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

[coolcoinz]

To me Craig is an opportunist. He saw an opening and just barged in. Such things sometimes happen on big parties or even funerals where narcissists seeking attention come in and form this aura of untouchability around them. I'm sure you've seen this in the movies where some guy comes to a wedding and hugs the bride. She hugs him back and invites him in because she thinks it's her husband's friend or family. Just look what Craig has gained when he took on the role of Satoshi. He's being invited to conferences, parties, people listen to him, he's a VIP. Have you listened to some of his speeches? He doesn't say anything important. Throws a joke here and there, parades the stage like a cock, adds a few curses here and there... All his talks are irrelevant and don't bring anything to the table, it's all just for show.

[1714856150]

1714856150

[1714856150]

1714856150

[1714856150]

1714856150

[1714856150]

1714856150

[The Sceptical Chymist]

To me Craig is an opportunist. He saw an opening and just barged in.

I don't really follow the whole "who's Satoshi?" drama, but what you say could well be true.  OP's point from 2 years ago is that CW is only an opportunist because he knows Satoshi is dead or otherwise isn't coming back (I think that's his point, anyway).  I hadn't thought of that, and it's an interesting proposition.

Though I'm at best mildly curious as to who Satoshi is, it would be really interesting if his identity were finally made known--and I have a feeling it will be eventually.

[johnyj]

Based on his deep understanding of some very low level constructions of early bitcoin architecture, I think he is Satoshi. But I guess he lost his keys to most of the early day bitcoins, since those coins worth nothing before 2011. Who would keep a disk full of useless things for 2 years? Anyway, many such projects before bitcoin just came out dead

And there is another fact supporting this view: All those early day coins were mined to different addresses, 50 at a time, they were never consolidated into a large batch, which indicated that they were just left there untouched for some reason. If someone really care about those coins, at least some kind of consolidation or movements of those coins should have happened

[hatshepsut93]

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? 

He pretends to be Satoshi because he's sure that the real Satoshi will never appear again, just notice how CWS started making claims in around 2015-2016 -  long after the days of Satoshi's public activity. He didn't make his claims in 2011 or 2012, when there was a chance that Satoshi will return, or maybe he didn't even know about Bitcoin back then. He shown zero signatures from addresses that solo-mined a full block, which means he wasn't even involved with Bitcoin at its early days.

[iamsheikhadil]

It can be that or that he really wants to take the risk and fail in it so that the real Satoshi actually turns up and prove him wrong and his wish to meet and know the real Satoshi is fulfilled, either way, it's like punching in the air because Satoshi if he's alive won't mind Craig taking his name as Craig hasn't really proved in any way he's Satoshi.

[20kevin20]

To me Craig is an opportunist. He saw an opening and just barged in. Such things sometimes happen on big parties or even funerals where narcissists seeking attention come in and form this aura of untouchability around them. I'm sure you've seen this in the movies where some guy comes to a wedding and hugs the bride. She hugs him back and invites him in because she thinks it's her husband's friend or family. Just look what Craig has gained when he took on the role of Satoshi. He's being invited to conferences, parties, people listen to him, he's a VIP. Have you listened to some of his speeches? He doesn't say anything important. Throws a joke here and there, parades the stage like a cock, adds a few curses here and there... All his talks are irrelevant and don't bring anything to the table, it's all just for show.

Yeah, look what Craig has gained! All this is going to finish with him behind the bars, so he better be living the best moments of his life right now 'cause it's not going to last much longer!

He doesn't say anything important because he's just a joker. Basically the troll of crypto. And people listen to him because they want that BitcoinShitVersion to turn into $20k so those who've missed the BTC rally would get another chance.

The dump this ShitVersion is going to have will surprise everyone who's put their money in Craig's pockets.

[pixie85]

Based on his deep understanding of some very low level constructions of early bitcoin architecture, I think he is Satoshi. But I guess he lost his keys to most of the early day bitcoins, since those coins worth nothing before 2011. Who would keep a disk full of useless things for 2 years? Anyway, many such projects before bitcoin just came out dead

I have disks that are 5-6 years old. Scientists tend to keep their work forever. When they change computers they keep their old drives stashed in a box somewhere. Craig woke up years after Bitcoin was created and tried to patent it. He's not Satoshi and I don't understand why you'd believe that he is.

And there is another fact supporting this view: All those early day coins were mined to different addresses, 50 at a time, they were never consolidated into a large batch, which indicated that they were just left there untouched for some reason. If someone really care about those coins, at least some kind of consolidation or movements of those coins should have happened

This is only a proof that real Satoshi didn't care much about the value of his coins. It's understandable because when he was mining there was no way to sell them. There were no exchange services and people who got involved in early 2010 were just giving it for free to others or exchanging for fun.

This does not prove that Craig is Satoshi. His forgeries paint a different picture.

[dongosquad]

I always imagine SN smiling seeing various speculations and ridiculous news about who he really is. Whether he is alive or not, I still imagine him smiling in one corner of the world and enjoying the brilliance of this innovation. I do not know, I am not too interested in anyone who recognizes himself as SN, who is clear with his intelligence to design all of this, surely he will not just carelessly reveal his identity, there must be another diversion. Like following a drama series

[Astvile]

I don't think Satoshi Nakamoto is dead. He must have been resting somewhere in the world chilling with his fortune because for sure he is a rich man and surely he is laughing about Craig's claims. Being the creator of this huge project me personally if I where Nakamoto I will never reveal myself I don't need the recognition I just want support for what I did. Plus it will be a great threat if he will reveal himself in the public.

[johnyj]

I have disks that are 5-6 years old. Scientists tend to keep their work forever. When they change computers they keep their old drives stashed in a box somewhere. Craig woke up years after Bitcoin was created and tried to patent it. He's not Satoshi and I don't understand why you'd believe that he is.

I guess nobody currently have an old disk holding WeiDai's B-money which a predecessor of bitcoin, if historically all such projects become useless after a few years, who would expect bitcoin to be any different in 2010. Even in 2011, those coins worth only 100 pizza

BTW, the keys can be stolen, keys prove nothing.

There is always a best way to find out the inventor. If you are Satoshi that invented bitcoin, you must be able to answer many original design related questions such as why OP_CHECKSIG is designed in such a seemingly illogical way. So far only Craig can answer that question, core devs don't understand that, so they invented segwit to replace it

Craig found out later that his invention is hijacked by a group of stupid coders, so he started to apply patents to prevent the same thing happen again

[xvids]

That would be another question or mystery that could be impossible to know.
We know that CW isn't the real SN and we don't even know if someone really know SN in real life so it could be so hard.
My theory is thatCW is just trying to bait the real SN out but it seem's like it isn't working and it is only making him look's like a fool on the internet.

[BlackFor3st]

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?  

I am not so sure about it but that scenario is not impossible also as he claims that he is the real Satoshi Nakamoto so there will be some reasons why he is doing this. As everyone can easily claim that they are Satoshi Nakamoto as the real SN is not showing himself.

There is a very little chance that the real Satoshi Nakamoto is already dead. Why? It's been only 10 years since the launch bitcoin and his disappearance is not about his health condition. But if I were to guess, there is a big possibility that Craig know the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto and they are doing this scene as part of their plan.

[hv_]

The simple way is the often the best way.

To proof ownership by just send some coins, is not a proof of ownership/identity. Btw

So - since no other guy really comes up with his caliber and saves ownership of copyrights and original BitCoin version to exists in real world..... (he invited all to sue him, simply) CSW is the simplest option

More simple proofs expected imo

BSV is the simplest BitCoin, btw

[FanatMonet]

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? 

Yes, this is a very common theory, and given the personality of Wright, who clearly knows something about the birth of Bitcoin, but cannot provide any significant evidence, this theory is very, very strong.
Although I have been telling everyone since 2015 that Satoshi is probably unfortunately no longer with us.

[gmaxwell]

Yes, this is a very common theory, and given the personality of Wright, who clearly knows something about the birth of Bitcoin, but cannot provide any significant evidence, this theory is very, very strong.
Although I have been telling everyone since 2015 that Satoshi is probably unfortunately no longer with us.

I've *never* seen wright repeat a true fact about Bitcoin that he couldn't have learned just reading some posts here or the mailing list. Instead, I've seen him repeat many false claims that you can find posted on the internet which anyone involved early in bitcoin would know.

The obvious conclusion is that since he is perpetrating a multi-million dollar fraud and identity theft he spent a little time doing homework, but as his school records show he is utterly terrible at performing any kind of intellectual work at all... and so he didn't do a good job of it.  He produces so much evasion, obfuscation, and outright bluster -- literally screaming FUCK YOU at people who challenge his technobabble, that he manages to fool more than a few people who aren't following closely.

If you want to make guesses as to why he would assume Satoshi wouldn't out him... first, why would he need to assume that?  He could continue to rake in money from victims until that time-- the scam has to end eventually after all, it might as well end that way.  second,  there were a long sequence of false Satoshi claims before him and Satoshi didn't show up to debunk those either so it's a safe bet that wright could get away with it for a long time.

Finally, wright's activities have caused more fixation on satoshi than ever.  It would be bad for everyone for satoshi to show up in light of that.

[AGD]

Yes, this is a very common theory, and given the personality of Wright, who clearly knows something about the birth of Bitcoin, but cannot provide any significant evidence, this theory is very, very strong.
Although I have been telling everyone since 2015 that Satoshi is probably unfortunately no longer with us.

I've *never* seen wright repeat a true fact about Bitcoin that he couldn't have learned just reading some posts here or the mailing list. Instead, I've seen him repeat many false claims that you can find posted on the internet which anyone involved early in bitcoin would know.

The obvious conclusion is that since he is perpetrating a multi-million dollar fraud and identity theft he spent a little time doing homework, but as his school records show he is utterly terrible at performing any kind of intellectual work at all... and so he didn't do a good job of it.  He produces so much evasion, obfuscation, and outright bluster -- literally screaming FUCK YOU at people who challenge his technobabble, that he manages to fool more than a few people who aren't following closely.

If you want to make guesses as to why he would assume Satoshi wouldn't out him... first, why would he need to assume that?  He could continue to rake in money from victims until that time-- the scam has to end eventually after all, it might as well end that way.  second,  there were a long sequence of false Satoshi claims before him and Satoshi didn't show up to debunk those either so it's a safe bet that wright could get away with it for a long time.

Finally, wright's activities have caused more fixation on satoshi than ever.  It would be bad for everyone for satoshi to show up in light of that.

I agree with almost all of your statements. There were a lot of people claiming to be Satoshi, but CSW was the only one who made it as far as convincing a person, who has gained the original Satoshi Nakamotos trust: Gavin Andresen. I would very much like to see the communication between him and CSW, that made Gavin book a flight to London.

[FanatMonet]

Yes, this is a very common theory, and given the personality of Wright, who clearly knows something about the birth of Bitcoin, but cannot provide any significant evidence, this theory is very, very strong.
Although I have been telling everyone since 2015 that Satoshi is probably unfortunately no longer with us.

I've *never* seen wright repeat a true fact about Bitcoin that he couldn't have learned just reading some posts here or the mailing list. Instead, I've seen him repeat many false claims that you can find posted on the internet which anyone involved early in bitcoin would know.

The obvious conclusion is that since he is perpetrating a multi-million dollar fraud and identity theft he spent a little time doing homework, but as his school records show he is utterly terrible at performing any kind of intellectual work at all... and so he didn't do a good job of it.  He produces so much evasion, obfuscation, and outright bluster -- literally screaming FUCK YOU at people who challenge his technobabble, that he manages to fool more than a few people who aren't following closely.

If you want to make guesses as to why he would assume Satoshi wouldn't out him... first, why would he need to assume that?  He could continue to rake in money from victims until that time-- the scam has to end eventually after all, it might as well end that way.  second,  there were a long sequence of false Satoshi claims before him and Satoshi didn't show up to debunk those either so it's a safe bet that wright could get away with it for a long time.

Finally, wright's activities have caused more fixation on satoshi than ever.  It would be bad for everyone for satoshi to show up in light of that.

I agree with almost all of your statements. There were a lot of people claiming to be Satoshi, but CSW was the only one who made it as far as convincing a person, who has gained the original Satoshi Nakamotos trust: Gavin Andresen. I would very much like to see the communication between him and CSW, that made Gavin book a flight to London.

Yes, this case was widely covered in the press then. And everyone I knew in the cryptocurrency world at that time was also at a loss how Anderson could believe Wright. Then, indeed, many thought that Satoshi was finally found, but this turned out to be completely wrong.

[Rengga Jati]

I don't think so. There is no one who knows about who is SN< what is SN, where is SN, and also what happens to SN right now. Whether he is still alive or even dead.
In relation to CW, I think that he is only making something surprising again to attract the issue about him. Well, I also don't think that he really knows about Satoshi.

Satoshi Satoshi Satoshi How long do we plan to discuss this topic?

I also think about this. Why should we make some judgment/prediction, and also guess about Satoshi more and more in this forum? Let it be and let Satoshi be Satoshi. Of course, He had his own reason why he didn't want to come up to the public and not to be seen. And let him still with his secret because it will be more interesting.

[Docnaster]

Let's not ascribe CSW any more credit than he is due.

It's quite clear that he simply took advantage of the early naivete of the community and lack of blockchain analytics platforms back in the day, to falsely claim that he is Satoshi in order to manipulate the market.

He's a straight-up fraud and not worth discussing. He'll be in jail soon enough, since he tried to co-opt the identity of another individual.

[gmaxwell]

There were a lot of people claiming to be Satoshi, but CSW was the only one who made it as far as convincing a person, who has gained the original Satoshi Nakamotos trust: Gavin Andresen. I would very much like to see the communication between him and CSW, that made Gavin book a flight to London.

I don't know if I'd go quite as far as trust, but you make a fair point.

We (the bitcoin devs) asked Gavin a number of questions in the immediate aftermath of his endorsement of Wright.

Gavin went unresponsive when we asked for details about when he started communicating with Wright.  So good luck finding out anything there.

He said in media interviews that he was absolutely convinced before ever seeing any proof.

Certainly, in none of Wright's communication that I've ever seen has he sounded at all like Satoshi for any span of more than a few words-- maybe a sentence at most... except where he was just quoting Satoshi.

And yet, as we are today Gavin has still never fully retracted his endorsement. He left it at an 'I'm not sure what happened, maybe I was fooled. It doesn't matter anyways'-- something which wright's promoters continues to use to promote wright's legitimacy.

Probably the most significant thing I can say on this subject is that *none* of the core-devs upon hearing Gavin endorsed the guy thought this was at all evidence of the claims-- even before seeing the publication of the obviously faked signature.  The idea that Gavin was hacked, was being coerced, was being paid off, was a scammed idiot, or was attempting a desperate attempt at taking over Bitcoin after he was unable to convince people through the merit of his arguments were all considered serious possibilities. We discussed the possibility that wright got his hands on of an early block private key that was mined by someone other than satoshi, and was planning on exploiting the ambiguity about who mined what-- and that Gavin fell for that because of one of the might have fallen for it due to the aforementioned reasons. The only people that thought his endorsement was persuasive were people that hadn't worked with him on technical matters. The people who would know best how to weigh the evidence of that endorsement didn't find it remotely persuasive. And in the aftermath, when Wright's public signature turned out to be fake Gavin's response wasn't to adopt complete transparency and help take out and protect the Bitcoin community from the guy that had supposedly conned him. Take that for what you will.

I think in general the pattern we've seen from Wright is that he isn't particularly convincing or persuasive, but rather he exploits the fact that people are usually unprepared to deal with such an audacious liar.  ... the sort of person who will go literally red faced screaming at you that NO, IN FACT THE SKY IS GREEN NOT BLUE THE SKY IS GREEN.  When faced with behaviour like that some people just start wondering if maybe its legit because they'd personally never act that way unless they were telling the truth and were absolutely sure of it.