Project Anastasia: Bitcoiners Against Identity Theft [re: Craig Wright scam]

[nullius]

Translations:  Pyccкий • Română • हिन्दी • Filipino • Bahasa Indonesia • Türkçe • Hrvatski
(Listed in chronological order of local topic creation.)

This is a princess named Anastasia, officially styled Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna Romanova, the youngest daughter of the last Russian Czar, photographed c. 1910:

On 17 July 1918, Communists murdered Anastasia together with her parents and siblings.  Anastasia was only 17 years old.  Her and her family’s bodies were mutilated to impede identification, and hidden so well that the remains were only finally discovered in 1991 and 2007, in two different places.

False rumours circulated, claiming that Anastasia had survived and escaped.  It is scientifically certain that those rumours were false:  DNA testing has accounted for all of the missing bodies.  Anastasia died in 1918.

In the 1920s through 1990s, multiple different imposters claimed to be Anastasia.  The imposters persuaded many people to believe their lies.  The most famous imposter, who had a long history of mental illness, even convinced one of Anastasia’s living relatives that she was the real Anastasia.  I will not hereby repeat the whole story; it is irrelevant, and embarrassing to the family.

These imposters were identity thieves.  They stole the identity of a famous person who had disappeared.  They did it for fame, or to try to swindle money from Anastasia’s wealthy relatives, or because they were crazy—or all of the above.  What they did was wrong; and it was hurtful to people who cared about Anastasia.


The identity of Bitcoin’s anonymous founder has been stolen by an imposter.

Craig Wright is an identity thief:  He claims the name and reputation of someone who is not him.  His claims are so absurd, there is only one reason why anybody would believe:  Only an extreme liar would dare to make such absurd claims!  Most people see him for what he is:  An extreme liar.

He is not the first to claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto, only the most brazen.  And he will not be the last.  Mark my words!  There is a big incentive for criminal imposters to pretend to be Satoshi Nakamoto.  During the Twentieth Century, people eventually came to shrug when they heard about another Anastasia imposter.  I expect that for about the next 50–70 years, as Bitcoin grows in value and popularity, people will come to react similarly to another Satoshi imposter.

But that is no reason to ignore the imposters!

Identity theft is wrong.  It is fraudulent, and it’s a crime.  In the case of theft of a famous identity, the imposture can hurt many people.  It must be stopped.

I hereby call on Bitcoiners to unite in opposition to identity theft.  Call it out when you see it.  Call it what it is, identity theft.  Never ignore it!  Stand up to it, whether the theft is big or small.  And if the identity thief is trying to hijack a famous identity so as to scam lots of people for lots of money, make sure that everybody knows this is identity theft on a grand scale.

Do it because it’s right.  Do it to protect Bitcoin.  And do it in memory of Anastasia, an innocent victim of famous identity theft for seven decades after she was already dead.

Moderation note:  Posts in this thread may be deleted according to my mood.  And I am in a bad mood.  Please be kind to Anastasia, and honest toward Satoshi.  Thank you.

Sigspam and posts that quote the whole OP will be deleted.

[1713583961]

1713583961

[1713583961]

1713583961

[1713583961]

1713583961

[bL4nkcode]

Correlating the life of anastasia to satoshi – then we might wait after almost a century to identify the real identity of satoshi.

[bitmover]

Welcome back nullius.

What I find ridiculous about all those fake satoshis is that they never prove to be him
 And it could be so easy.

Satoshi had many known public addresses.  Until someone just sign a message from one of those addresses, I.e. providing a cryptographic proof to be satoshi, they are just fake.

Calling them liars out loud isn't just like "feeding the troll"? I don't get how Craig got so much attention,  he even created the "real bitcoin cash". Lol

[aoluain]

Interesting read and something new I have learned today.

Pertaining to fake Satoshi's it is as @bitmover states the only proof
any of us need is any sort of action relating to the known Satoshi
wallets, sign a message or move 1 bitcoin from one wallet to another
(to be extra dramatic)

Everything else is bunkum, hot air, waffle and we should all realise
this and call on the imposter to complete either of the above tasks
because I dont want to be listening and reading or seeing thread
after thread of imposter related chat.

[figmentofmyass]

He is not the first to claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto, only the most brazen.  And he will not be the last.  Mark my words!  There is a big incentive for criminal imposters to pretend to be Satoshi Nakamoto.

the silver lining: satoshi's pseudonymity may have enabled imposters, but it also allowed him/her/them to disappear completely unknown. that was a massive win for bitcoin's decentralization.

in contrast, it would be virtually impossible to impersonate vitalik buterin. the trade-off for ethereum is they forever have a "benevolent dictator". that trade-off isn't worth it IMO.

[bitmover]

in contrast, it would be virtually impossible to impersonate vitalik buterin. the trade-off for ethereum is they forever have a "benevolent dictator". that trade-off isn't worth it IMO.

This is one of the things I find most amazing about bitcoin: The creator is totally anonymous.

Unlike Vitalik's Blockchain, where he is alive giving opinions and acting like a central planner, bitcoin is growing wildly without any central planner.

If satoshi was a real person, everything would be centralized on him.

[nullius]

Interesting replies!  Before I respond, I have a few further thoughts inspired by an argument not seen in this thread:

Al Capone was a gangster and a murderer.  He was never convicted of these crimes.  But that’s what he was!

I like to call a spade a spade.  Now, what does an identity thief ordinarily do?  He steals your identity so that he can open a credit card using your name, your ID number, your credit history—your reputation.  Thus, he scams the credit card company by pretending to be you.

Craig Wright is not only stealing a name:  He is stealing the reputation that goes with it.  He is stealing Satoshi’s fame, Satoshi’s credibility—he is stealing Satoshi’s legend!  He is using that reputation, Satoshi’s public “credit score”, to run the massive scam called “Bitcoin SV”.  If that is not identity theft, then what is?

I want to make people think about what Craig Wright is really doing:  The exact same thing as an ordinary identity thief, but blown up to be literally millions of time larger.  If the ordinary identity thief may scam out a few thousand dollars, Craig Wright is stealing a famous identity to try to wreck the Bitcoin market worth over a hundred billion dollars, and redirect that wealth into his own scamcoin project so that he can reap the profits.

(I also want to help provide other Bitcoiners with talking points that they can use in other debates, to point out the real nature of Craig Wright’s scam.  Please help me get the word out!)

Correlating the life of anastasia to satoshi – then we might wait after almost a century to identify the real identity of satoshi.

The identities of some creative geniuses are never discovered.  In academic scholarship, they are often referred to by the word “Anonymous” with the name of the city they are believed to have lived in:  For a fictional example, “Anonymous Alexandria” may be an ancient poet or philosopher who is believed to have lived in Alexandria.

Most such persons never gave named themselves, and are not famous with the public.  Satoshi Nakamoto gave himself a name, and thus gave the history books a name for him.  We don’t know where he lived, or much of anything else not revealed in his code and his forum posts.  Unless unexpected evidence is discovered someday, it may remain that way forever.  Historians in the year 10,000 may write Ph.D. theses and academic papers examining the mystery of Satoshi Nakamoto!

Welcome back nullius.

Thanks!  I’m glad to be back.

Calling them liars out loud isn't just like "feeding the troll"? I don't get how Craig got so much attention,  he even created the "real bitcoin cash". Lol

I thought so, too.  That is why before now, I have avoided all BSV-related discussions:  I didn’t want to feed the troll.  Then, I realized that I was wrong!  This persuaded me:

...a big part of the reason that he's caused so much disruption (and he truly has)-- is because so many bitcoiners took one look at him [Craig Wright], saw how transparently fake he was, and decided it was best to ignore him.  The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.  And that is what has happened here--

[...]

In the future we're going to see more crap like him threatening any business that accepts Bitcoin with patent litigation, to which the common response will be "damn, this bitcoin stuff isn't worth the trouble" from most parties who's business isn't primarily about Bitcoin.  How could you expect otherwise when your response to wright is "damn, this wright stuff isn't worth the trouble"?

Because his lies are so prolific and layered in every one of these threads there are some newer bitcoiners that end up being corrected and put on a more sensible path.  It isn't always a question of people believing him outright, often its falling for one of his lesser lies like the claim that he's an "og bitcoin investor" or that kleiman had something to do with Bitcoin's creation.

[...]

If someone broke into your house and was stealing stuff-- you wouldn't just say 'that thief doesn't deserve our attention' and ignore them.  We shouldn't hesitate to defend Bitcoin and the community surrounding it.

[...]

Now-- if you want to argue that various threads aren't very effective and that the community could do better?  I couldn't agree more.

Satoshi had many known public addresses.  Until someone just sign a message from one of those addresses, I.e. providing a cryptographic proof to be satoshi, they are just fake.

Pertaining to fake Satoshi's it is as @bitmover states the only proof
any of us need is any sort of action relating to the known Satoshi
wallets, sign a message or move 1 bitcoin from one wallet to another
(to be extra dramatic)

Everything else is bunkum, hot air, waffle and we should all realise
this and call on the imposter to complete either of the above tasks
because I dont want to be listening and reading or seeing thread
after thread of imposter related chat.

When I returned to the forum after a 20-month absence, I appreciated that some people demanded a PGP-signed statement that I am really nullius.  In the crypto-world, it’s the way to stay safe against identity thieves!

In Satoshi’s case, I think the proof of his identity would require more evidence:  It would be necessary but not sufficient that he provide a cryptographically signed proof.  It is unlikely, but possible that someone may have stolen Satoshi’s private keys.

The signed statement is the baseline, the first evidence to demand; without that, yes, “everything else bunkum, hot air, waffle”.  It would then be necessary to evaluate whether the claimant had the same level of cryptographic knowledge as Satoshi did, the same writing style, etc.  Given the amount of money that a scammer could steal by stealing Satoshi’s identity, we would need to be sure!

Craig Wright has not even provided the most basic evidence.  Of course, that’s why everybody who is knowledgeable about crypto immediately rejects his claims.  The danger is that he can fool newbies, and he can destabilize the market by making his claims to people who never used Bitcoin at all, and he can do other damage by telling his lies to the public.

That’s why the public must be told that Craig Wright is an identity thief who has stolen the identity of Bitcoin’s founder.  Words are powerful.  People know what “identity theft” is, so they will immediately get the right idea—instead of falling down into a complicated crypto discussion involving topics that are unfamiliar to them.

the silver lining: satoshi's pseudonymity may have enabled imposters, but it also allowed him/her/them to disappear completely unknown. that was a massive win for bitcoin's decentralization.

Good point.  And if Satoshi is still alive, that is really a matter of his safety, too.  If he still had any ongoing public exposure, can you imagine the money and effort that criminal gangs and repressive régimes would use to try to find him?

in contrast, it would be virtually impossible to impersonate vitalik buterin. the trade-off for ethereum is they forever have a "benevolent dictator". that trade-off isn't worth it IMO.

Replete with top-down ordered “irregular state changes”, of course. That permanently killed Ethereum’s credibility, in my view.

[CryptoBry]

Craig Wright is not only stealing a name:  He is stealing the reputation that goes with it.  He is stealing Satoshi’s fame, Satoshi’s credibility—he is stealing Satoshi’s legend!  He is using that reputation, Satoshi’s public “credit score”, to run the massive scam called “Bitcoin SV”.  If that is not identity theft, then what is?

And he wished to steal Bitcoin too. First, you made a very strong point on identity theft and the possible side effects the act can be doing to other people and even to a whole industry. The tragic Anastasia story nailed the coffin. Definitely, we should be standing united and loud on the many lies that this man has already inflicted on Satoshi Nakamoto's name and Bitcoin. Glad to know that we are doing that here in this forum which exposed him every step of the way. We should not allow a pathological liar to hijack an industry that can be empowering people and representing the future of money, finance and banking. We have heard enough of the things that CW claimed, and we know the truths even the court acknowledged.

[aoluain]

snip

In Satoshi’s case, I think the proof of his identity would require more evidence:  It would be necessary but not sufficient that he provide a cryptographically signed proof.  It is unlikely, but possible that someone may have stolen Satoshi’s private keys.

The signed statement is the baseline, the first evidence to demand; without that, yes, “everything else bunkum, hot air, waffle”.  It would then be necessary to evaluate whether the claimant had the same level of cryptographic knowledge as Satoshi did, the same writing style, etc.  Given the amount of money that a scammer could steal by stealing Satoshi’s identity, we would need to be sure!

Craig Wright has not even provided the most basic evidence.  Of course, that’s why everybody who is knowledgeable about crypto immediately rejects his claims.  The danger is that he can fool newbies, and he can destabilize the market by making his claims to people who never used Bitcoin at all, and he can do other damage by telling his lies to the public.

That’s why the public must be told that Craig Wright is an identity thief who has stolen the identity of Bitcoin’s founder.  Words are powerful.  People know what “identity theft” is, so they will immediately get the right idea—instead of falling down into a complicated crypto discussion involving topics that are unfamiliar to them.

This needs to be highlighted more on the forum,
should we afford CW a special board or section?

and a fect file in the beginners section too, so newbies can be informed.

More people need to be aware of what is ACTUALLY
going on and how (as above) he can be brought to task.

[o_e_l_e_o]

In Satoshi’s case, I think the proof of his identity would require more evidence:  It would be necessary but not sufficient that he provide a cryptographically signed proof.  It is unlikely, but possible that someone may have stolen Satoshi’s private keys.

This is an important point to be made, and it's a point I've made before.

Until someone can provide some sort of cryptographic evidence (sign from an early address, moving coins, PGP, etc.), then what they say can be rightly ridiculed. If they can provide such evidence, then that doesn't automatically make them Satoshi, but it does warrant further discussion and examination. Signing a message proves ownership; it does not prove identity.

Given CSW's endless list of lies, his repeated scam attempts, all his faked "evidence", his poor technical knowledge regarding bitcoin and cryptography, his complete lack of understanding regarding code he supposedly wrote, even his writing style and general philosophies regarding privacy, even if he did manage to sign a message or similar, I still wouldn't believe he was Satoshi.


In the interest of providing people with talking points, as much as it pains me to link to a BCH subreddit, I'll share this link: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/b479rk/please_excuse_the_craig_wright_spam_but_this_is/ej4oxvj/

[hv_]

There is never a 100% sure thing in our complex world

just to put sth against

https://unboundedcapital.com/blog/why-we-think-craig-wright-is-satoshi-and-why-that-matters

[DooMAD]

https://unboundedcapital.com/blog/why-we-think-craig-wright-is-satoshi-and-why-that-matters

Whoever wrote that is desperately clutching at straws.  There's nothing concrete in any of that and it's just wishful thinking on their part that they haven't been duped by a con-artist.  I'm sorry, but both they and you have been deceived.

[hatshepsut93]

The reason why this whole mess has started is because journalists didn't care about the consequences of their actions, they wanted to write a story that would generate clicks, so they have brought CSW to the spotlight and they keep doing it to this day. If news sites stopped making articles about this scammer, he'd be forgotten in a year.

in contrast, it would be virtually impossible to impersonate vitalik buterin. the trade-off for ethereum is they forever have a "benevolent dictator". that trade-off isn't worth it IMO.

Why such binary choice? I'm sure Satoshi could have gone public without becoming a "benevolent dictator", he could even distance himself from Bitcoin development.

[DooMAD]

I'm sure Satoshi could have gone public without becoming a "benevolent dictator", he could even distance himself from Bitcoin development.

No distance would be great enough, I suspect.  Every single word said by a verified and real satoshi about a present-day Bitcoin would be over-analysed to death and people would try to interpret every last syllable a million different ways.  It would just be too disruptive.

[BitcoinFX]

Code:

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Project Anastasia: Bitcoiners Against Identity Theft

Craig Wright is an identity thief who has taken the name Satoshi Nakamoto - prove me wrong!

My Old Wallet Address: 1JXFXUBGs2ZtEDAQMdZ3tkCKo38nT2XSEp created 15/02/2010 15:20

Why can't Craig Wright do this? 

Verifying my (old) zero balance wallet address for blockchain research etc.,

- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4630066.0

Not Your Private Keys, Not Your Bitcoin.

Don't trust, verify.

Signed by BitcoinFX - bitcointalk.org - January 6th, 2020
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1JXFXUBGs2ZtEDAQMdZ3tkCKo38nT2XSEp
G7/SRVNoiHQp0/hWWFBiKACp1OJfvytLudcp855eptMnZyvrGKymAdB98yrrHtV9H+jQvgpcmfcF1011bVUQHRI=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

- https://brainwalletx.github.io/#verify?vrAddr=1JXFXUBGs2ZtEDAQMdZ3tkCKo38nT2XSEp&vrMsg=Project%20Anastasia%3A%20Bitcoiners%20Against%20Identity%20Theft%0A%0ACraig%20Wright%20is%20an%20identity%20thief%20who%20has%20taken%20the%20name%20Satoshi%20Nakamoto%20-%20prove%20me%20wrong!%0A%0AMy%20Old%20Wallet%20Address%3A%201JXFXUBGs2ZtEDAQMdZ3tkCKo38nT2XSEp%20created%2015%2F02%2F2010%2015%3A20%0A%0AWhy%20can't%20Craig%20Wright%20do%20this%3F%20%0A%0AVerifying%20my%20(old)%20zero%20balance%20wallet%20address%20for%20blockchain%20research%20etc.%2C%0A%0A-%20https%3A%2F%2Fbitcointalk.org%2Findex.php%3Ftopic%3D4630066.0%0A%0ANot%20Your%20Private%20Keys%2C%20Not%20Your%20Bitcoin.%0A%0ADon't%20trust%2C%20verify.%0A%0ASigned%20by%20BitcoinFX%20-%20bitcointalk.org%20-%20January%206th%2C%202020&vrSig=G7%2FSRVNoiHQp0%2FhWWFBiKACp1OJfvytLudcp855eptMnZyvrGKymAdB98yrrHtV9H%2BjQvgpcmfcF1011bVUQHRI%3D

- https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1JXFXUBGs2ZtEDAQMdZ3tkCKo38nT2XSEp

...

Whilst the identity theft of princess Anastasia is an excellent analogy, I have long thought that the 'Tichborne case' also provides a very fitting example to describe the actions of CSW ...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tichborne_case  a.k.a "The Tichborne Claimant"

"... the man who lost himself still walks in history, with no other name than that which the common voice of his day accorded him: the Claimant ..."

[squatter]

Until someone can provide some sort of cryptographic evidence (sign from an early address, moving coins, PGP, etc.), then what they say can be rightly ridiculed. If they can provide such evidence, then that doesn't automatically make them Satoshi, but it does warrant further discussion and examination. Signing a message proves ownership; it does not prove identity.

In fact, there's technically nothing that could ever prove Satoshi's identity. Signing from early addresses or Satoshi's PGP key would only muddy the waters. Private keys can be compromised due to security mistakes or even encryption vulnerabilities.

I believe that anybody claiming to be Satoshi ought to be ridiculed and ostracized from the community without question. It's an unprovable claim; believing it requires faith. That's the antithesis of everything Satoshi ever imparted to us, including the Bitcoin software. I'm not going to believe something I cant verify.

[BitcoinFX]

Until someone can provide some sort of cryptographic evidence (sign from an early address, moving coins, PGP, etc.), then what they say can be rightly ridiculed. If they can provide such evidence, then that doesn't automatically make them Satoshi, but it does warrant further discussion and examination. Signing a message proves ownership; it does not prove identity.

In fact, there's technically nothing that could ever prove Satoshi's identity. Signing from early addresses or Satoshi's PGP key would only muddy the waters. Private keys can be compromised due to security mistakes or even encryption vulnerabilities.

I believe that anybody claiming to be Satoshi ought to be ridiculed and ostracized from the community without question. It's an unprovable claim; believing it requires faith. That's the antithesis of everything Satoshi ever imparted to us, including the Bitcoin software. I'm not going to believe something I cant verify.

Signing is better than not signing. Verifying is better than not verifying.

Multiple Bitcoin address signing (and verification) of early blocks, coupled with account logins (on sourceforge.net , bitcointalk.org , email etc.,) and GPG Key signing, as well as being able to discuss topics on early Bitcoin development and the Bitcoin code with original members of this community would be a good start.

- https://bitcointalk.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

Code:

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
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=3FTe
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

Instead we get continually deflecting responses like this from CSW ...

GQ interview with Craig Wright "F##K OFF!"
- https://youtu.be/7YUTq7_vO3A *NSFW*

 



Image Source: @lopp on twitter

"/Shuz" - *Satire* - SWIM
- https://youtu.be/LPBTaVfsfrQ *NSFW*

[hv_]

https://unboundedcapital.com/blog/why-we-think-craig-wright-is-satoshi-and-why-that-matters

Whoever wrote that is desperately clutching at straws.  There's nothing concrete in any of that and it's just wishful thinking on their part that they haven't been duped by a con-artist.  I'm sorry, but both they and you have been deceived.

I'd agree on the Point of wishful thinking - but that is behind all crpto ( esp see LN ...) , otherwise we'd have global adoption today

[Wind_FURY]

This needs to be highlighted more on the forum,
should we afford CW a special board or section?

NEVER. He doesn't deserve the space.

and a fect file in the beginners section too, so newbies can be informed.

More people need to be aware of what is ACTUALLY
going on and how (as above) he can be brought to task.

This topic is enough. Although, another one mainly for funny Faketoshi memes, ridiculing his claims would be a good one.

https://unboundedcapital.com/blog/why-we-think-craig-wright-is-satoshi-and-why-that-matters

Whoever wrote that is desperately clutching at straws.  There's nothing concrete in any of that and it's just wishful thinking on their part that they haven't been duped by a con-artist.  I'm sorry, but both they and you have been deceived.

I'd agree on the Point of wishful thinking - but that is behind all crpto ( esp see LN ...) , otherwise we'd have global adoption today

Hahaha.

You actually had wishful thinking that Craig Wright is Satoshi?

[aoluain]

This needs to be highlighted more on the forum,
should we afford CW a special board or section?

NEVER. He doesn't deserve the space.

He deserves a targeted and focussed highlight of his claims and
his impersonation. A place where all articles can be grouped in one
where we can all be informed and vent our hate at his antics.