Bitcoin 'Creator' Reneges On Promise To Provide More Proof, Says He's Sorry (bbc.com) 133
Craig Wright, the Australian computer scientist who claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto -- the creator of bitcoin -- has backtracked on a pledge to provide more proof of his earlier claims. Wright says that he lacks the courage to face allegations. On May 1, Wright claimed that he was the creator of bitcoin, offering digital signature, signed using a private key that was thought to be held by Nakamoto. We later learned that the "proof" Wright offered was simply copied from an older transaction. At the time, Wright assured that he will be moving early bitcoins as "extraordinary evidence". On Thursday, Wright wrote in a blog post that he is "sorry," and that he cannot do this. He writes: I believed that I could do this. I believed that I could put the years of anonymity and hiding behind me. But, as the events of this week unfolded and I prepared to publish the proof of access to the earliest keys, I broke. I do not have the courage. I cannot. When the rumors began, my qualifications and character were attacked. When those allegations were proven false, new allegations have already begun. I know now that I am not strong enough for this. I know that this weakness will cause great damage to those that have supported me, and particularly to Jon Matonis and Gavin Andresen. I can only hope that their honour and credibility is not irreparably tainted by my actions. They were not deceived, but I know that the world will never believe that now. I can only say I'm sorry.
Classic (Score:5, Interesting)
Now that he's exposed, the scam artist tries to play the role of victim.
Re: (Score:2)
And he used the generic "I'm sorry," no less.
Sorry for what? Because if you're not willing to say, then you're not really sorry, are you?
The generic "I'm sorry" is almost as inauthentic as the patronizing "I'm sorry you misunderstood me."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"I'm not strong enough for this"...for dealing with accusations of fraud. So he decides not to offer incontrovertible proof then stride around with a 10 foot cock of titanium.
Riiiiiiiight.
Re: (Score:1)
...1 of 2 things: 1) ... 2) Not being willing to expose himself as the creator.
option #2 is no longer a possibility. And I did check the other alternate realities to confirm this.
Re:Classic (Score:4, Insightful)
I've read that it's the #1 indicator of guilt in police interrogations. An accused denies everything for hours, and just when he leaves the room turns around and says something like "I'm sorry I couldn't help you" to the officer.
Re: Classic (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I am Spartacus !! (Score:1)
Yes he's being attacked and torn down - I'm sure I wouldn't enjoy such scrutiny. Esp since I know the internet makes things up and offers personal attacks from hidden people.
He could be the real deal. We may never know.
Re: (Score:1)
The experts think he's real though. Which means that others don't believe it and think it's a conspiracy. But of course it's Bitcoin, which means first that all sorts of non-conformists are involved, and second that it doesn't really matter anyway.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Normally, I think you're retarded. However, in this case, I'm not sure I understand why you were moderated down. You may have said something that someone doesn't like but that doesn't mean you're incorrect or trolling. There are many non-conformists involved and, at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter.
You also said the experts think he's real and, from what I've read, they do seem to think he's being honest about that - if not much else. Yes, others have expressed their disbelief and I have seen th
"No, Timmy, say it right." (Score:5, Insightful)
He didn't say he was sorry for lying about being Satoshi. He said he's sorry that everybody is being a bunch of dicks to him, by asking him to provide ordinary proof for his extraordinary claim.
Re: (Score:1)
he didn't say sorry at all... he only said that he CAN say sorry.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: "No, Timmy, say it right." (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Never trust. Never.
Like I was taught as a teenager, "trust isn't about if somebody is going to harm you. If that is a concern, there is no chance of trust. Trust is knowing that they're not going to leave you out on a limb. Trust means you know they're always going to have a receipt to give you, the paperwork is already in order. Trust means you're confident they're not going to ask to be trusted, to leave you without the correct paperwork."
If you're willing to go without the paperwork, you might as well be
Re:"No, Timmy, say it right." (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically he said that because we didn't trust him, he is too hurt and emotional to do what Charlie Lee (creator of Litecoin) did the other day [twitter.com]. He can't do that and needs a therapist, or a good chocolate bar, or something.
In other words, he was lying all along. This is what your spouse does when you catch them lying and in an affair: instead of stopping it and making it right and apologizing, they whine that they are too hurt and emotional because of your allegations. It's what children do when you catch them lying. It's what all liars do.
Re: (Score:3)
"You're clearly lying."
"HOW DARE YOU! HOW. DARE. YOU. I am HURT and HUMILATED!"
"So you are, indeed, a liar."
THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT!"
Yeah. This seems familiar.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also what spouses do when you accuse them of having an affair and they're not having an affair.
Nope. I've actually lived through both versions of that scenario, and the behavior of a spouse having an affair is vastly different from the behavior of a spouse not having an affair. One of them invites accountability, the other does not.
the affair is a symptom, not a cause
Baloney.
Have you had an affair yourself at some point?
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. I've actually lived through both versions of that scenario, and the behavior of a spouse having an affair is vastly different from the behavior of a spouse not having an affair.
You seem to be generalising to all cases from your own experience. Doesn't mean you're wrong, but it ain't a good reason to hold an opinion, imHo. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm more worried about his writing the note much like a suicide letter, even ending it with "Goobye".
Any aussie friends of his here that can check up on him and make sure he's okay?
That makes no sense... (Score:4, Insightful)
He is saying he is *capable* but unwilling to do that because he can't leave the anonymity behind?
If he couldn't leave the anonymity behind, we would have backtracked on his whole claim. Instead he doubles down that he is truthful, but won't prove it to keep anonymity...... I'm truly baffled at who he thinks he's fooling.
Re:That makes no sense... (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm truly baffled at who he thinks he's fooling.
Himself.
As others have pointed out, he's crying "victim" because he doesn't want to back up an extraordinary claim with some seemingly simple evidence.
Rather than own his issue, he is crying "victim" and blaming it on everyone else. Reasonably typical behavior of a narcissistic braggart.
Re: (Score:2)
It actually all makes perfect sense. Celebrity impostors used to be fairly common, especially back before our DNA, photos, and records followed us everywhere.
They're not even all con artists. They're often nobodies who see a chance to become a somebody by impersonating someone who lots of people have heard about but have never actually seen or met. So some nobody Polish factory worker becomes Anastasia Romonov and gets to be a somebody for a while. A bunch of forgotten old men become competing Billy the Kid
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, you almost made my heart bleed.
My wife and I were just chatting on this and she brought up an excellent point.... she said she thought he was tired of people asking him if he was Satoshi so, maybe he decided to go with it since he keeps getting asked.
I mean, if I was constnatly being asked if I was someone, I would probably start fucking with the occasional person who asked..... tho, public statements does seem a bit beyond the pale.
Re: (Score:3)
He knows he's not fooling people like you, he only needs to fool the media.
The Missing Post (Score:5, Informative)
Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Proof
May 3, 2016
ExtraordinaryClaims
Yesterday, Andreas Antonopoulos posted a fantastic piece on Reddit.
Andreas said something critically important and it bears repeating: “I think the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto does not matter”.
He’s absolutely right.
It doesn’t – and shouldn’t – matter to the Bitcoin community.
I cannot deny that my interest in bringing the origins of Bitcoin into the light is ultimately and undeniably a selfish one – the only person to whom this should matter is me. In the wake of the articles last December in which I was ‘outed’, I still believed that I could remain silent. I still believed that I could retreat into anonymity, sever contact, go quiet, and that the storm would eventually pass and life would return to normal. I was right and wrong. The story did eventually retreat, but not before it ‘turned’ and the allegations of fraud and hoax (not to mention personal threats and slurs against me and my family) clung to me.
I now know that I can never go back.
So, I must go through to go forward.
Mr. Antonopoulos’ post also notes that if Satoshi wants to prove identity, “they don’t need an “authority” to do so. They can do it in a public, open manner.” This is absolutely true, but not necessarily complete. I can prove access to the early keys and I can and will do so by moving bitcoin, but this should be a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for such an extraordinary claim.
And this is why I wanted to speak with Gavin weeks ago. Gavin was in a unique position as we dealt with each other directly while we nurtured Bitcoin to life in 2010. I knew that Gavin would remember the content of those messages and discussions, and would recall our arguments and early interactions. I wanted to speak with Gavin first, not to appeal to his authority, but because I wanted him to know. I owed him that. It was important to me that we could re-establish our relationship. Simply signing messages or moving bitcoin would never be enough for Gavin.
And it should not be enough for anyone else.
So, over the coming days, I will be posting a series of pieces that will lay the foundations for this extraordinary claim, which will include posting independently-verifiable documents and evidence addressing some of the false allegations that have been levelled, and transferring bitcoin from an early block.
For some there is no burden of proof high enough, no evidence that cannot be dismissed as fabrication or manipulation. This is the nature of belief and swimming against this current would be futile.
You should be sceptical. You should question. I would.
I will present what I believe to be “extraordinary proof” and ask only that it be independently validated.
Ultimately, I can do no more than that.
Re:The Missing Post (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Riiight. He doesn't need that wallet, he could simply post on the P2P Foundation message board [p2pfoundation.net] again.
The fact that he can't do even that means he's not Satoshi.
Re: (Score:2)
What is the scam?
Scamming yourself to pay more tax and putting your life in danger?
Re: (Score:2)
That's not how taxes work. Elvis impersonators don't pay extra tax because somebody as their country's tax office believed they were really Elvis. If people believe him, but he doesn't have the money, he wouldn't pay any tax.
And if he has the money, and didn't pay the tax, he can still be charged with crimes. It doesn't matter if the public believes he's so-and-so or not; the jury will only be asked to decide if he payed the taxes due on the money they found in his bank accounts or under his mattress.
Re: (Score:2)
Mining bitcoins is not taxed.
Just like mining gold is not taxed.
Selling one of the two and making a profit, the profit is taxed.
Re: (Score:2)
Satoshi Nakamoto's ID does not matter to Bitcoin
It *is* however of interest to persons wanting to either hire the elusive genius, or pick his brains on other complex algorithmical topics over an extended interview.
Surprise!!!! (Score:3)
Big foot has left the grassy knoll, and didn't leave a forwarding address with the illuminati. Perhaps he was kidnapped by the greys?
Reminds me of the free energy guys (Score:3, Insightful)
He sounds just like the free energy people who claims they have a magic working device. But, they keep coming up with lame excuses why they just can't provide the proof of it despite how easy it would be to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like cold fusion all over again...
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I haven't seen anything of the "ecat" for ages.
Thank god for the Wiki though or I'd have missed this:
"In April 2016, Rossi filed a lawsuit in the USA against Industrial Heat, alleging that he was not paid an $89 million licensing fee due after a one year test period of an E-cat unit. Industrial Heat's comment on the lawsuit was that after three years of effort they were unable to reproduce Rossi's E-cat test results"
Errr... (Score:3, Insightful)
It would be easier and less stressful to provide proof then writing that post and running away...
He's either mentally ill or a fraudster. Or both.
This won't end well (Score:3, Funny)
If he's not Satoshi Nakamoto then logically he must be Spartacus.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We are ALL individuals!
Re: (Score:2)
It Must Be Interesting (Score:3)
It must be interesting for the actual bitcoin creator to watch all of the drama around it unfold and wonder if you should say something or just continue to stay in the darkness. Do you laugh? Shake your head? Do you even care? Fun times.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm actually convinced an AI made bitcoin.
An AI from the future.
Re: (Score:2)
See sig.
Warning: may destroy your soouul.
strange, yet true (Score:2)
Think about it. It explains a lot of what you see on
Re: (Score:2)
Most likely he hasn't even noticed, what with his head being likely stuck in a recursive integral he's been head-refining since last week.
Re: (Score:2)
I think Dorian Nakamoto is more scared than amused of all of this.
Re: (Score:2)
It must be interesting for the actual bitcoin creator to watch all of the drama around it unfold and wonder if you should say something or just continue to stay in the darkness. Do you laugh? Shake your head? Do you even care? Fun times.
Well ... I devised the bitcoin actually as a weapon to bring chaos and destruction to you mortals and it's true I expected to see some good laughs seeing wall street go into a tailspin, but things got a bit out of control.
Re: (Score:1)
Don't hold your breath waiting for the media to learn.
"Hey, it's a tech thing we barely understand! Let's play spot the buzzword and write an article!"
"Hey, it's a medical thing we barely understand, but the word 'cancer' is in the article. Let's write an article how this causes and/or stops cancer in it's tracks!"
Re: (Score:2)
OK, so I'm not the only one wondering wtf this is news.
Ok, Bitcoins. Great. Use them. But do you really care who invented it? Why is that of ANY relevance whatsoever? As far as I'm concerned the Illuminati could have coined them together with the reptiloids under the supervision of the reverse vampires. If it's cryptographically safe and they can't trace it, it doesn't fucking matter whose idea it was.
Re: (Score:2)
But do you really care who invented it?
That nobody can seem to figure out who invented it is unusual and newsworthy.
this shit is crazy (Score:2)
Someone invents a cybercurrency that gains widespread use, sticks it to the corrupt System and is going to change everything.
And the guy that invented it is a mystery.
Then St Germain comes out and says he invented it. But can't manage to do even the simplest of tasks that would prove his authorship.
Re: (Score:2)
So ... /. is now part of the yellow press? When are we going to hear speculations on whether the next baby of some royalty is going to be a boy or a girl? Or who some celebrity is going to screw or even marry now?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, so all the unusual and curious stuff is now newsworthy, even if it can't possibly have any effect on us?
Next story is then "10 biggest freak accidents of all times", I guess? That's unusual and odd, so it's newsworthy.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, so all the unusual and curious stuff is now newsworthy, even if it can't possibly have any effect on us?
Yes, this is how it's been for the last 5000 years or so.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's cryptographically safe and they can't trace it, it doesn't fucking matter whose idea it was.
What if it has tracing built in, like... bitcoin?
Reminds me of the movie "Big Eyes" (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Reminds me of the movie "Big Eyes" (Score:5, Informative)
The real Margaret Keane said in an interview that the painting scene in the film was somewhat understated in comparison to reality...
WWSD (Score:2)
If one were Satoshi and found at this stage that he was "not strong enough to out himself", the logical course of action would be to backpedal and call the whole thing a hoax. After all, if the thing you were not strong enough to do was reveal your identity, continuing to assert that identity -- regardless of willingness to provide proof -- would be pretty silly.
This isn't the "not strong enough to do the right thing" move. It's the "got called on his BS and looking for a way to save face" move.
Re: (Score:2)
This. But it doesn't even pass the stink test far enough to question.
I honestly think the whole thing is summarized by two things.
1. He is claiming to be a person who MUST have intimate knowledge of how to use a hash properly
2. He attempted to prove his identity without providing the full document he claimed to sign.
I don't care if the signature was the same....its highly unlikely to be a real collision but, real collisions are possible. No, what I care about is that he even tried to not release the whole d
Re: (Score:2)
There is no way I believe the real Satoshi Nakamoto makes that particular mistake.
The mistake itself could be harmless, but it would be expected that the real person would be very embarrassed by it and would correct the technical part of the mistake right away and with excessive apologies and embarrassment. It would be totally normal for a smart recluse to screw up what he's best at when making a rare foray into the public light. It would be abnormal to be casual about the same mistake, or leave it uncorrected.
Re: (Score:2)
Mechanically yes. I agree anyone can corrupt a file, or send the wrong file. Technically though, no. Not when its pointed out that the file was truncated. I do not believe anyone with his level of knowledge would ever knowingly release a truncated file along with a signature for a full file.
Now, if that was the end of the story..... he made a mistake and then thought better of it....ok fine. However, the signatures match. Thats a very unlikely coincidence, and when you combine the two..... it looks terribly
CW, the Dark Triad (Score:3)
We can all brain storm and dream up cool tech, but it's the folks that actually create it that should be credited. It's clear that CW had nothing to do with the development of the initial release, but it's likely that he knew the folks that did.
If he had come out publicly with an honest statement to that effect, he would have been received much differently. Instead, he chose to be dishonest and misleading, and there is no forgiveness for that.
If CW could cryptographically prove himself, then he wouldn't be attacked and/or chased away. I mean, without proof, what did he expect was going to happen?
Pardon me (Score:2)
...while I get my hip boots on.
I don't use bitcoins (Score:2)
....but seriously, who gives a shit who conceptualized it?
I have absolutely no idea if he is who he claimed to be or not. Nor do I even faintly care. I'm curious why other people care so much?
Re: (Score:2)
I can't answer that, but to ask why do people care about the Karcrashians? People care about lots of things that seem irrelevant to me.
Maybe he didn't move any early bitcoins... (Score:1)
But maybe someone made a recent sell off of bitcoins since the nose-dive turn around in April after all this started to get cycled around the rumor mill?
One of the strong drivers of bitcoin's price is the news media...
Provided explanation makes no sense (Score:2)
My take (Score:1)
There has been a Mr. Nakamoto who first 'admitted' that he was part of the project, but then later retracted that.
I think he was true, and that the project was to get a 'bottom up' financial semi-revolution going in order to enable a worldwide acceptance of virtual but perfectly traceable money, so that eventually, when we have been led into the 'cashless society', all our transaction
Re: (Score:1)
I have incontrovertible proof of this
At least I stated that I don't have any proof and that it was only my opinion.
taxes anyone? (Score:1)
Lets see, Fame or prison... hmm.
Summed up: (Score:2)
"Sorry"? (Score:2)
What exactly are you sorry for son?
Sorry (Score:2)
People who are genuinely sorry attempt to fix the situation, where possible.
Given that fixing the situation would consist of exactly what he promised (loading up an old Bitcoin wallet and moving a fraction of a coin out of it to anywhere else), that would seem to indicate that he's NOT sorry and/or he's lying (i.e. he's lost the wallet or he has no such power and never did).
For your entertainment (Score:2)
A puzzle unsolved is far more interesting than a puzzle solved.
I always think of the JFK assassination in these cases. The fact that Lee Harvey Oswald appears to have done it, yet we have numerous things that don't quite seem to add up, e.g. "the magic bullet," "the grassy knoll," etc., makes it far more interesting than the Lincoln assassination, where all the basic facts are pretty cut-and-dried.
Regardless of whether Wright is a con man or the real deal, he's clearly toying with us: his most recent statem
I do not have the *courage* (Score:2)
He misspelled *private keys.* But he probably just typed that from a mobile device.
No point either way... (Score:2)
I tend to think he's lying but... (Score:3)
I'm more interested in WHY he's lying than IF he's lying, mainly because I think the IS lying.
Everyone seems to think that lying shows him as a fraud, but this is may be assumptive.
What if he is backing out, but for a completely different reason than he's willing to say. What if that's the lie, not the claim of authorship.
Any monetary system, even a secure one like bitcoin, can be exploited through the distribution of wealth in the corrupt economy. What I find more interesting is the fact that bitcoin is outside of the normal channels of bank tracing and manipulation. The banks can't trace where the money is going without extensive outside help from governments or the involvement of their own accounts in transactions. People often forget that the banks share a great deal of information with both the government and between each other. The flow of wealth is far more important to them than the actual dollar amounts.
I tend to think that bitcoin is a huge threat to them because it represents a critical information hole.
I also tend to think that they are not above extortion to 'prove' fraud and corruption to destroy bitcoin. Personally I'd be far more afraid of providing proof of my identity (and presumedly my integrity) to the public than of being e-bullied by trolls if the result could be the ire of the true power in the world.
I can levitate! (Score:2)
But ever since I said I could levitate, everyone doubted me. They attacked me by saying "Well if you can levitate, prove it by levitating". I was going to levitate, but I just can't bear any more of these attacks on my character. If I proved I could levitate, people would just attack me even more by saying things like "Wow! You've proven you can actually levitate, you asshole. I hate you!" So I've decided I won't be levitating (even though I can). I'm so sorry that you'll never believe me now (because
Lost the key? (Score:2)