Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[whoreble]

No matter how much proof Satoshi gives you guys, you'll still nitpick and find fault. No wonder he withdrew from this poisonous community.

[1715259314]

1715259314

[Syke]

No matter how much proof Satoshi gives you guys, you'll still nitpick and find fault. No wonder he withdrew from this poisonous community.

No, the proof is trivial, but has not been posted. Sign a message with the genesis block key and post it for us all to verify. Anything less is simply a scam.

[beastmodeBiscuitGravy]

Just when this moon rocket had liftoff too... sigh

So much anxiety, followed by pain, in this coin.

[thefunkybits]

No matter how much proof Satoshi gives you guys, you'll still nitpick and find fault. No wonder he withdrew from this poisonous community.

No, the proof is trivial, but has not been posted. Sign a message with the genesis block key and post it for us all to verify. Anything less is simply a scam.

Yup. This.

I'm expecting everything to be back to normal in 24 hours...

[anil1]

Is that one person can destroy the system bitcoin? 
Or, the strength of Bitcoin lies in who uses it? 
What is the element that has the most influence on the price of Bitcoin? 

[coinpr0n]

No matter how much proof Satoshi gives you guys, you'll still nitpick and find fault. No wonder he withdrew from this poisonous community.

Yeah, basically no amount of proof will ever be enough. But you must provide at least some proof for someone to be considered a candidate. We haven't seen any yet. We're told that he seems to control at least 1 (one) private key directly associated to Satoshi. But even this doesn't discard a real Satoshi having handed these keys to CW for whatever reason (eg. money). In fact, if I were Satoshi, I would have probably done something just like that a long time ago.

[whoreble]

No matter how much proof Satoshi gives you guys, you'll still nitpick and find fault. No wonder he withdrew from this poisonous community.

No, the proof is trivial, but has not been posted. Sign a message with the genesis block key and post it for us all to verify. Anything less is simply a scam.

There are many reasons he may not want to post proof for you to verify, not the least of which is you constantly moving the goal posts. He has provided proof to the most respected leaders of bitcoin:

<...> And even though Dr. Wright, inventor of Bitcoin, has conclusively proven he is the real Satoshi Nakomoto to Dr. Gavin Andresen, Chief Scientist of the Bitcoin Foundation AND to Mr. Jon Matonis, @jonmatonis, Founding Director at Bitcoin Foundation, CEO of Hushmail, Columnist at Forbes, Chief Forex Dealer at VISA, Economist, you stubbornly refuse to accept the truth?
Do you really expect the three most important people in Bitcoin (two of them Doctors) to drop the important projects they're working on to humor every Tom Dick and Harry with an ax to grind?
Get real.

How about showing some respect for Dr. Wright's privacy?  

[Blacula X]

...
Someone who built a currency out of a mistrust of the government puts all of his bitcoins (which are not secure unless you own the keys) in the hands of a trust which is enforceable by government.

I'm a little disappointed also. Not at all what I expected.

[JayJuanGee]

They don't make Chief Scientists like they used to?

I still think that he is the most competent of the bitcoin Core developers. 

How are you defining competence?  good looks and presentation skills or actual contributions made to core?

From my understanding, Gavin's quantity of contributions in coding (which is supposedly part of what he is supposed to specialize in) has been quite low and quite old.  In that sense, he had not been contributing in recent years and really engaging on that kind of a level - except to propose hardforks and changes in governance, no?

[finkelsteinMonster]

Gavin's quantity of contributions in coding (which is supposedly part of what he is supposed to specialize in) has been quite low and quite old. 

Any place I can check out your code, JJG? Involved in some fun projects, were you?

[JayJuanGee]

why would someone claim to be satoshi fully knowing he won't be able to prove it when the time comes

did he really think we'd take gavin's word " i verified his key " as irrefutable proof?

Adam, I have my own doubts about this use of indirect and flimsy evidence.. and it just seems so amazing that Gavin and Wright are conceiving the bitcoin community to be so gullible as to go along with this bullshit...  You gotta wonder whether they sold some coins before they did this?  (O.k. maybe I am going a bit far because short term profits are not necessarily in order for them still to have motivations to attempt to undermine bitcoin's current non XT and non Classic direction).

Surely, I can recognize and appreciate that the BTC market is going to react with some irrational exuberance, and accordingly, it could take some time to correct the market's downward movement on bad information; however, these lack of evidence claims gotta have an impact on Gavin's credibility.

I recall at one point within the last month or two that you (Adam) asserted that you "fully and completely" trust Gavin with leading the direction of bitcoin.  Are you have second thoughts about his credibility after this public display, drama and assertions based on a lack of evidence?

[AliceGored]

.. and it just seems so amazing that Gavin and Wright are conceiving the bitcoin community to be so gullible as to go along with this bullshit... 

Well, we got you to buy $1200 coins, so...

[belmonty]

why would someone claim to be satoshi fully knowing he won't be able to prove it when the time comes

did he really think we'd take gavin's word " i verified his key " as irrefutable proof?

Adam, I have my own doubts about this use of indirect and flimsy evidence.. and it just seems so amazing that Gavin and Wright are conceiving the bitcoin community to be so gullible as to go along with this bullshit...  You gotta wonder whether they sold some coins before they did this?  (O.k. maybe I am going a bit far because short term profits are not necessarily in order for them still to have motivations to attempt to undermine bitcoin's current non XT and non Classic direction).

Surely, I can recognize and appreciate that the BTC market is going to react with some irrational exuberance, and accordingly, it could take some time to correct the market's downward movement on bad information; however, these lack of evidence claims gotta have an impact on Gavin's credibility.

I recall at one point within the last month or two that you (Adam) asserted that you "fully and completely" trust Gavin with leading the direction of bitcoin.  Are you have second thoughts about his credibility after this public display, drama and assertions based on a lack of evidence?

The BBC has published a new story about our scepticism.

It quotes Gavin as saying:

"It is impossible to prove something like that 100%."

concerning the "proof" Wright showed him.

Bitcoin industry 'sceptical' of Satoshi

Is he trying to cover his ass for if/when it gets out he got tricked?

Andreas M. Antonopoulos got invited to the "proof" part too, but turned it down because he was asked to sign a NDA. If Gavin signed one then what does it stop him talking about? How many of its clauses make him keep his mouth shut even if it turns out to be a scam?

See how Andreas M. Antonopoulos got contacted ( https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hj1xu/why_i_declined_to_verify_sns_identity_two_weeks/ ) :

About two weeks ago I was contacted and asked to offer security advice for a project. I was asked to sign an NDA in order to discuss the project itself, something I am reluctant to do, in general. Once I received the NDA however, it became obvious that the project was related to verifying the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. I immediately declined the offer, declined to participate and declined to sign the NDA.
I'm sure many people will think I was wrong to decline the "opportunity" to verify SN's identity. From my perspective, the request for me to verify his/her/their identity is in itself an appeal to authority. It is replacing public cryptographic proof with endorsement by a third party. If SN wants to "prove" their identity, they don't need an "authority" to do so. They can do it in a public, open manner. To ask people in the space who have a reputation to stake that reputation and vouch for SN's identity raises many red flags in my mind.
I don't know if Craig Wright is SN. I don't care and I don't want to know.
As I have expressed many times in the past, I think the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto does not matter. More importantly I think it serves to distract from the fact that bitcoin is not controlled by anyone and is not a system of Appeal-to-Authority. Identifying the creator only serves to feed the appeal-to-authority crowd, as if SN is some kind of infallible prophet, or has any say over bitcoin's future.
Identity and authority are distractions from a system of mathematical proof that does not require trust. This is not a telenovela. Bitcoin is a neutral framework of trust that can bring financial empowerment to billions of people. It works because it doesn't depend on any authority. Not even Satoshi's.
Back to work.

[Meuh6879]

they want down (high trap volume) ... but pression is enable to go up.

[JayJuanGee]

why would someone claim to be satoshi fully knowing he won't be able to prove it when the time comes

did he really think we'd take gavin's word " i verified his key " as irrefutable proof?

nope i dont think so. lets see how this all develops, but to outright refuse the possibility seems extremely childish to me.

ImI..... you seem to be giving way too much benefit of the doubt to the possible truth of these claims. 

Yeah, right, I can understand that you don't want to jump to conclusions too soon, but really, why do these guys provide shady, non-provable, indirect and easily fabricated "evidence" rather than some direct and irrefutable evidence that clearly would be within their ability to do..?

The reason is because they are being less than genuine in respect to how they are treating this kind of claim, which provides a considerable amount of inference that they are engaging in a kind of attempted fraud on the public (and more directly the bitcoin community). 

Yes, it is possible that Wright could be Satoshi; however, after what we have seen as the evidence, we should recognize that possibly to be about less than 1%... and accordingly such claim should not be getting so much benefit of the doubt. 

[Syke]

There are many reasons he may not want to post proof for you to verify, not the least of which is you constantly moving the goal posts.

Feel free to browse my extensive post history. I was posting here when Satoshi was still active. The goal posts have never moved. Sign a genesis block msg. Trivial for Satoshi to do and *everyone* can verify it.

He has provided proof to the most respected leaders of bitcoin:

They were tricked. Have you never seen a magician? Do not believe the "proof" from secret meetings.

How about showing some respect for Dr. Wright's privacy?  

If he wants privacy he shouldn't claim to be Satoshi. Claiming to be Satoshi is inviting investigations. The real Satoshi is smarter than that. He keeps quiet and no one finds him.

[Fatman3001]

There's nothing ireffutable yet. And who in the BBC is going to have much of a clue as to what it takes to prove it?

I can't be the only one who wants to see a BBC Bitcoin special hosted by Jeremy Clarkson?

"Some say..."

OMGOMGOMGOMG!!!!!

Satoshi is The Stig!!!!!!

[Meuh6879]

[whoreble]

There are many reasons he may not want to post proof for you to verify, not the least of which is you constantly moving the goal posts.

Feel free to browse my extensive post history. I was posting here when Satoshi was still active. The goal posts have never moved. Sign a genesis block msg. Trivial for Satoshi to do and *everyone* can verify it.

He has provided proof to the most respected leaders of bitcoin:

They were tricked. Have you never seen a magician? Do not believe the "proof" from secret meetings.

How about showing some respect for Dr. Wright's privacy?  

If he wants privacy he shouldn't claim to be Satoshi. Claiming to be Satoshi is inviting investigations. The real Satoshi is smarter than that. He keeps quiet and no one finds him.

So now Dr. Wright is a magician That's some serious trust issues you got there.
look, if Dr. Wright pulled the wool over the eyes of both Dr. Gavin Andresen, Chief Scientist of the Bitcoin Foundation AND to Mr. Jon Matonis, @jonmatonis, Founding Director at Bitcoin Foundation, CEO of Hushmail, Columnist at Forbes, Chief Forex Dealer at VISA, Economist, but you insist that you won't be fooled? Oh, that's rich.

[USB-S]

Potato   Bitcoin