/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>28563234
Wrong 100% incorrect.
The direct successor of Satoshi Nakamoto as lead developer on the Bitcoin project was Gavin Andresen.
Gavin Andersen explicitly said that Craig Wright signed a message using the private key from Block #1 of Bitcoin. Time was spent on a careful cryptographic verification of messages signed with keys that only Satoshi should possess.
So who do we trust? You or the lead developer of Bitcoin ?
https://youtu.be/gTPcm4zCJIg?t=6

>>28262371
>when it would be easier to just sign with his keys.
and what does this prove. Do you know his reasoning for NOT doing this ?
Keys do not equal ownership. Let's be for real here. If he did sign with the keys, people would just say he stole or cracked them. We have courts to decide ownership, not public opinion.

>Because he has a lot to gain by doing litigious stuff
Yeah like getting his reputation and work back.
You do realize with just the klienman signed coins and not 1 more BTC or BCH or BSV he is the richest man on planet earth. You also understand that he has never sold any of his BTC and we know he has at least 1.1 million in June of 2011.

I think you don't know the arguments for and against him being Satoshi. That's ok neither did I.

If you're interested in a neutral, balanced view on whether Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto, watch this YouTube video on the subject..
https://youtu.be/_yuyrxGJ-FU