|
|
|
|
|
|
by ifdefdebug
3700 days ago
|
|
|
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. 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. 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. |
|
|
Everything I've read about Craig Wright makes it seem pretty unlikely that he's the former. I just don't see enough in his CV to believe he created Bitcoin. This is the Satoshi I'd be more interested in actually learning the identity of.
As for the latter, all he needs to do to prove that is sign a message. That's pretty easy to do relative to the magnitude of the claim. Any proof beyond that isn't proof of identity, it's proof that he obtained that identity legitimately. I kind of don't care about who this Satoshi is unless they are the same person.
I don't think these two Satoshis have to be the same person, I don't think they need to be only one person, and I don't think they need to be alive, but right now I've personally seen nothing that makes me thing Craig is either.