[writtles]

To save everyone from the oozing condescension of this guy's rant I'll boil down his thesis: Just because someone can spend Satoshi's bitcoin doesn't PROVE that they're Satoshi. Given by the many common sense reasons he listed with the know-it-all fervor of an 8th grade WoW player (someone could have stole it or the original team passed it around among themselves etc). Sure it doesn't prove anything ABSOLUTELY if Craig Write actually moved a bitcoin, but it certainly would help his case.

[mbgaxyz]

On the other hand... the author is a respected financial cryptographer. He invented Riccardian contracts, is a proponent of triple-entry accounting, has authored many papers and provided expert testimony to the US senate finance subcommittee. 45 leading banks have joined the R3 consortium and he is R3's blockchain architect.

[maxander]

One might object that we don't know the author is a respected financial cryptographer- we see merely that he's posting with a respected cryptographer's account, which proves nothing. : )

Regardless of his larger accomplishments, this particular post qualifies as a rant by my measure- phrases like "ripping the wool off sheep's backs" and "sate your pavlovian hunger" don't make for calm and measured discourse. As for substance, clearly he's angry that people are responding so scathingly to Wright's claim, but A) this is the internet, that's how it behaves, and B) we are all quite aware that cryptographic proofs aren't everything and that Satoshi might have lost his keys, but Wright has offered us many good reasons to doubt his sincerity. Past actions (fake degrees, tax shenanigans, etc) aside, he came out with the assertion that he was Satoshi and could prove it. He posted a fake demonstration of signing a message with Satoshi's key, and then made noise about being about to spend coins from the genesis block before backing out altogether. It just looks bad. If he had come out and said "I'm Satoshi Nakamoto, but I don't have the keys to prove it", well... people wouldn't necessarily believe him, but it would have remained a possibility in people's minds. This whole story has functioned as quite effective human proof that Wright is a con-artist.

[oneloop]

And despite all that he still makes the idiotic point that just because you have Satoshi's keys doesn't mean you're Satoshi.

Having Satoshi's keys proves you have Satoshi's keys we understand the obvious "nuances". I think he just likes to hear himself talk.

[kazinator]

> Just because someone can spend Satoshi's bitcoin doesn't PROVE that they're Satoshi.

Unless that spender is Nick Szabo. At that point, it's no longer rational to entertain any lingering doubt. :)