Craig Wright Claims He's Satoshi Nakamoto, the Creator Of Bitcoin 147
Australian entrepreneur Craig Wright has put an end to the years-long speculation about the creator of Bitcoin. In an interview with the BBC, The Economist (may have a paywall), and GQ, Wright claimed that he is indeed the person who developed the concepts on which Bitcoin cryptocurrency is built. According to the BBC, Mr. Wright provided "technical proof to back up his claim using coins known to be owned by Bitcoin's creator." Wright writes in a blog post: [A]fter many years, and having experienced the ebb and flow of life those years have brought, I think I am finally at peace with what he meant. If I sign Craig Wright, it is not the same as if I sign Craig Wright, Satoshi[...] Since those early days, after distancing myself from the public persona that was Satoshi, I have poured every measure of myself into research. I have been silent, but I have not been absent. I have been engaged with an exceptional group and look forward to sharing our remarkable work when they are ready. Satoshi is dead. But this is only the beginning. According to Wright's website, he is a "computer scientist, businessman and inventor" born in Brisbane, Australia, in October 1970. Some have questioned the authenticity and relevance of the "technical proof" Wright has provided. Nik Cubrilovic, an Australian former hacker and leading internet security blogger, wrote, "I don't believe for a second Wright is Satoshi. I know two people who worked with Wright, characterized him as crazy and schemer/charlatan." Michele Spagnuolo, Information Security Engineer at Google added, "He's not Satoshi. He just reused a signed message (of a Sartre text) by Satoshi with block 9 key as 'proof.'"
If he were, why isn't he using the money? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Almost nobody accepts Bitcoins for payment, except through an exchange with all prices in USD. Nobody says "this game costs 1.3 BTC, now send me 1.3 BTC". This has almost no influence on Bitcoins current or future value.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:If he were, why isn't he using the money? (Score:5, Informative)
The real Satoshi Nakamoto is worth at minimum around a half a billion dollars.
That would assume that selling that many bitcoins and adding them to the actively traded pool would not cause a significant inflationary depreciation.
Even if done slowly, it would have a significant effect. There's no way to hide the infusion, no matter how slowly it is done, because the records are by design open.
Re:If he were, why isn't he using the money? (Score:5, Interesting)
Those BTC may be worth that much at today's prices; but you can't sell out without crashing the market. There are, however, probably some established exit strategies for this kind of thing. He could, at the very least, have small planned sales and provide himself with a steady income without putting too much price pressure on the currency, adjusting the sales from time-to-time if it were causing prices to move in an undesirable direction. Ironically, that would be a lot like what the Fed does.
Re: (Score:2)
> He could, at the very least, have small planned sales
In a rational market, yea, maybe. But this is Bitcoin. The coins in question haven't moved EVER- many assume that they are probably stuck in place (essentially destroyed), and the market reflects whatever percent of bitcoin speculators believe that. So even moving a single bitcoin would probably cause some pretty serious effects.
Certainly, this guy is not Satoshi, and now we know for sure. Previously there were hints that he may have set up. Now
Re: (Score:2)
If you're a hedge fund wanting to dump a million shares of company X, you don't just run down to the NYSE and say "SELL". You find some other hedge fund or mutual fund, and you make them an offer. Maybe you give them a few dollars off the current price or whatever. Same situation here, there would probably be folks willing to take 50 million dollars of bitcoin off you for the right price and they would hold it or slowly sell it or whatever. Don't bet that 500 million of bitcoin can't be liquidated.
Re: (Score:2)
Who says he hasn't ? The blockchain. Pfft, The smart strategy with an investment expected to gain over time, is not to reduce principle, but to borrow against it at a rate lower than the rate of return you get on the investment.
This is why rich guys will often finance their sports cars, at like 0-1% interest, because their principle is making 7%.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to be "a rich guy" to do that. If you have a low enough mortgage, _counting_ the mortgage interest deduction(*), you can reasonably make more from investing that you would have made by paying off the mortgage earlier.
(*) I know some deductions are reduced due to AMT, I'm not sure if the mortgage interest deduction is. If so, and one pays AMT, that has to be taken into account.
Re: (Score:2)
The article says it's owned by a foundation, not him.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The simplest proof (Score:5, Interesting)
The simplest proof would be to sign a message from the owner of the "genesis block".
Craig Wright pretended to do this, but actually copied&pasted a random signature from an early transaction, proving only that he's trying to commit fraud
Re: (Score:2)
Better proof would be for him to sign something in today's headlines, or a block that was mined today.
No, I am Spartacus! (Score:5, Funny)
No, I am Spartacus! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
First few characters are the same, looks legit.
Bitcoin creator (Score:5, Funny)
I know two people who worked with Wright, characterized him as crazy and schemer/charlatan
How does this make him *not* a candidate for being the creator of BitCoin? To me that just seems to reinforce his claim.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I'm not saying his claim is accurate, just that someone trying to call him out as a fraud might want to highlight a belief that the dude is just not smart enough to do it or that it makes no sense to come out rather than saying the guy's a crazy and a schemer, neither of which would preclude making something like Bitcoin. *Particularly* since a lot of us consider it a gigantic nerd ponzi scheme, it'd probably be best not to give us just more fuel for our argument.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess because he's annoyed by the constant speculation that he might be Yakamoto. Whilst Bitcoin is still a thing that wouldn't have stopped. But removing the mystery means a flood of media interest for a while, but then it'll be yesterday's news, and he'll get a bit more peace and quiet.
Re:Bitcoin creator (Score:5, Funny)
Yup, that's the best new pyramid scheme that was created since the beginning of time! :D
No, the greatest pyramid schemer was Khufu [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Considering Bitcoin doesn't even fit the definition of a pyramid scheme, perhaps you should learn more about the subject before spouting off 100 times in every bitcoin article?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
But he IDENTIFIES as Satoshi (Score:3, Funny)
And we must respect that, or liberals will boycott us.
Re:But he IDENTIFIES as Satoshi (Score:4, Funny)
Nope. It's cultural appropriation. Off to diversity training with you!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No, he's right. We violated AC's safe space. We should be ashamed.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a gun free zone, please stop with the verbal violence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm actually working on my second billion $$ right now. I had to give up on the first, though.
Re: (Score:1)
And we must respect that, or liberals will boycott us.
I identify as morally superior to Muhammed.
Now what? =P
Re: (Score:2)
Your joke at the expense of others says more about your disdain for your fellow humans than the "liberals" you are so angry with. Real people are having real problems with their lives, and here you are mocking them on Slashdot for yuks. I'd implore you to grow up, but it seems too late.
Re: (Score:2)
If I had the points, I would mod you up simply for having the bravery to burn your own karma without using the AC checkbox. The change is actually refreshing.
Re: (Score:1)
Eh, I have my moments of rage, but I can't stop the coming storm. Actually I've been trying to log in for my most incendiary comments. Anybody can flame somebody else as AC.
Nobody will listen, but there are larger things at stake here. But it's like when your attack in Monster Hunter and the attack just keeps deflecting from the monster and I stupidly keep pressing attack like that'll make a difference.
TPP/TTIP/TISA is the New World Order they talked about on shortwave radio when I was a kid. Their [the
Already debunked (Score:5, Informative)
So the big news of the day is that Bitcoin's creator has stepped forward.
Let's nip it in the bud. No, he has not. A con man who was already outed half a year ago has made an elaborate stunt to try to convince people he's Satoshi. The stunt was quickly debunked.
For the technically minded: A cryptographic signature of text A will not be the same as the signature of text B, even if you use the same key. The signature Craig Wright claims is of text B has been found to be a known signature in the Bitcoin blockchain of text A.
Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto.
He's a con man: https://news.ycombinator.com/i... [ycombinator.com]
Re-used signature: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitco... [reddit.com]
Re:Already debunked (Score:5, Insightful)
The real Satoshi could trivially and indisputably prove his identity: Sign some message generated today with the key used to sign the genesis block.
You know what would be awesome? To have an anonymous message show up on some online forum that says "Craight Wright is not Satoshi, and the May 2, 2016 opening prices of AAPL, INTC, GOOG and MSFT were $93.96, $30.45, $697.63 and $50.00, respectively", signed with the Bitcoin block 0 key.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a generally effective stunt because few few people actually try to verify signatures.
https://xkcd.com/1181/ [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
"root keys" & "send Bitcoin to the shitter"
I don't think you understand how Bitcoin works.
Why now? (Score:2)
I am (Score:2)
prove it.. Make that genesis block move. (Score:1)
Prove it.. Make that genesis block move.
https://blockchain.info/block-index/14849
Re: (Score:1)
Please prepare to deliver Genesis to us upon our arrival. Reliant out.
Re: (Score:2)
For technical reasons, the coins in Block 0 (zero) can't be spent (moved).
That is not Satoshi (Score:2, Interesting)
Imposter (Score:2)
We are also Charlie Hebdo and Sasha Fierce.
He certainly doesn't know much about SHA-256 (Score:5, Interesting)
In his blog post, he writes:
"The SHA256 algorithm provides for a maximum message size of (2^128 - 1) bits of information whilst returning 32 bytes or 256 bits as an output value. The number of possible messages that can be input into the SHA256 hash function totals (2^128 - 1)! possible input values ranging in size from 0 bits through to the maximal acceptable range that we noted above."
There are two obvious errors in this paragraph. The maximum message size of SHA-256 is (2^64 - 1) bits and the total number possible input messages is (2^(2^64) - 1). I doubt that the inventor of Bitcoin would make such fundamental mistakes.
Re:He certainly doesn't know much about SHA-256 (Score:5, Funny)
What better way to protect your anonymity than jump in the spotlight and play the buffoon so everybody ignores you?
This guy's subtle.
I am not sparticus, but I play him on TV (Score:2)
What better way to protect your anonymity than jump in the spotlight and play the buffoon so everybody ignores you?
This guy's subtle.
That EXACTLY the sort of thing that Satoshi would post to make us think that Craig is actually Satoshi, and further obfuscate his real identity.
Well played, Mr Satoshi. Well played.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you get the total number of possible input messages to 2^(2^64)-1 exactly? Break down a simple example of the total number of possible messages from 0 up to 8 bits.
Satoshi-san, I think you are taking your buffoonery a bit too far here.
I'm... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm Satoshi Nakamoto, and so's my wife!
Re: (Score:2)
Good! (Score:2)
...now we know who to blame
It should be easy (Score:2)
Two cases:
Either Satoshi has his private keys from back then, or he doesn't.
If he has his private key, have him sign a message that reads "John R. Smith is Satoshi Nakamoto" with his private key.
If he doesn't, I say it doesn't matter who he is, his money isn't going anywhere.
It's all about the taxes (Score:2)
Maybe he really *is* the founder of bitcoin, but claiming to be the founder in a way that everybody will debunk - thus the Australian tax authorities won't go after the half-billion dollars or so that he has in bitcoin?
A.
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares? (Score:2)
Seriously, why is that of any importance? Even if you use BitCoin, what does knowing who came up with it accomplish?
Re: (Score:2)
> what does knowing who came up with it accomplish?
If someone at M$, the FBI, or Never-A-Straight-Answer had invented it then it would be looked at as extremely suspicious and an alternatively would have extremely high motivation.
But you're right -- it is probably over-reacting.
Why is knowing who invented the wheel important? It isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
This guy holds more Bitcoin that anyone else.
If he's forced to sell it by a court, or decides to flog it off of his own will, that will bring the price of Bitcoin right down.
And if he is "the creator", then he's a clever guy (or those that he hired were). Nobody's yet found a flaw in Bitcoin that allows anyone to steal protected money (stupid auto-generated accounts and crap passwords don't count), or falsify the blockchain.
It's time to come out. (Score:2)
Satoshi Nakamoto Lost the Key (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be really really funny if Satoshi Nakamoto *lost* his key to all of his bit coins?
Re: (Score:2)
It's not one key. It's 20,000 different keys, one for each block he generated in the early days, each with 50 BTC. Given how careful he was in creating bitcoin in the first place, it would be highly unlikely he kept all his keys in one place that could be lost, unless he "lost" them on purpose.
Re: (Score:1)
one for each block he generated... ... Given how careful he was... ... it would be highly unlikely he kept... ...all his keys... ...unless he "lost" them...
For someone supposedly anonymous, you've made a rather large assumption there.
Re: (Score:1)
The keys shouldn't be stored on any device like a hard drive or thumb drive, since those can fail.
I would print out all of the keys on paper. Now would you store copies of the keys in more than one place, balancing the probabilities of them being lost verses being stolen?
And now he is lucky that he never intends to spend any of them. Managing those keys across multiple sites would be tedious.
Or maybe I haven't thought about it enough.
Hmm (Score:1)
I have it on pretty good authority that the real Satoshi Nakamoto is actually a half-Malaysian, half-Chinese guy born in the UK and has been living in Japan for about 20 years now.
If it's true, he is a very smart guy and owns a business for fun in Japan currently. He's also worked for Microsoft and Amazon. His real initials are D.C.
I'm sure Googling based on that can pinpoint it. But yeah, I hope one day before I die that the world figures out who the real genius behind BitCoin is.
Re:Thanks For Nothing (Score:5, Funny)
Just how much energy has been wasted mining bitcoins over the years.
Probably less than one billionth of the amount of energy that's been used to view porn on the internet over the same period of time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Working in those mining data centers really dries the skin, and the low returns are definitely responsible for many tears being shed. I think "decades" is a stretch though.
Re: (Score:2)
Decades is not a stretch. Were were printing out ascii-art porn from usenet on the line printers at UC Irvine in 1986.
Re: (Score:2)
ASCII porn was a thing in the early 70's at least, and probably earlier - I just wasn't in a situation where it was available until I got to secondary school.
However, GP was, humorously, alluding to the fact that data centers have not been around for decades, or, at least, that they have not been used for bitcoin mining.for decades.
Re-hardnessing power (Score:1)
Yes, but they're working on devices to generate power via kinetic energy. That means they'll reclaim all that and more within the next few years...
Re: (Score:3)
How much energy has been wasted (and human life lost) mining a certain yellow metal out of the Earth? Granted gold has some practical use in manufacturing & electronics, but not so much that it justifies the inflation of its value caused by using it as money. Both gold and Bitcoin are valuable (or not) primarily because people believe in their value and because their supply is limited.
As far as I know, nobody ever died mining Bitcoin.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention dozens of sysadmins killed when the bitmill burnt down because management chained the doors.
Re: (Score:2)
Just how much energy has been wasted mining bitcoins over the years.
Bitcoin mining is done where electricity is cheap, which means baseload hydropower in places like Iceland or Oregon. So the only "waste" is water flowing to the sea at a slightly lower velocity.
This guy, and anyone that uses Bitcoin, is a drain on society and resources.
Compared to what? Would we better off if people mined more gold and diamonds instead?
Re: (Score:2)
Just how much energy has been wasted mining bitcoins over the years.
Bitcoin mining is done where electricity is cheap, which means baseload hydropower in places like Iceland or Oregon. So the only "waste" is water flowing to the sea at a slightly lower velocity.
Hydropower isn't free nor without impact on the nature (and I'm not talking about building the powerplants here, just using them). Wasting it on something is still a waste.
This guy, and anyone that uses Bitcoin, is a drain on society and resources.
Compared to what? Would we better off if people mined more gold and diamonds instead?
How about not trying to create a strawman? But even then: yes, both gold and diamonds are useful for manufacturing, medical treatments etc.
Wasting power is still a waste.
Re: (Score:2)
both gold and diamonds are useful for manufacturing, medical treatments etc.
Only a tiny fraction of gold is used in industry. Nearly all is used to store value as either bullion, coinage, or jewelry. Gold mining is terribly destructive, creating erosion and mercury contamination. Most industrial diamonds are manufactured, not mined. Diamond mining fuels wars and funds corrupt governments.
Re: (Score:2)
It impounds the silt (nutrients) and prevents flush-out of gravel beds needed for fish spawn.
Re: (Score:2)
Or on other peoples' computers.
Re:Thanks For Nothing (Score:5, Insightful)
Just how much energy has been wasted mining bitcoins over the years. This guy, and anyone that uses Bitcoin, is a drain on society and resources.
You could say exactly the same thing about gold. And more: the countless lives that have been lost digging gold out of the ground, only to have most of it sit in vaults. At least we don't have mine collapses and typhoid epidemics in the bit-coin mining camps.
Re: (Score:2)
True as far as the initial mining goes. But gold embodies the energy used to create it, after that it takes little energy to use it as a secure currency. "Counterfeit" gold would require use of present energy and cost as much as or more than the real thing.
Whereas bitcoins embody no energy and to prevent counterfeiting *require* a increasing use of present energy in the form of ever more difficult blockchain mining. As more energy is needed the old bitcoins lose relative value; if verification could someh
Re: (Score:2)
Bitcoins kinda do embody the energy required to calculate their hashes, and they also take little energy (actually less energy) to store than compared to gold.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Glad we're still talking about this pointless, shitty technology from 2009. What's next, we'll be Waving each other about the stuff we found on Bing?
Hey, check out this new Nickelback song on my Zune!
Re:Any day now! (Score:5, Funny)
Hey, check out this new Nickelback song on my Zune!
That reminds me of a funny thing one of my co-workers said about his Zune (this was almost 10 years ago.)
He was describing the features of the Zune in comparison with the iPod. One neat thing was, he said, that one Zune could "loan" a song to another Zune. (I think the song would last for 3 days then go *poof*.)
I said, "Wow, that's pretty neat. How does that work?"
He said, "I don't know... I haven't met anyone else with a Zune yet."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Right, I'd forgotten about the Zune's ability to "squirt" songs.
I can't believe they used that term.
Re: (Score:2)