First impressions on Craig Wright ( Satoshi Nakamoto ? )

[Slow death]

this guy is the biggest disaster and shame for the cryptocurrency market, he is constantly embarrassing the whole community with his claims that he is the real satoshi nakamoto and when people ask him to prove the guy he just can't, the price of bitcoin has gone up a lot for the $69000 why doesn't he spend all satoshi bitcoins? he doesn't spend because he can't access bitcoins. he is a fraud and a joke to the whole community.

[1713980466]

1713980466

[1713980466]

1713980466

[1713980466]

1713980466

[1713980466]

1713980466

[mynonce]

If someone proved that he/she/they is/are Satoshi, he/she/they could patent the blockchain technology and how we use it.

10 year after his disappearance? Nah man. Its not how it works. You can't patent open source code ...

Not the source code, I meant the blockchain technology.

Yes, Satoshi distributed the wallet software with 'Copyright (c) 2009 Satoshi Nakamoto' under the MIT/X11 Software License.

[gmaxwell]

If someone proved that he/she/they is/are Satoshi, he/she/they could patent the blockchain technology and how we use it.

Nope. That isn't how patents work.  If someone publishes an invention that publication becomes prior art and is an absolute bar to patentability, after a year even the inventors own publications count as prior art.

So no, Satoshi themselves couldn't even do this.

But your misunderstanding is one of that faketoshi fraudsters like Wright like to exploit.

[pooya87]

Wherever I go, opinions seem to be divided about whether Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto or not.

I don't know which places you've been going but from what I have seen so far everyone knows for a fact that Craig Wright is a scammer. The handful of people who say otherwise in his support know this fact better than everyone else, they just have some benefit in publicly saying otherwise.

will this be the kiss of death for BTC ? I say this because he claims BSV is the real Bitcoin and BTC is not.

The most obvious way of knowing if someone is an identity fraudster is to see if they have ever proved any of their claims which CW has never provided any proof whatsoever.

Another easy way to knowing this and whether the shitcoin called BSV has anything to say is to see what it stands for. When Satoshi created bitcoin the goal was obviously decentralization and when the scammer got behind the shitcoin called BSV the goal was obviously centralization and they also clearly made this claim that people shouldn't even be running full nodes and full nodes should be run by centralized authorities that control the network.
In other words BSV fundamental principles are the exact opposite of what Satoshi Nakamoto invented back in 2008.

The fact that you are even asking such a question here shows that you haven't done any research into what Bitcoin is and have been hanging out in some sort of altcoin bag holder echo chamber.

[o_e_l_e_o]

BSV that was once ranked amount the first 10 coins now at 59th in marketcap. There are other fake bitcoins like BCH also.

I don't often check the prices of these fakecoins, but seeing BSV hit a new all time low of 0.0025 BTC and BCash not far off a new all time low at 0.009 BTC does make me chuckle a bit. Dumping that trash at almost 0.2 BTC each was a great decision, even more so as time goes on. I do feel for all the newbies who have fallen victim to these scams, though.

though claiming to be Dr. Craig for decades he only completed his first doctorate in 2017, et 4 years ago
yep he has been faking his education for decades

Don't forget that this doctorate was plagiarized as well, including from a source which discusses the territorial behavior of birds: https://medium.com/@paintedfrog/craig-wright-plagiarized-significant-portions-of-his-phd-thesis-and-tried-to-hide-it-80cd8f01459

I'm open minded, but show me some real evidence !

Yes, exactly this. Show us a single piece of real evidence that CSW is Satoshi. No? Didn't think so.

And are you even aware that Craig Wright just won a civil lawsuit against him regarding the creation of Bitcoin ?

The lawsuit had nothing to do with whether or not he was Satoshi, and he was ordered to pay $100 million to the Kleiman estate.

and CW has already done this privately in front of a few selected individuals.

His methods of doing this are public and have been shown to be fake.

[amishmanish]

Wow. Some of the comments here! It seems some of the nay sayers are mostly basing their views on gossip and internet rumors. I'm open minded, but show me some real evidence ! And are you even aware that Craig Wright just won a civil lawsuit against him regarding the creation of Bitcoin ? ( they wanted to take away a big chunk of the early mined Bitcoins, which only Satoshi Nakamoto would have had access to ) Also, moving coins is not the only way to prove you have access to the private keys, there are other ways, and CW has already done this privately in front of a few selected individuals. You need to find the Kitco report on it ( keywords "Kitco News Satoshi Nakamoto")I would share the direct link here but last time I did that my post got removed by moderators.

From the initial post, you did not seem like one of those trolls who have frequented this forum since the beginning trying to make scammers look legit. There were those who did it for Roger Ver, There are those who do it for CSW. I almost felt like you were genuinely bamboozled by his bullshit coz you have to admit that if you are just someone sincere, really hoping to know Satoshi, you'd fall for his tactics.

Yet, now that you quote the lawsuit, I am pretty sure you are just another troll. Another comment giving Roger importance only means that you are just intentionally ignorant.

The lawsuit was from the estate of Ira Kleiman seeking part of the one million BTC that CSW wrongly claimed he has access to. There are records on the internet that the addresses this idiot has claimed as his own (in papers filed in court), have publically sent "signed" messages saying that he is a fraud. There are no BTC that this scum controls. The community has been challenging him to sign a message for years now but he keeps coming up with excuses and diversion tactics to keep people like you entertained who will believe anything due to your own greed.

There are a lot of like you in the crypto world. Those who hold these shitcoins and very intensely want it to be true because it'd mean that you'd all become millionaires. There are those thousands of retail idiots who kept buying the XRP tokens being printed in the billions and now hope that it becomes legit, because that'd mean they'd get rich.

There is no other reason for your beliefs except your greed.

If you did even a wee-bit of actual research, went into details of signed messages and looked at the way CSW resorts to outright lies (well even Vitalik called him a scammer), you'd realize that he is just a slick, scammy narcissist who enjoys all this attention. This narcissist can never be Satoshi. If you read even a word of the man himself on the forum, you'd instantly recognize the very down-to-earth and humble style that had zero hints of self-aggrandizement, which is something that faketoshi loves to do.

Just learn to read and make decisions for yourself. it is still not late to make actual money in crypto with honest dev work and getting onto new projects that launch everyday. Bitcoin is at the foundation of them all. If you want to earn crypto, then actually study and be sincere about the technology and stop batting for people who have repeatedly proven themselves to be scamsters. Think for yourself and stop fooling yourself. Sell that BSV shit if you hold any and utilize your time to find good projects and teams in this bear market.

[Len Saldua]

For the record I do not own any BSV, or BCH... and I have invested in Bitcoin. Whether Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto or not makes no difference to me, I'm mostly invested into Altcoins like Terra, Solana, Matic, Helium, Ethereum and a few others. What I was saying is that based on what I've seen and heard on YouTube ( including testimonials from very credible people in reliable news channels, not "opinion" fanboy channels ) I found Craig Wright to be a likely candidate.

P.S. If his education and Phds are all fake, those BBC journalists were certainly fooled, as they referenced them many times...

[dkbit98]

Without going into much detail, after watching several of the interviews on YouTube I have to admit he seems to be the real deal.

I won't go into much details but i have to admit that you seem to be one of his cult followers and believers, and you need to detox asap.
CSW is nothing like Satoshi Nakamoto, CSW is not a nerd but he is a big liar and ex-farmer who probably stole money from other.
Anyone can have patents and bunch of paper that proves nothing, and btw I know some killers and biggest frauds also finished universities and had Phds.
BSV is just a worthless shitcoin, and it will always be just that.

[Stalker22]

What I was saying is that based on what I've seen and heard on YouTube ( including testimonials from very credible people in reliable news channels, not "opinion" fanboy channels ) I found Craig Wright to be a likely candidate.

As someone once said, "I'm open minded, but show me some real evidence!" If you base your evidence on YouTube videos and news headlines, it is no wonder you have ended up with the wrong conclusions.

P.S. If his education and Phds are all fake, those BBC journalists were certainly fooled, as they referenced them many times...

Who said his education and Ph.D. were fake? People have said that there is indications his doctorate is plagiarism, but that is not the same thing. I think you need to read more carefully.

[Cling18]

The first time I've heard about Craig Wright, I started to feel suspicious about his actions. I already noticed that there's something wrong with his claims. He couldn't even provide proof and evidence that he's the real Satoshi which is necessary. As we all know, most of us always look for concrete evidence since there are already lots of people who are claiming to be Satoshi. Obvious lies have existed which is disappointing about Craig even his coin was suspicious for most people at that time.

[mynonce]

... they wanted to take away a big chunk of the early mined Bitcoins, which only Satoshi Nakamoto would have had access to ...

... I'm open minded, but show me some real evidence ! ...

... searched, found ...

https://cswarchive.info/csw-filed

Documents and Quotes Showing That Wright Claimed the "CSW Filed" List Was a List of Bitcoin Addresses He Owned

From that list:

Code:

Bitcoin address
1JaKriNjceGmggKYQkURmatQv6LXyvUiAB          mined 11/May/2009 09:37 PM UTC
1CpkvbaAhn81Vc4vbx1yr9jGuETvetutBj          mined 11/May/2009 10:00 PM UTC
...

... but also found signed messages (same message for several addresses) ...

Code:

Craig Steven Wright is a liar and a fraud. He doesn't have the keys used to sign this message.

The Lightning Network is a significant achievement. However, we need to continue work on improving on-chain capacity.

Unfortunately, the solution is not to just change a constant in the code or to allow powerful participants to force out others.

We are all Satoshi

Code:

Bitcoin address                             Signature
1JaKriNjceGmggKYQkURmatQv6LXyvUiAB          Gzyzrkz/iN5SKCDLZmHy6duoWk4cxMo8cDA8mGGI3m5sa/Nd7d5+PooVbLygMI0bTp7b+GDXXJ3ptZEe/x3/dho=
1CpkvbaAhn81Vc4vbx1yr9jGuETvetutBj          HD5PjDblrRPV3F/Y2ytk+TFzhYkBjX6DHapxpvh5BCtvUDs+nh99KnUx4OOOeOWLBRwhJYOeVEGHW0vN+xRBTCA=
...

You can check it here: https://www.verifybitcoinmessage.com

The signatures are valid.

- no comment - ... but you can.

[odolvlobo]

Here is some real evidence. Not rumors or gossip.

I'm open minded, but show me some real evidence !

While there is no direct evidence proving that CSW is not Satoshi, there are many instances of CSW lying, and fabricating, forging, and doctoring documents in order to support his fraud.

An example of a doctored post

And are you even aware that Craig Wright just won a civil lawsuit against him regarding the creation of Bitcoin ? ( they wanted to take away a big chunk of the early mined Bitcoins, which only Satoshi Nakamoto would have had access to )

The civil lawsuit did not and was not intended to establish whether or not he is Satoshi. In fact, the lawsuit is the source of much of the evidence against him. The plaintiff wanted their share of the bitcoins that CSW claimed to mine (but never proved that he actually mined them). BTW, he was ordered to pay the plaintiff $100 million, so it is hard to claim that he won the lawsuit.

"First, the Court is not required to decide, and does not decide, whether Defendant Dr. Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto,..."

Also, moving coins is not the only way to prove you have access to the private keys, there are other ways, and CW has already done this privately in front of a few selected individuals.

As you say, there are other ways to prove his claim, but has yet to use any of those methods. The simplest way would be to sign a message using a private key known to be owned by Satoshi. That has never been done. The "few selected individuals" now say that they were probably fooled by CSW.

Bamboozled: Gavin Andresen Says He Could Have Been Fooled by Craig Wright

[bitterguy28]

Wherever I go, opinions seem to be divided about whether Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto or not.

It is not Divided , instead Only few listen to that Hoax and Majority of the people in crypto never even bother to Hear that beliefs .

Out of curiosity, I decided to watch a few of the interviews and lectures CW has done over the years, and hear what he has to say. I have to admit some of the things he said struck me as shocking ( ie. BTC will never go to 100K, BTC is not a store of value, etc. ) but hey, I've got an open mind.

and this is what you gone to believe?

Without going into much detail, after watching several of the interviews on YouTube I have to admit he seems to be the real deal.

If he is the real deal? then he must awarded you With Bitcoin from the Million in his hands , But first ask Him to open the wallet first.

Or in other words, he is almost everything you'd expect Satoshi Nakamoto to be...

Wrong , he is just there to claim but none are truthful pointing to him as satoshi .

[pooya87]

If his education and Phds are all fake, those BBC journalists were certainly fooled, as they referenced them many times...

Having phd doesn't mean the person can not be a scammer!
Besides if you have ever read any of those articles you can clearly see that none of them ever make any claims about this scammer being Satoshi. They are not in a place to make such a claim. They are just quoting him making the claim and they are all doing it to generate traffic.

[davis196]

The BTC community being divided about Craig Wright being the real Satoshi Nakamoto?Don't make me laugh.
The BTC community is actually UNITED around the fact that Craig Wright is NOT the real Satoshi Nakamoto.
If he was the real Satoshi,he would have proven this by providing a clear evidence years ago,and all this discussion would have been finished by now.
All he does is just shitting over Bitcoin Core and praising his forked BSV altcoin,while doing on some lawsuits and trying to "prove" his ridiculous claims.
If he was the real creator of Bitcoin,he wouldn't shit over and talk BS about his own creation,wouldn't he?

By the way,why do you like him so much?

[Erdogan]

You really think this man doesn't want fame? After all, everything he does involves confusion around him. In my opinion, this man is still undervalued and even narcissistic. What would all this fuss be for? After all, if he is Satoshi Nakamoto, it's very easy task, just make a transfer from one of the first addresses and it's over.

[franky1]

The lawsuit had nothing to do with whether or not he was Satoshi, and he was ordered to pay $100 million to the Kleiman estate.

the lawsuit is about a company called W&K. set up in 2013. craig 'won' ownership of the company. has to 'pay' $100m to his own company for damages of taking patents out of the company.

this is just a 'paper' thing. where he as the company owner just needs to tell the judge a payment was made and final, and wont be disputed. the judge does not need to see a real bank transfer occur just that the receiver is happy.. the receiver being craig

The lawsuit was from the estate of Ira Kleiman seeking part of the one million BTC that CSW wrongly claimed he has access to. There are records on the internet that the addresses this idiot has claimed as his own (in papers filed in court), have publically sent "signed" messages saying that he is a fraud. There are no BTC that this scum controls.

the lawsuit had nothing to do with the BTC. the btc was not in contest/dispute. both sides agreed they both thought the company had the funds so it was not part of the debate or argument over ownership.
just the ownership of the company name was in dispute.

as for the signatures. to clarify to the topic creator that is wrongly pro-craig.
the signature craig showed in 2016 was not a freshly made signature from a unique message made in 2016, it was simply a copy and paste job of a pre-existing signature found in the blockchain in 2009. it proves nothing about craig nor anything about any 2016 proof session. anyone can copy existing transaction signatures.

however craig also had a list of thousands of public bitcoin addresses and pretended that having a list of public addresses meant it was proof of ownership of such. again anyone can list public addresses. its meaningless. craig could not sign new unique messages for these addresses. yet dozens of other people that do actually own the addresses did sign it to say that craig is a lying scammer.

[Kakmakr]

Dude... You cannot be more wrong on this.

Craig Wright has been hunting for the Satoshi Nakamoto title for many years now.. for Only 2 reasons.... Fame & Fortune. He wants intellectual rights to cash in on that and he wants to be famous, because he is literally a Attention Wh@re.

The guy could not sign ONE of the Bitcoin addresses that are linked to Satoshi Nakamto.... Not ONE! .... He tried to fool people into thinking that he actually signed an address ... but the tech savvy guys out there quickly debunked all his evidence.   

[NeuroticFish]

P.S. If his education and Phds are all fake, those BBC journalists were certainly fooled, as they referenced them many times...

Media doesn't care much what's real. They mostly cite what he said. Keep in mind that nowadays the news are written for 2 reasons:
1. To get people read the paper - so they have to impress, not necessarily tell the truth
2. Fill the spaces between ads

And since CSW is an attention whore, while he and many others (including Roger) want to "rewrite history" for their own benefit, it's clear that their version is more present everywhere.
But if you look deeper you'll find that CSW tried and failed to prove himself as Satoshi (has fooled the journalists, but not the people really understanding crypto and bitcoin), has along history of forgeries, got even his "evidences" ignored in the last lawsuit because they were found to be forgeries.

I am not even convinced about the validity of his actual PhD. I mean that his paper may be plagiarized.

Update: I've got my proof. See here, or even more direct, here. Thanks @o_e_l_e_o. It's indeed plagiarized.

[o_e_l_e_o]

-snip-

This should have been the final nail in the coffin for CSW, at least when it comes to any person who can actually think. CSW picks a bunch of old school addresses which haven't transacted in 10+ years, because he thinks they were owned by Satoshi and therefore "abandoned", and claims that they belong to him. The real owner of those addresses comes out with definitive proof that CSW does not own them and calls CSW a scammer. And yet CSW fanboys either ignore this or play Olympic level mental gymnastics to justify how someone else has possession of what they believe to be Satoshi's coins? Laughable.

I am not even convinced about the validity of his actual PhD. I mean that his paper may be plagiarized.

Take a look at the Medium post I linked to above, which is the same one linked to in that article. It is blatant and barn door plagiarism. Not only has he copied entire paragraphs, but he has also copied entire equations and graphs. Even worse/funnier is that he has introduced multiple errors in to the various equations he plagiarized since he does not even understand what he is plagiarizing, resulting in incorrect equations and undefined terms. The whole thing is a joke.