Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto - Evidence Here

[Tipstar]

So does he lost all of his account passwords in this forum and github?
Has he lost all of his wallets private keys and bitcoins?
Satoshi tried to decentralized the works as much as possible. He created both this forum and the bitcoin.org but went on to transfer the ownership to others. If satoshi really wanted to come out, it would not have been this difficult.

[nutildah]

point is the REGISTRATION was in april.
no one contested it. thus no investigation/no verification process was needed. thus automatic rubber stamp changed
thus in may the C.O changed ownership from an anonymous pseudonym to a guy with a birth certificate.

now that certificate can be used to make many more false claim court cases and hope the defendants 'settle' early just to avoid having to prove its a false claim

lets word it another way.
it cost craig $35 to do this. but would cost someone else alot more now to contest it

The registration was filed in April. The registration was accepted in May. The copyright has NOT been granted. The only thing Wright has done is file paperwork. Nobody has awarded him a copyright, yet.

[MFahad]

If Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto, then why he choose Chines name, and a huge people think that bitcoin is made by China. It is for me hilarious and confusing, and now i just quit to think who is Satoshi. Now I know bitcoin and i think it is enough that bitcoin give us profit.   

[nutildah]

If Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto, then why he choose Chines name, and a huge people think that bitcoin is made by China. It is for me hilarious and confusing, and now i just quit to think who is Satoshi. Now I know bitcoin and i think it is enough that bitcoin give us profit.   

-1 Merit.

[Quickseller]

https://medium.com/@craig_10243/evidence-and-law-f8f10001efa5

If the claims in the medium article are true and can be verified, specifically that he used his credit card to purchase the bitcoin.org domain in 2008, this would be very strong evidence that he is satoshi. I don't think these claims have been proven, and I was also previously under the impression that satoshi had used cash in the mail to pay for the domain registration/hosting.

The medium article also implies that CSW no longer has access to his private keys, and I generally believe this to be true considering satoshi has not spent any of his coins even after bitcoin reached ~$20K. Further evidence of this being true is satoshi not stepping in (with proof of who he is) to try to mediate the block size debate in 2014-2017 when things were very heated.

If CSW is in fact satoshi (he has done things to "prove" he is satoshi that I would consider fraudulent, so I am very skeptical), I would not automatically agree with everything he says, nor his stances of various crypto topics. I maintain my ability to think for myself. In fact I would disagree with many of his stances, including those that caused bitcoin cash to split SV to split off from BCH.

[Bunsomjelican]

Honestly, I am too much sick and tired about this guy. Obviously, He's not telling the truth in short his a big LIAR.. Imagine, He is connecting his name to the founder and creator of bitcoin, even it is still anonymous,  for what? of course, craig want to be in the head line news in crypto world to get his name become popular. Well, congratulation to him but for not being He is Satoshi Nakamoto instead He is a great pretender and hypocrite guy, and I knew most of the community in bitcoin and crypto world believed on this things.

[ðºÞæ]

He paid for Bitcoin.org domain registration in 2009 with VISA and is on Australian Tax records.  

At the end of the day what matters is technology.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5145823.msg51164379#msg51164379

[nutildah]

He paid for Bitcoin.org domain registration in 2009 with VISA and is on Australian Tax records.  

Evidence, please. Show me a link. Show anything.

At the end of the day what matters is technology.

Exactly. And at the end of the day, BSV is just a copy of BTC, so why would anyone use it?

[RapTarX]

Criag can never be satoshi. If so, why don't he use any of satoshi's known address to prove the identity with signing a message? I guess he is a shill only.

[ðºÞæ]

He paid for Bitcoin.org domain registration in 2009 with VISA and is on Australian Tax records.  

Evidence, please. Show me a link. Show anything.

At the end of the day what matters is technology.

Exactly. And at the end of the day, BSV is just a copy of BTC, so why would anyone use it?

I am not a court to have access to peoples tax documents. Any court will accept Credit card payments and Australian Tax records as evidence.
A copy ? BTC BSV are light yeas apart as you can see on the link.

Criag can never be satoshi. If so, why don't he use any of satoshi's known address to prove the identity with signing a message? I guess he is a shill only.

Signing address does not prove anything other that you have access now.
Credit card payments and tax records are court accepted proves , the later having the most weight.

[nutildah]

I am not a court to have access to peoples tax documents. Any court will accept Credit card payments and Australian Tax records as evidence.

Ok so you are taking a known pathological liar's word for it. That's your decision, but you can't expect everybody else to follow.

A copy ? BTC BSV are light yeas apart as you can see on the link.

They are more closely related than just about any other pair of coins. They share a tremendous amount of blockchain information, in addition to lines of code, properties and structure.

Credit card payments and tax records are court accepted proves , the later having the most weight.

Too bad Craig hasn't presented them to verify his claims.

[ðºÞæ]

I am not a court to have access to peoples tax documents. Any court will accept Credit card payments and Australian Tax records as evidence.

Ok so you are taking a known pathological liar's word for it. That's your decision, but you can't expect everybody else to follow.

A copy ? BTC BSV are light yeas apart as you can see on the link.

They are more closely related than just about any other pair of coins. They share a tremendous amount of blockchain information, in addition to lines of code, properties and structure.

Credit card payments and tax records are court accepted proves , the later having the most weight.

Too bad Craig hasn't presented them to verify his claims.

I have to accept a courts decision, if I like it or not is a different matter.
For courts to come to a particular outcome they will look at facts which matter to them and not what bagholder A wants.

[7788bitcoin]

He’s an embarrassment to be honest, a cringeworthy weasel. I can’t wait until we see his demise. The only way he can prove he is Satoshi is if he signs a message from a well known Satoshi early address & he won’t because he can’t.

That is the biggest mystery of them all, why cannot he sign from his well know address and shut everything up rather than going a different route, if all these drama if the real Satoshi was alive he would have come forward and end these fictional characters by signing in from the genesis block and since we do not see any of that i have to assume he is no more.

[kenzawak]

For me, there are two possibilities concerning CSW :

-he has a link to Paul Calder Le Roux (who then would have to be the real Satoshi) and he's trying any way he can to get access to those keys, being helped by his pedo friend Calvin Ayre. He really believes he can crack them and is doing all that stuff (attention whoring) in the hope that one day he'll be able to say "I told you so".

-he has been hired by someone(s) to divert us from the real Satoshi... the only problem is he's a fucking idiot and no one with half a brain can believe he is Satoshi. Now he's just nothing more than a troll.

Either way, he's an idiot, an annoying one.

[Netnox]

I have another theory. I don't think that Craig S Wright is the real Satoshi Nakamoto. But it is possible that he knows the real identity of Satoshi. And the reason why I think he suddenly came up with this claim, may be because of the death of the real Satoshi. He made the claim of him being Satoshi, fully knowing that the real Satoshi will not be there to counter him.

[chek2fire]

is more possible a comet to strike earth in the next 2 seconds rather this hoaxer scammer to be Satoshi.
This guy is a serious psychotic lunatic scammer and nothing more.
A reminder to everyone that this kind of persons before internet dominate and hoax people for decades.
Now only they can ridiculous their selves

[minersday]

I always wonder why people are too anxious to know the identity of who Satoshi Nakamoto is. Knowing the  identity of Satoshi Nakamoto will not add any relevant development to the entire crypto ecosystem... people just need to understand and know the true purpose for the creation of Bitcoin and the solutions it has brought to the entire financial ecosystem. 

[mich]

Update (coindesk)

https://www.coindesk.com/us-copyright-office-says-it-does-not-recognize-craig-wright-as-satoshi?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=coindesk&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=Organic%20



Even as bitoin SV (BSV) enjoyed a Craig Wright/Satoshi bump Tuesday, the U.S. Copyright Office was hard at work dispelling notions that it officially “recognized” anyone as the inventor of bitcoin.

“As a general rule, when the Copyright Office receives an application for registration, the claimant certifies as to the truth of the statements made in the submitted materials. The Copyright Office does not investigate the truth of any statement made,” the Copyright Office wrote in a press release. “In a case in which a work is registered under a pseudonym, the Copyright Office does not investigate whether there is a provable connection between the claimant and the pseudonymous author.”

As multiple sources have already noted, all it takes to register a copyright is $55 and a stable internet connection. In short, any claim that the U.S. government has registered Wright as the author of bitcoin are spurious at best.

Why did the government go to the trouble of clarifying this point? Wright’s actions required it. On Tuesday, a press representative sent a widely read release that suggested, in short, that the government accepted Wright was Satoshi. From the release:

    Importantly, the registrations issued by the U.S. Copyright Office recognize Wright as the author – under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto – of both the white paper and code. This is the first government agency recognition of Craig Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin.

The U.S. Copyright Office, on the other hand, doesn’t actually recognize anyone for anything. Ultimately, it is a repository designed for protecting the creators of art and literature.

But it’s not an immutable source of truth, like, uhm…ok let’s not go there.

[miropp]

It seems to me that such an active proof that he is Satoshi pretty suspicious. I don't think the real Satoshi would do that. As mentioned above, what he said that he did not have time to prove something to someone if they do not believe it.

[sieemma]

I do not look for the rightful inventor of BTC. If he wanted us to know him, he wouldn't have remained silent for sometime now. What I seek for is more money=BTC.
Dr Craig may be the true Satoshi, cool but I do not support his BSV because it can't give me the profit I want. Those who are in for the tech or whatever can keep researching into BTC and BSV codes which doesn't concern me any way .