Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by DyslexicAtheist 1052 days ago
indeed.

this is Satoshi/Wright all over again. All Wright had to do is sign a document with the original key to provide (reasonably) plausible proof that he was indeed Satoshi.

Behavior of grifters always has this constant: infuriate your peers by making excuses and dazzle the outsiders/media with techno-babble. Sit back and watch both camps fight in social media, from where it infects MSM. Once it takes off the 2 camps battling another ensure it stays in the news and the cult that was created ensures their idols (gods) are protected. The public can no longer tell truth from fiction because as they understand "where there's smoke there's fire". At this point the suits and corporate talking-heads promise big returns, so there is no stopping it because money is being made regardless from it being real.

replicate || GTFO

1 comments

In Wright's case what's funnier is that after his little trickery in his attempts to prove he's Satoshi (which fell to bits immediately), he was willing to go to extraordinary lengths to keep up the act. He came up with some Back To The Future style excuse for not being in possession of certain keys saying that he'd somehow split them into N parts and had arranged for some bonded courier to show up at a given day (which obviously didn't happen). Additionally he fought against the estate of a former business partner, persuaded the judge that he was Satoshi and therefore worth billions and owes the estate $100m in damages:

> Following a three-week trial in late 2021, a jury found Wright liable for conversion but awarded Kleiman's estate US$100 million in damages while Kleiman's estate had sought upwards of US$25 billion at trial. Wright took the position that verdict served as a vindication of his role in inventing bitcoin and stated that he would not appeal the jury's findings

Really childish stuff.