/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>6982878
He showed the proof to Jon Matonis and Gavin Andresen and Jon is now his employee and Gavin swears he is Satoshi. That being said he swore with his Jean Paul Sartre post he would never prove he was Satoshi publicly again so don't hold your breath.

>>6983014
>Gavin swears he is Satoshi.
Gavin later changed his mind about him being SN.

>>6983163
No he didn't. He said he made a mistake saying anything before Craig showed proof.

>>6983410
Proof to the public that is.

>>6983410
https://medium.com/@hoaxchain/the-hard-evidence-about-craig-wrights-backdated-pgp-key-step-by-step-guide-for-windows-users-bd99c47c495f

>>6983676
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/jpgq3y/satoshis-pgp-keys-are-probably-backdated-and-point-to-a-hoax

>>6983676
He never said those keys were proof he was Satoshi, the only people he showed actual proof to were Jon Matonis and Gavin. I don't know why you're trying to show me proof that these keys are backdated, everyone knows this.

>>6983910
Because it proved he scammed everyone?

>>6983910
Or at least everyone knows its not proof, "backdated" isn't exactly the word. But this was never meant to be proof he was Satoshi, and it was outside reporters that tried to use this as proof he was Satoshi, not Craig.

>mfw newfags don't know about the Tulip Trust

>>6984021
see >>6983845

>>6983952
This "evidence" was brought out by Wired and Gizmodo. Not by Craig Wright. So why are you claiming that Craig scammed everyone when he didn't publicly release this and even tried not to verify himself as Satoshi. Ever watched the GQ interview where they try and get him to verify he is Satoshi? He was pissed off. It's not Craig's fault that reporters got their information wrong so why are you blaming him?

>>6984035
no thanks faggot, I've made my bets

>>6984053
There's no point reading the articles anyway, all they say is that reporters from the Wired and Gizmodo magazines got their information wrong. It has nothing to do with Craig whatsoever but this idiot can't even read.

>>6984069
>>6984049
You

>>6984107
Did you read the article? All of this evidence was from the reporters of the magazines and never released by Craig. Yet you are saying Craig is scamming people when he never came out to prove he was Satoshi to anyone but Andresen and Matonis. If you can't understand that I can't help you. I'm just saying all Craig has ever done publicly is say he will never prove publicly that he is Satoshi. I'm not sure how you make the leap in logic to say he is scamming people into believing he is Satoshi when it was others who tried to prove he was and then Craig declined to prove it himself.

>>6984173
https://www.ccn.com/gavin-andersen-craig-wright-blog-mistake/

>>6984195
Can you even read?
>Bitcoin core developer Gavin Andresen has expressed regret in publishing his blog backing Craig Wright’s claim that he is, Satoshi Nakamoto. More specifically, Andresen claims it was a mistake to publish his post before the much-scrutinized post published by Craig Wright.
All he said was it was a mistake to blog about it before Craig proved it as it put Gavin in a weird spot.

>Still, Andresen believes that Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto citing Wright’s possession of the private key from the first bitcoin block as cryptographic proof. He added: It’s possible that I’m wrong [about Craig Wright], but I don’t think I am.
Gavin never backtracked that he thinks Craig is Satoshi. He says its possible Craig is not, but he thinks Craig is. How dumb do you have to be to post an article that directly contradicts yourself.

https://seebitcoin.com/2016/05/heres-how-craig-wright-probably-tricked-gavin-andresen/

>There’s a bit of a smoking gun here. A factory seal doesn’t prove something hasn’t been tampered with any more than writing ‘this is genuine’ on a CD makes it genuine. Instead of buying a laptop himself, he allowed one of Wright’s representatives to source the laptop. This means the laptop can no longer be considered ‘clean’. It could have been preloaded with modified software, either to trick the computer into downloading a modified version of Electrum, or by modifying a legitimately downloaded version of Electrum during or after installation.

>>6984292
>It is also very suspect that Wright insisted on keeping the laptop and USB stick without a compelling reason after the demonstration as that would have allowed Andresen to verify the test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qLI3VIHuKU

>>6984327
I don't think anyone alive says Craig is Satoshi unless you are talking about Gavin and Jon. Everyone else just says it could be. The only person who can prove it either way is Craig and he said publicly he won't do it. So why make an issue out of this when you won't make any progress either way?

>>6982878
Is there any reason to NOT believe he is Satoshi? He is pretty much a genius after all.