Seriously, this is at TV soap opera level now. And this...<p>"Whatever is happening is fascinating, it’s a plot worthy of Hollywood."<p>...is terrible judgment. No, it's not a plot worthy of Hollywood. It's a known fraud continuing to make grandiose claims that people publish and debate for some reason. Now, he's concocted a trail of evidence leading to a person that's paralyzed, hospitalized, and maybe nearly dead. The type of person that can't fight a disinformation campaign effectively. And the crowds go wild! Internet soap opera...<p>Maybe I need to leak some emails that some other HN people and I created Bitcoin as a prank to see how many people would waste that energy and CPU when they could just use decentralized transactions with real currency. That I was holding onto my Satoshi stash out of regret for how far my prank would go. Then, a third-world bank invests its holdings in the scheme to save their economy from impending hyperinflation. The same country that previously canceled my contracts for locals due to bribes to their corrupt government. So, I go Bond villain and dump all my Satoshi bitcoins at once to drive the value to near zero. The country is begging IMF for a bailout the next day.<p>Or some other Hollywood-style bullshit that Wright wasn't bright enough to come up with. :)
How much do we believe that the Dorian Nakamoto denial comment on p2pfoundation was from the real Satoshi?<p><a href="http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-source?commentId=2003008%3AComment%3A52186&xg_source=activity" rel="nofollow">http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-sour...</a><p>Because that was posted in 2014, and Kleiman died in 2013.
Didn't the Satoshi Nakamoto account comment on the Newsweek article claiming Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto was the man?[0] That was in 2014. Since Kleiman died in 2013, then someone else would have had access to the Nakamoto account, right?<p>Indeed, I wonder why the Nakamoto account haven't made a comment on the Craig Wright claims.<p>[0] <a href="http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/m/discussion?id=2003008%3ATopic%3A9402" rel="nofollow">http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/m/discussion?id=2003008%3ATopi...</a>
Reminds me of the mystery about +ORC back in my reversing days. I shortly talked to Francesco during a CCC but couldn't get more info on the topic :D<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Red_Cracker" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Red_Cracker</a><p><a href="http://www.home.aone.net.au/~byzantium/found/found4.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.home.aone.net.au/~byzantium/found/found4.html</a>
It is clearly obvious that Craig Wright will be accused of identity theft by many if he really provides the crypto proof he announced yesterday.<p>Too many people prefer to think of Gavin Andresen as a complete idiot easy to fool with some stupid tricks or even a fraud one can buy, rather than to accept Craig Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto. They also think about Craig Wright as a complete idiot who gives false proof easily debunked in a matter of a few hours, when he never ever stated that his discussion of "Key Verification" was a proof of anything.<p>So if he is who he claims, which is something I don't know, then he has good reasons to try to proof it far beyond a signed message. The signed message, if it appears, won't settle things for him. Many people will just say he had the keys stolen.
Nobody suggested yet a scifi twist in the story like Satoshi Nakamoto was an AI project using deep learning. The project was dismantled and the keys can't be recovered. The model was trained with papers in cryptography.<p>Note to downvoters: think that every Satoshi story is hilarious until someone MOVES those F*ing prehistoric bitcoins on a transaction.
Seriously what's with all this bitcoin propaganda on Hacker News these days?<p>Is this kind of stuff even interesting except to the few people that have money invested in bitcoin?