Craig Wright deliberately made a fool of us all with his cyrptographic proof

[AntonSetzer]

Everybody believed that when Craig Wright made his wrong cryptographic proof he was cheating. But this was a deliberate hoax, making a fool of us all.

The video 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIvqn87iAz8 
reveals it all (but apparently nobody understood what he was saying):

One needs to look at the message he claimed to sign but didn't sign:

"  Wright, it is not the same as if I sign Craig Wright, Satoshi.\n\n"

which was a variant of the message by Sartre by which he refused to take the Nobel prize:

It is not the same thing if I sign Jean-Paul Sartre or if I sign Jean-Paul
Sartre, Nobel Prize winner. A writer must refuse to allow himself to be
 transformed into an institution, even if it takes place in the most honorable form."

So in essence he was a saying: If I sign the message that I'm Satoshi, then I betray myself because then I'm no longer the person I was before. I refuse to sign.

So he didn't cheat because he didn't have a key, but because it is against his anti-authoritarian conviction.

This doesn't prove of course that he has the keys, and doesn't prove that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, but for me the mindset this is coming might indicate he may indeed be Satoshi Nakamoto.

[1714695849]

1714695849

[1714695849]

1714695849

[1714695849]

1714695849

[DooMAD]

There are no bigger fools than those who foolishly believe that such a loathsome shit-sack could be the inventor of Bitcoin.

So in essence he was a saying: If I sign the message that I'm Satoshi, then I betray myself because then I'm no longer the person I was before. I refuse to sign.

To describe this as "reaching" would be a colossal understatement.

So he didn't cheat because he didn't have a key, but because it is against his anti-authoritarian conviction.

Except he's not anti-authoritarian at all.  He advocates for a regulated protocol.  Governments in charge of code.  No thank-you.

[hatshepsut93]

but for me the mindset this is coming might indicate he may indeed be Satoshi Nakamoto.

You know that people can pretend to have convictions? Or even if they do have them, this is in no way an argument that they are an anonymous person with same convictions.

This argument that intentionally refusing to prove to be Satoshi proves being Satoshi is just totally devoid of logic. It's just some mental gymnastics for CWS cultists.

[BigBos]

It's up to what he does because at the end of the day I think our view remains the same by not overthinking such a thing as believing that he is Satoshi.
There's no need to bother looking further into the video because the result is the same and I feel sorry for those who still believe in this because at the end of the day when people are saying Craig is a fool claiming to be Satoshi then of course the people who believe in it are even more foolish

[serjent05]

So in essence he was a saying: If I sign the message that I'm Satoshi, then I betray myself because then I'm no longer the person I was before. I refuse to sign.

So he didn't cheat because he didn't have a key, but because it is against his anti-authoritarian conviction.

This doesn't prove of course that he has the keys, and doesn't prove that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, but for me the mindset this is coming might indicate he may indeed be Satoshi Nakamoto.

This is abull**** IMO.  don't get trapped by his psychological approach.  I do think that is one of his alibi.  Knowing about Bitcoin, Craig knows how important it is to sign a Bitcoin message since Bitcoin is about trust in code not on whatever reason the people in mind.  If you can't sign a message with the address known to be Satoshi's, then you are not Satoshi.  @OP  just a reminder, don't get played.

One more, if it is against his anti-authoritarian conviction, why is it that he is dying to claim that he is Satoshi?

[sheenshane]

This doesn't prove of course that he has the keys, and doesn't prove that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, but for me the mindset this is coming might indicate he may indeed be Satoshi Nakamoto.

Are you Craig Wright?
You already stated that this doesn't prove why you still believed he is a Bitcoin creator.

Everyone needs valid proof and if he is able to sign the message then there's no doubt at all.
So I think to stop playing around and stop mentioning this name here, everyone knows about his foolishness.

[nelson4lov]

~Snipped
So in essence he was a saying: If I sign the message that I'm Satoshi, then I betray myself because then I'm no longer the person I was before. I refuse to sign.

So he didn't cheat because he didn't have a key, but because it is against his anti-authoritarian conviction.

This doesn't prove of course that he has the keys, and doesn't prove that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, but for me the mindset this is coming might indicate he may indeed be Satoshi Nakamoto.

Why are you bringing this up now? He should live by what he talks about – "There is no glorious leader" but was actively parading himself as Satoshi. When people called his bluff, he should have submitted a valid proof instead of looking for loopholes in a word game. This should be the end of all Craig Wright shenanigans since it's obvious that he can't walk the talk.

Conversations involving Craig Wright, Roger ver about Bitcoin are unnecessary in 2023.

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

Craig Wright is a Faketoshi, one of Faketoshis.

I gathered every Satoshi Nakamoto thread collects many topics about Faketoshis.

One of interesting facts about Craig Wright is this one Legal Disputes and Drama - Craig Wright's Continuing Bitcoin Controversy

We’ll close this story by leaving a quote from Craig’s mother, who revealed his habit of exaggerating the truth from an early age and through adolescence.

[franky1]

the real satoshi invented bitcoin as a cryptographic proof mechanism .. CSW(who only ever got any btc in 2013+, so not satoshi, nor affiliated) however wants to use social drama idiocy as his "proof". much like other idiots that just want to quote themselves and their idiot cult followers as proof

ass kissers and echo chambers are not proof, they are just evidence of lies, cheating and being an idiot

CSW is not satoshi. and any idiot that just follows other idiots echo chambers of ass kissery deserves to lose any value they have got

[Darker45]

Is he making a fool of us all? Do we even care about him?

"Mindset" my ass! What is in that answer of his that made it special to you? Did he, by making mention of Sartre's refusal of the Nobel prize, in effect make himself extra special? Is that enough to give him the benefit of the doubt? Is that enough for us to reconsider our position and acknowledge that he could indeed be Satoshi?

If at all, that video, that answer, only made him look more foolish by contradicting himself. He has been daydreaming claiming for years to be Satoshi and yet he doesn't want to labeled as such because of his convictions?

He's not making a fool of us. He's making a fool of himself and those who applaud him and believe in him. And probably you.

[DooMAD]

Also can't help but notice that this is the OP's first and only post.  Using a throwaway sockpuppet account, which was only registered today, to spread Faketoshi propaganda is pretty spineless and utterly lacking in credibility.

 

[adaseb]

I remember back in 2016-17 or so when I was actually more convinced he might be satoshi because he was going to prove it by signing a message from a certain address and then last minute he got cold feet and said something along the lines of “i cannot do it”. I got mixed feelings about him and figured maybe he just doesn’t want the added risk of being a target which you own over billions of bitcoin.

However years later and especially how that BSV turned out, I knew 100% he definitely cannot be the real satoshi.   I remeber there was a photo of him standing next to a Lambo. Then turns out that Lambo was a rental. The real satoshi wouldn’t do this.

[Kakmakr]

He only made a fool of himself and possibly also of Gavin Andresen who supported him with that.    He is a narcissist with zero consciousness of what the truth is and what Satoshi Nakamoto stood for.... so why would he fake it, if he wants the fame and fortune?

He likes to be in the limelight and he plays tricks like a true "Snake oil salesman" ..but a scorpion will never change it's behavior. Let's forget about this fool and just focus on people who wants to build Bitcoin and not sell it to the highest bidder. 

 

[digaran]

 You know, when I come to think about it, I believe it would be in everyone's interest if and only if Satoshi could somehow deliver a cryptographic proof as in a signed message with genesis block key and put an end to this nonsense.

I don't know but it seems this wannabe is registering a new account every once in a while to come here and shill for himself, I mean what a f'ed up kind of guy.
Because nobody has such imaginations as the ones shilling for him other than himself.

[Blitzboy]

When someone claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto without proof and compares himself to Sartre, red flags fly. Even if you support government resistance, encryption claims dont seem like handing up the Nobel Prize.

Make no mistake: philosophical claims are not cryptographic evidence. In Bitcoin, where transparency and verification are crucial, implication and roundabout statements dont work.

Bitcoin users want proof. If Craig Wright has the keys, sign a message. No need for drama, no need for riddles. Its about a huge cryptocurrency's legitimacy, not a game.

[NotATether]

This doesn't prove of course that he has the keys, and doesn't prove that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, but for me the mindset this is coming might indicate he may indeed be Satoshi Nakamoto.

That's a moronic conclusion to reach because what kind of MF owing thousands of dollars in taxes to the Australian tax agency would not just cash out those hundreds of thousands of bitcoins that they minted as soon as they had some kind of appreciable value and use that to get them off his trail?

That's like saying Craig Wright created Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Talk - he doesn't have any coding skills!

[Lucius]

There are no bigger fools than those who foolishly believe that such a loathsome shit-sack could be the inventor of Bitcoin.
~snip~

In a world where you have millions of adults who believe that the earth is flat, we should not be surprised that Faketoshi still has an audience that supports him, and not only in the way OP does, but also generously financially, considering that his court farces cost a lot if we only consider the army of lawyers representing him.

~snip~
Everyone needs valid proof and if he is able to sign the message then there's no doubt at all.

A signed message from any address presumed to have belonged to Satoshi would not mean that the person who signed it was actually Satoshi. As incredible as it may seem considering how much the real Satoshi has hidden his identity, it is still possible that one day someone will discover one of his private keys and try to impersonate him.

Even if Faketoshi manages to sign one of those addresses, only fools would believe that he is Satoshi - those two people have absolutely nothing in common, and that is visible to anyone with a little brain in their head.

[dzungmobile]

A signed message from any address presumed to have belonged to Satoshi would not mean that the person who signed it was actually Satoshi. As incredible as it may seem considering how much the real Satoshi has hidden his identity, it is still possible that one day someone will discover one of his private keys and try to impersonate him.

Even if Faketoshi manages to sign one of those addresses, only fools would believe that he is Satoshi - those two people have absolutely nothing in common, and that is visible to anyone with a little brain in their head.

Like recovering a bitcointalk account, a signed message is one of proofs but not the only one proof will be requested by moderators.

If an account is valuable like donator or VIP, more details like past PMs and some information will be asked.

Like this VIP member and how theymos investigate it.

[buwaytress]

I'm not sure if the only fool (seemingly, voluntary too) is OP.

If anyone doubted CW's delusions of grandeur, his copy of Sartre (if at all intentional) and contempt of justice procedure tells you all you need to know about what this guy is.

Why his followers don't put BSV where their mouth is, I don't get.

[Majestic-milf]

Everybody believed that when Craig Wright made his wrong cryptographic proof he was cheating. But this was a deliberate hoax, making a fool of us all.

So if I interpreted what you're saying right, you mean he could be Satoshi nakamoto? Yeah, right. Then I'd be Bill Gates. C'mon! Didn't you read it in the news that this fake Satoshi wannabe will go any lengths just to deceive any unsuspecting user into believing he's the real deal? Weren't you aware of the court case that's still ongoing about him trying to prove ownership of the Bitcoin white paper and code? Oh, probably you didn't.
Since 2016 he has been obsessed with the belief that he's the Bitcoin messiah and it will be crazy for anyone to fall for his tricks.

This doesn't prove of course that he has the keys, and doesn't prove that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, but for me the mindset this is coming might indicate he may indeed be Satoshi Nakamoto.

Baseless assumptions, bruh. You sound like one of Craig's faithfuls which is not surprising considering how you easily confused yourself with your topic.