Hopefully that will not be on the same date as the discovery of Nessie 
I don’t see how being considered a fraud and con man is better than being considered the founder of Bitcoin. It doesn’t seem to me he improved his quality of life with this whole ordeal.
1 Like
Also, if this was his plan all along, he purposefully dragged Jon Matonis and Gavin Andresen through the mud, ruining their reputations.
My explanation is that this is designed to make people think he is a faker and not Satoshi. This is entirely consistent with one of the things we are most sure about Satoshi - that he wants to remain anonymous and is willing to go to some lengths to achieve that.
Ohw, and after that blogpost in which he tried to fool people, he made
another post that he was going to prove he was Satoshi by moving some
coins and sign a message. And again, he didn’t! How much more evidence do you need he is not Satoshi?
Again you seem not to understand my reasoning. We both agree:
- “he is trying and failing - rather badly for a guy who does understand cryptography - to convince people he is Satoshi”
You conclude he is a scammer, and not Satoshi.
I agree that is possible, but on the basis of evidence, think it a bit more likely he is deliberately trying to convince people he is not Satoshi. And the only explanation for that is that either he is Satoshi, or is worried that people will think he is Satoshi because of his close association with David Kleiman and other activities.
How could easily proof me and other critics wrong, but he says that it is to hard for him. Hard in what way?
My point is that he doesn’t want to. You say he’s a scammer but take what he says at face value. I don’t. I’m looking at what he’s been saying and doing (including back in December) and the most likely explanation seems to be that he’s deliberately doing things that make him look like a faker, with the intention of undermining any idea or suggestion that he is Satoshi.
If he now proves with a simple signature that he has the Satoshi keys he
might be able to save his karma a bit. But let me predict he won’t
We agree on this 
But have you thought of any scenario that explains what his motive for this elaborate and complex behaviour might be. I don’t think it is credible to say “to convince people he is Satoshi” because it is clear the evidence put forward for that was easy to debunk. Do you really think Craig White thought that would fool the bitcoin community? Or anyone else given he did this so publicly? I don’t, so I’m unable to think of a motive for him to do all this, and that is what makes me skeptical of the explanation that he was seriously attempting to convince the world, or that his behaviour is scamming. Scamming what?
Nobody has attempted to answer this question, here or anywhere else I’ve read. They just point to his pathetic failure to prove he’s Satoshi and say “scammer” or “faker” and don’t actually consider any further. This appears to be because the community don’t want to believe that CW might be Satoshi. But it doesn’t appear to be a rational conclusion based on his behaviour, or what we do know about Satoshi.
I don’t see how being considered a fraud and con man is better than
being considered the founder of Bitcoin. It doesn’t seem to me he
improved his quality of life with this whole ordeal.
My suggestion is that he might do this in order to avoid being identified as Satoshi, and preserving his anonymity is something we know that Satoshi has gone to great lengths to achieve. So this behaviour is entirely consistent with being Satoshi.
Also, if this was his plan all along, he purposefully dragged Jon
Matonis and Gavin Andresen through the mud, ruining their reputations.
Indeed, and it is worth noting that this scammer, or person who might be mentally ill (no evidence for that I’ve seen), has publicly apologised to them. A scammer might do that, a mentally ill person might do that, but not necessarily. However, one would expect Satoshi to be very regretful of hurting Gavin in that way, and others at the heart of something that he was obviously very committed to creating. So it certainly makes sense to me that he’d try to let them know that he is mindful of the harm what he is doing might cause them, and sorry for doing this, at the same time as explaining why.
Gavin and co. have every reason to be pissed at him whether he is Satoshi or not, but in his position, he might believe it was a necessary evil.
1 Like
If Wright is Satochi but wants to convince others he isn’t, like you suggest, is it then not easier to anonymously send/respond an email or so with a Satochi signature with a message like ‘Wright is not Satochi, I am’ ?
3 Likes
Is this the best way to do that? Let’s assume someone blackmailed him saying he would expose him as Satoshi. He could’ve gone on camera once saying that he likes Bitcoin, maybe fits the profile a bit but that he’s just an entrepreneur involved in Bitcoin and not Satoshi. He could even make a simple joke saying that he could never had the time to be one because of a demanding wife. And nobody could have proved him wrong. Now he did it in public, dragging down the credibility of several crypto people with him. That’s not a nice thing to do.
Maybe he did what you said, but I think that chance is extremely small. And like i asked before, who’s gonna do business with him now half the world sees him as a con man?
2 Likes
Joseph VaughnPerling doubles down on CW being Satoshi.
JVP: The world can learn much from what he has done and how. He is showing what cryptography does and does not do. It is a lesson that the world needs to learn before mass adoption can occur.
JVP: Do your own research. Keep on your quest for knowledge. When
you find someone who can teach you, listen carefully. When you find
someone that can learn from you, be kind.
I’m sorry, but when people start talking like this, I have a very hard time taking them seriously. They love drama too much. Like he’s the Oracle in The Matrix.
1 Like
Haha, I was thinking the same. But when I read this:
JVP: He will know why.
AVW: Why are you sharing it with me?
JVP: It will also be shared with some selected cryptographers.
It almost looks as if JVP can’t reach CW at the moment, but wants to let him know that there will be a conference call. It also looks as if JVP was part of the team next to “some selected cryptographers”. And he now is backing CW showing others from the team will go open as well.
The part about: the world wasn’t ready for bitcoin because they don’t know what encryption does or not sounds a bit weird to me. He says CW is making a complete fool out of himself to teach the world a lesson. It sounds almost religious.
1 Like
He seems to love to be smart-ass cryptic and dramatic. His point seems to be that owning a private key doesn’t mean you are someone. Well, duh. The reason why we want to see a signature from one of the appropriate private keys is because the likelyhood that that person is Satoshi increases.
At any rate, it has next to nothing to do with world-wide adoption of Bitcoin.
1 Like
One thing that doesn’t make any sense, if these reputable cryptographers (Gavin and all) are on Craig’s side, and the purpose of this whole ordeal is to make the world believe he is not Satoshi, then why do they keep insisting the man is Satoshi. Like VaughnPerling, he says Craig/Satoshi needs to work in private, then it would make a lot more sense to keep quiet and let the world believe Craig is a fraud.
2 Likes
people are playing mind games…
How can I get my 13.5k Satoshi? 
I’ve read that Satochi has around 1 million unspent Bitcoins (=100 trillion Satoshi’s).
And it seems to me that this has to be divided fairly among about 7.4 billion people, if everybody is Satochi.
Enough for me to buy 1 MAID at the moment.
1 Like
is craig the real craig wright lol
3 Likes
Paywall at the link you provided. Do you mind sharing what’s there ?
You can sign up & get a few free articles per month. It’s a pretty entertaining & humorous article - worth the bother I’d say
2 Likes
craig hired top london pr firm for his big reveal
Ian grigg explains who owns satoshis coins and the trust protecting them. And asks whats the point in the proof [Cryptography] Proof-of-Satoshi fails Proof-of-Proof.