who ever moves the "Satoshi" coins gets the bigger prize in this case--it seems to me at least.

The chronological period of Homer depends on the meaning to be assigned to the word "Homer". Was Homer a single person, an imaginary person representing a group of poets, or the imaginary author of a traditional body of oral myths? If the works attributed either wholly or partially to a blind poet named Homer, were really authored by such a person, then he must have had biographical dates, or a century or other historical period, which can be described as "the life and times of Homer".

Australian flim-flam man: I am homer.
Millions of naysayers: Prove it!
Australian flim-flam man: No prob! I'm meeting a man who knows his shit at my office atop a high-rise building.
Gavin Andresen: I have met The Man, and after hearing him recite the epic poem Casey at the Bat, I'm totally convinced that he's Homer.
G.A.'s peers: Excuse me, but that epic poem is not an epic Greek poem.
Gavin Andresen: Wait, what? But he even showed me documents proving that Casey at the Bat was originally published by some anonymous dude under the pen name "Phin" (short for "Phinney"), claiming that was one of Homer's blind sockpuppets.

<months later>

Attendee at Homer's Roundtable: This is epic! The Australian flim-flam man is about to once again prove that he's Homer. Who here has Bitcoin Magazine on speed dial so that we can relay the news? And somebody order some more Romulan Ale, for my cup runneth empty.

<a couple days later>

Epic Bitcointalk thread created:

Homer's at it again.
Lies.
Such wow.
No, lies.
No, such wow.
Let's talk about supporting different scaling solutions.
Cartoon time.
Pissing match ensues.
You have a filthy dick.
I'll suck your clean dick.
You're a flaming fag.
Yes, I do smoke.
New thread created.
Why you start a new thread?
Need more cow bells.
The misspelling of Iliad and Odyssey are introduced to throw off the scent.
Meanwhile, a portrait of Andrew Jackson is hung in the Oval Office where President Trump is playing with some red buttons, musing 'bout what would happen if he inadvertently pushed one.

[OneUnderBridge]

You are too good.  And, poetic and funny and what are you trying to say anyway?  CW is in control of the narrative here, make no mistake.

[franky1]

Attendee at Homer's Roundtable: This is epic! The Australian flim-flam man is about to once again prove that he's Homer. Who here has Bitcoin Magazine on speed dial so that we can relay the news?

replace to

Attendee at Homer's Roundtable: we are going to further bastardise homers poetry some more, but we need a distraction 'hey our investor coindesk can you start a rumour about some social nonsense..' maybe even something about homer or The Australian flim-flam man so no one asks about what we are destroying. becasue they will be too busy talking about homers flim flam alter ego

[Gleb Gamow]

Attendee at Homer's Roundtable: This is epic! The Australian flim-flam man is about to once again prove that he's Homer. Who here has Bitcoin Magazine on speed dial so that we can relay the news?

replace to

Attendee at Homer's Roundtable: we are going to further bastardise homers poetry some more, but we need a distraction 'hey our investor coindesk can you start a rumour about some social nonsense..' maybe even something about homer or The Australian flim-flam man so no one asks about what we are destroying. becasue they will be too busy talking about homers flim flam alter ego

Quit alluding to what I'm alluding to. We must thread lightly with these here readers, else ...

[BitcoinUKmedia]

Does it really matter who she is and does anyone REALLY care anymore?

I agree - It's not important - so many wonderful startups are carrying on the story - developing some really cool tech off the back of blockchain, it would be better to champion them imo

[LeGaulois]

About the quote talking about the  Satoshi Roundtable conference...

I saw this week in title something like "Satoshi Roundtable conference Bildeberg...". At first before clicking on it I thought it was a clickbait , then I started to read the article. Seen the introduction I thought that it was just a joke first. Then continue reading I thought it's a satirical article. But look like not. I have not finished to read this article and not searched more about this group meeting. I never heard about this but I think it's going to against the ideology of the bitcoin. I find it funny if we have a "Bildeberg bitcoin group" or not so much

[franky1]

About the quote talking about the  Satoshi Roundtable conference...

yep many of the devs are dropping their ethical code hats and instead reaching for their richboy club jackets.
it all started changing in 2013-2014.
less actual code rules to protect bitcoin but more features to cause economic utility to degrade under the guise of security and utility, purely to sway the argument that bitcoin cant grow.. while strangely suggesting that a sidechain alt can grow.

EG - explaining like your 5
billy bitcoin cant drive down the his own street because road developers have been speaking with officials and have put a 10mph speed limit on the billy's road. and smeared frightening posters on the street to scare people into thinking that car crashes will happen if billy and his neighbours sped up even at a safe small speed increase.

but the road developers built a second road, exactly the same that allows sammy sidechain and people who pay a fee, can drive as fast as they like on this other road.
same tarmac. same twists and turns in the streets. but higher speed limits.

so while sammy sidechain and neighbours use their road. the road developers want to inform billy bitcoin that all residents should not ask other road developers increase the speed limit. but instead to move people out the street and into the leased accommodation of sammy sidechains street.

the other option is to get billy bitcoins street residents to put their children into foster care where the parents can only see the kids once a month, blaming the need of a speed limit on the children

yet sammy sidechain street, exactly same as billy bitcoin street becomes the main route through town and the children can play in the road because there is no actual issues with the roads.

soon enough sammy sidechain starts charging people to return/visit billy bitcoin street, making it cost money to use billy bitcoin street. so that the value of property declines on billy bitcoin street and gains value on sammy sidechain street. even though the properties were like-for-like in the beginning.

now people in billy bitcoin street want to move out to where the higher value property can be sold. and so they move into sammy sidechain street.
exchanging their 1 bitcoin bedroom property for a 1sidechain bedroom property. which gives them more value.

no way would they dare return to billy bitcoin street now. and billy bitcoin street becomes a derelict wasteland

^
wrote as if the reader was 5, to show the future intentions of these corporate paid devs