Craig W. only claims to be Satoshi, because he knows the real Satoshi is dead?

[BillyBobZorton]

Why do you think that ? satoshi is not dead, Nick szabo is satoshi nakamoto

Nick Szabo helped Craig Wright,

I also think Nick was possibly connected to Satoshi {They, Craig Wright & Nick & Hal Finney might have been part of a

small group of people that formed the pseudonym, Satoshi Nakamoto} I think Hal Finney owned most of the coins in the

beginning and when he died he took the private keys to his grave. 

Hal Finney and Nick Szabo being satoshi are one of the best proponents, and big blockers hate this because both Hal Finney and Nick Szabo aren't big blockers and are pro-payment channels:

http://bitcoinist.com/nick-szabo-bitcoin-censorship-resistance/

Finney being satoshi is specially interesting because he is both confirmed to be the first ever person to receive a bitcoin transaction, and also confirmed to be dead. So if someone knew Hal was satoshi, he would could safely claim to be satoshi himself without risks of the real satoshi showing up.

[1714840273]

1714840273

[jonatuzc]

The way people fight over this matter, man, I wonder if the world will go into explosion if they don’t come up with the person behind that name: Satoshi Nakamoto. Now someone has decided to claim he’s the real SN, and people are still doubting. Infact the real thing is this: nobody is Satoshi Nakamoto, it’s just a code name (as in a username).

[Newmine]

Just an idea. If Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, he would definitely risk the real Satoshi come up with a proof, that Craig is not SN. Is it possible, that CW explicitly knows about the death of the person behind SN, so he can make his claims without backing them up with a proof? 

No, he knows that Satoshi Nakamoto, whoever they are, would not risk communicating with the world ever again. (its kinda obvious why)

To me it's not obvious. Please explain.

Well according to some blockchain analysts, Satoshi is sitting on billions of US dollars worth of Bitcoin.
If I was them, I wouldn't risk any possibility of being traced. This includes making a post on the internet or really doing anything online that involves that username.

Those coins were worth like 30 cents each when he decided to abandon the Satoshi alias. So your theory makes zero sense.

[AGD]

....
Sidenote: you saw CW at the presentation the other day, where he was talking utter nonsense? This guy is definitely not Satoshi.

Of course he is not Satoshi. My point is he was close to Satoshi which might have given him some of the information which only Satoshi would have known. And he also knows that real Satoshi is no more and he is trying to use it to his advantage.

If Craig Wright had the private key to the first block the it's very clear he is Satoshi. What more proof do you need?
...

No, someone who is/was very close to Satoshi may successfully obtain a key or two that belonged to real Satoshi. We need more proof, not just one key.

I got your point (presentation topic was just a little side talk. Watch it. Funny stuff) and I also think, that this theory fits well, but I don't think, that CW has recieved any key from SN. Which still makes me wonder how CW convinced Gavin, who certainly knew, that he would play with his reputation. Reason enough for a smart guy, to securely veryfy CW's claims, before going public with a statement like "I believe CW is Satoshi Nakamoto". And the truth is: Gavin messed up pretty bad. The reason for that must have been worth losing his reputation. I think, that both, Gavin and Craig are lying.

[eXpl0sive]

....
Sidenote: you saw CW at the presentation the other day, where he was talking utter nonsense? This guy is definitely not Satoshi.

Of course he is not Satoshi. My point is he was close to Satoshi which might have given him some of the information which only Satoshi would have known. And he also knows that real Satoshi is no more and he is trying to use it to his advantage.

If Craig Wright had the private key to the first block the it's very clear he is Satoshi. What more proof do you need?
...

No, someone who is/was very close to Satoshi may successfully obtain a key or two that belonged to real Satoshi. We need more proof, not just one key.

I got your point (presentation topic was just a little side talk. Watch it. Funny stuff) and I also think, that this theory fits well, but I don't think, that CW has recieved any key from SN. Which still makes me wonder how CW convinced Gavin, who certainly knew, that he would play with his reputation. Reason enough for a smart guy, to securely veryfy CW's claims, before going public with a statement like "I believe CW is Satoshi Nakamoto". And the truth is: Gavin messed up pretty bad. The reason for that must have been worth losing his reputation. I think, that both, Gavin and Craig are lying.

I can't rule out the possibility that both of them lied. Otherwise if CW had actual proof to show Gavin, there was no harm in showing it to rest of the world. Why ONLY Gavin? Why not the rest of us? In fact doing it publicly would have made his case solid than ever.

[talkbitcoin]

Just an idea. If Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, he would definitely risk the real Satoshi come up with a proof, that Craig is not SN. Is it possible, that CW explicitly knows about the death of the person behind SN, so he can make his claims without backing them up with a proof? 

not necessarily.
after many years of not being present (6 or 7 years?) and not once break that anonymity, it is fairly correct to assume Satoshi Nakamoto will not come forward and break the anonymity in the future either. and the reason for that can be anything.
and CW's attempts were mostly a public stunt that the community caught easily. so again he can be fairly sure Satoshi will never come forward to put his claims down since we have already did it instead of real SN.

[AGD]

....
Sidenote: you saw CW at the presentation the other day, where he was talking utter nonsense? This guy is definitely not Satoshi.

Of course he is not Satoshi. My point is he was close to Satoshi which might have given him some of the information which only Satoshi would have known. And he also knows that real Satoshi is no more and he is trying to use it to his advantage.

If Craig Wright had the private key to the first block the it's very clear he is Satoshi. What more proof do you need?
...

No, someone who is/was very close to Satoshi may successfully obtain a key or two that belonged to real Satoshi. We need more proof, not just one key.

I got your point (presentation topic was just a little side talk. Watch it. Funny stuff) and I also think, that this theory fits well, but I don't think, that CW has recieved any key from SN. Which still makes me wonder how CW convinced Gavin, who certainly knew, that he would play with his reputation. Reason enough for a smart guy, to securely veryfy CW's claims, before going public with a statement like "I believe CW is Satoshi Nakamoto". And the truth is: Gavin messed up pretty bad. The reason for that must have been worth losing his reputation. I think, that both, Gavin and Craig are lying.

I can't rule out the possibility that both of them lied. Otherwise if CW had actual proof to show Gavin, there was no harm in showing it to rest of the world. Why ONLY Gavin? Why not the rest of us? In fact doing it publicly would have made his case solid than ever.

We don't know if there was no harm in showing it in public. As I said, it must have been worth losing his reputation for this secret.

[TheGodson]

It seems like a whole lot of people think Satoshi is dead. I don't think we should jump to this conclusion. I think it is more likely that Satoshi is alive.

It is interesting that Satoshi in his posts seem very friendly, polite, patient and likeable in his messages. Craig Wright on the other hand seems cold, bitter, arrogant, and angry in person. In one of the Satoshi emails, Satoshi uses the euro as an example for transaction. This leads me to believe the real Satoshi is from a European country. Also in a post he uses an expression about "eating crow", which is supposedly an American expression, but I have a feeling that it may be European for some reason. Either way it isn't Australian that's for sure.

Craig would not need to wait for Satoshi to be dead to make the claims. His claim is ridiculous and for some weird reason, there is a group of people gullible enough to believe him. Satoshi probably didn't denounce him, because it isn't worth it. Satoshi isn't going to give Craig the honor of being denounced. It already is obvious.


Interesting thoughts on Gavin lying. Who knows what kind of blackmail he could be facing. Maybe he did something really fucked up and Craig is using that as leverage against Gavin.


Hah, another theory for thought. What if Craig really is Satoshi and he was worried people were figuring it out somehow. As a result he purposely came out in the open and tried to do a bad job at convincing everyone. Like a reverse psychology thing. Seems pretty far fetched though.

I'm confident that Craig is not Satoshi, but if he is and can prove that he is, I'll gladly eat crow.  

[eXpl0sive]

....
I'm confident that Craig is not Satoshi, but if he is and can prove that he is, I'll gladly eat crow.  

Be careful of what you speak, we live in a weird world.

[BillyBobZorton]

....
Sidenote: you saw CW at the presentation the other day, where he was talking utter nonsense? This guy is definitely not Satoshi.

Of course he is not Satoshi. My point is he was close to Satoshi which might have given him some of the information which only Satoshi would have known. And he also knows that real Satoshi is no more and he is trying to use it to his advantage.

If Craig Wright had the private key to the first block the it's very clear he is Satoshi. What more proof do you need?
...

No, someone who is/was very close to Satoshi may successfully obtain a key or two that belonged to real Satoshi. We need more proof, not just one key.

I got your point (presentation topic was just a little side talk. Watch it. Funny stuff) and I also think, that this theory fits well, but I don't think, that CW has recieved any key from SN. Which still makes me wonder how CW convinced Gavin, who certainly knew, that he would play with his reputation. Reason enough for a smart guy, to securely veryfy CW's claims, before going public with a statement like "I believe CW is Satoshi Nakamoto". And the truth is: Gavin messed up pretty bad. The reason for that must have been worth losing his reputation. I think, that both, Gavin and Craig are lying.

The theory of Gavin Andresen being part of the psyOPs operation to pass Craig Steven Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto in order to brainwash the masses into supporting their forks is very valid. Gavin Andresen started doing a 180 on his views after the CIA visit and Satoshi disappeared after his CIA visit... connect the dots.

Gavin and Craig are partners in bitcoin-crime.

[Carlsen]

Wasn't there something with a patent application Craig and some partners filed shortly after claiming to be Satoshi?
I think I have read something like that in the news and it was discussed here as well.
It all seemd to be some big publicity action to support his claim to get those patents that were about blockchain technology, if I remember correctly.

[Kprawn]

....
Sidenote: you saw CW at the presentation the other day, where he was talking utter nonsense? This guy is definitely not Satoshi.

Of course he is not Satoshi. My point is he was close to Satoshi which might have given him some of the information which only Satoshi would have known. And he also knows that real Satoshi is no more and he is trying to use it to his advantage.

If Craig Wright had the private key to the first block the it's very clear he is Satoshi. What more proof do you need?
...

No, someone who is/was very close to Satoshi may successfully obtain a key or two that belonged to real Satoshi. We need more proof, not just one key.

I got your point (presentation topic was just a little side talk. Watch it. Funny stuff) and I also think, that this theory fits well, but I don't think, that CW has recieved any key from SN. Which still makes me wonder how CW convinced Gavin, who certainly knew, that he would play with his reputation. Reason enough for a smart guy, to securely veryfy CW's claims, before going public with a statement like "I believe CW is Satoshi Nakamoto". And the truth is: Gavin messed up pretty bad. The reason for that must have been worth losing his reputation. I think, that both, Gavin and Craig are lying.

The theory of Gavin Andresen being part of the psyOPs operation to pass Craig Steven Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto in order to brainwash the masses into supporting their forks is very valid. Gavin Andresen started doing a 180 on his views after the CIA visit and Satoshi disappeared after his CIA visit... connect the dots.

Gavin and Craig are partners in bitcoin-crime.

Are you saying Satoshi was taken out {RIP} because they wanted to take control? I doubt if these extreme measures was

considered to take control over something that they could stop by just using the judicial system. It would also not be for

financial gain, because bitcoins were worthless back then. Interesting thought process. 

[BillyBobZorton]

....
Sidenote: you saw CW at the presentation the other day, where he was talking utter nonsense? This guy is definitely not Satoshi.

Of course he is not Satoshi. My point is he was close to Satoshi which might have given him some of the information which only Satoshi would have known. And he also knows that real Satoshi is no more and he is trying to use it to his advantage.

If Craig Wright had the private key to the first block the it's very clear he is Satoshi. What more proof do you need?
...

No, someone who is/was very close to Satoshi may successfully obtain a key or two that belonged to real Satoshi. We need more proof, not just one key.

I got your point (presentation topic was just a little side talk. Watch it. Funny stuff) and I also think, that this theory fits well, but I don't think, that CW has recieved any key from SN. Which still makes me wonder how CW convinced Gavin, who certainly knew, that he would play with his reputation. Reason enough for a smart guy, to securely veryfy CW's claims, before going public with a statement like "I believe CW is Satoshi Nakamoto". And the truth is: Gavin messed up pretty bad. The reason for that must have been worth losing his reputation. I think, that both, Gavin and Craig are lying.

The theory of Gavin Andresen being part of the psyOPs operation to pass Craig Steven Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto in order to brainwash the masses into supporting their forks is very valid. Gavin Andresen started doing a 180 on his views after the CIA visit and Satoshi disappeared after his CIA visit... connect the dots.

Gavin and Craig are partners in bitcoin-crime.

Are you saying Satoshi was taken out {RIP} because they wanted to take control? I doubt if these extreme measures was

considered to take control over something that they could stop by just using the judicial system. It would also not be for

financial gain, because bitcoins were worthless back then. Interesting thought process. 

It was too late for them to kill Bitcoin. Once the code is out there, it's game over for them. Just like Tor, they couldn't stop it after the code was released and people ran nodes. They knew about this, so they want to manipulate it and keep it alive under their own terms. This is why they want to make the blocks huge, so the people can't run nodes.

I don't know if Satoshi was killed, but Craig Wright is an obvious actor/agent of sorts trying to pass as Satoshi, and I doubt they would do that if they didn't knew Satoshi was either dead or captured. Make of that what you will.

[PokerFace3]

Just an idea. If Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, he would definitely risk the real Satoshi come up with a proof, that Craig is not SN. Is it possible, that CW explicitly knows about the death of the person behind SN, so he can make his claims without backing them up with a proof? 

No, he knows that Satoshi Nakamoto, whoever they are, would not risk communicating with the world ever again. (its kinda obvious why)

To me it's not obvious. Please explain.

Well according to some blockchain analysts, Satoshi is sitting on billions of US dollars worth of Bitcoin.
If I was them, I wouldn't risk any possibility of being traced. This includes making a post on the internet or really doing anything online that involves that username.

Those coins were worth like 30 cents each when he decided to abandon the Satoshi alias. So your theory makes zero sense.

Whatsoever but really Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto, so what’s the big deal here. Even if we say, he has bitcoins worth zillion dollars, what difference is that going to make anyways. Look guys, wherever is Satoshi and whoever is he, it hardly impacts me and my earnings. For my sake, he can be in heaven or hell like I care. This topic is just a drag and this mystery is getting on my nerves now.

[eaLiTy]

Just an idea. If Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, he would definitely risk the real Satoshi come up with a proof, that Craig is not SN. Is it possible, that CW explicitly knows about the death of the person behind SN, so he can make his claims without backing them up with a proof? 

Since you are think that Craig Wright knows who the real person was behind Satoshi then he might very well know more than anyone else in the world,so that does give a validity right that he really knew Satoshi, what if he is the real Satoshi and he is not willing to produce further proof because of the amount of money he has to owe as tax,why should he risk doing that and play the bluff game,it is also possible right.

[cellard]

Just an idea. If Craig Wright is NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, he would definitely risk the real Satoshi come up with a proof, that Craig is not SN. Is it possible, that CW explicitly knows about the death of the person behind SN, so he can make his claims without backing them up with a proof? 

No, he knows that Satoshi Nakamoto, whoever they are, would not risk communicating with the world ever again. (its kinda obvious why)

To me it's not obvious. Please explain.

Well according to some blockchain analysts, Satoshi is sitting on billions of US dollars worth of Bitcoin.
If I was them, I wouldn't risk any possibility of being traced. This includes making a post on the internet or really doing anything online that involves that username.

Those coins were worth like 30 cents each when he decided to abandon the Satoshi alias. So your theory makes zero sense.

Whatsoever but really Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto, so what’s the big deal here. Even if we say, he has bitcoins worth zillion dollars, what difference is that going to make anyways. Look guys, wherever is Satoshi and whoever is he, it hardly impacts me and my earnings. For my sake, he can be in heaven or hell like I care. This topic is just a drag and this mystery is getting on my nerves now.

Of course it would make a difference. People are like sheep and they need their shepard, and they would look at Craig Wright if he was Satoshi as the definite leader of BTC, which would mean they would use Craig Wright to influence people into buying the big blocks bullshit and centralize the network inside buildings owned by corporations.

Craig Wright is a goddamn conman that PsOPS are trying to pass Satoshi to influence the masses into their agenda's benefit.

[AGD]

Info:


Craig Wright faked an email to get out of billion-dollar lawsuit, expert claims in court

https://decryptmedia.com/6827/craig-wright-faked-email-billion-dollar-lawsuit-court-expert-claims

However, cyber security engineer Dr. Matthew Edman provided written testimony to the court on Monday that Wright’s email evidence is bogus. The email’s digital signature, says Edman, demonstrates that it was produced in early 2014—not 2012 as Wright claims.

The problem? Kleiman died in 2013.

[AGD]

....
Sidenote: you saw CW at the presentation the other day, where he was talking utter nonsense? This guy is definitely not Satoshi.

Of course he is not Satoshi. My point is he was close to Satoshi which might have given him some of the information which only Satoshi would have known. And he also knows that real Satoshi is no more and he is trying to use it to his advantage.

If Craig Wright had the private key to the first block the it's very clear he is Satoshi. What more proof do you need?
...

No, someone who is/was very close to Satoshi may successfully obtain a key or two that belonged to real Satoshi. We need more proof, not just one key.

I got your point (presentation topic was just a little side talk. Watch it. Funny stuff) and I also think, that this theory fits well, but I don't think, that CW has recieved any key from SN. Which still makes me wonder how CW convinced Gavin, who certainly knew, that he would play with his reputation. Reason enough for a smart guy, to securely veryfy CW's claims, before going public with a statement like "I believe CW is Satoshi Nakamoto". And the truth is: Gavin messed up pretty bad. The reason for that must have been worth losing his reputation. I think, that both, Gavin and Craig are lying.

The theory of Gavin Andresen being part of the psyOPs operation to pass Craig Steven Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto in order to brainwash the masses into supporting their forks is very valid. Gavin Andresen started doing a 180 on his views after the CIA visit and Satoshi disappeared after his CIA visit... connect the dots.

Gavin and Craig are partners in bitcoin-crime.

Valid more than ever...

[jak3]

it is also possible that someone got Satoshi when he was working on the development of bitcoin on 2009-2010, or maybe he got bored or something and left the project. or maybe bitcoin is completed and he was just working on an advanced network. Craig W. cannot prove that he is real Satoshi.

[AGD]

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/kleiman-v-wright/?order_by=desc&page=1
esp. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/1/11/kleiman-v-wright/

If things turn out the way I think it does, Dave was Satoshi and he took his private keys into his grave. 1 million Bitcoins burned 
Possible that Craig has something to do with Dave's demise?