3 ms·
I am the only one who thinks Craig Wright is the writer of the Bitcoin whitepaper and the original developer? I understand why it is controversial and doesn't f
by throwaway4good 6y ago
I am the only one who thinks Craig Wright is the writer of the Bitcoin whitepaper and the original developer? I understand why it is controversial and doesn't fit the bitcoin myth. And I don't find him particular symphatic.
But he convinced Gavin Andresen and in general has the background of someone who could build this and do the writing that followed on various mailing lists and discussion forums.
- chabes 6y agoThere’s a simple way to verify his claim, yet he has yet to do so. Why, if he could, would he not? And why would the opinion of a single person (Gavin, or anyone) be relevant to wether or not Craig’s claim is factual?
- jonathanaird 6y agoHe’s stated his reasoning many, many times. Legally speaking, keys do not prove identity. They prove access to keys which can be stolen. He’s making an intentional point to prove it in a court of law as a part of his bigger point that Bitcoin exists within existing legal frameworks and was not created to evade the law. Quite the opposite, it was created as a system to provide immutable evidentiary trails.
- smitj 6y agoCraig worded this nicely 2 weeks ago here https://youtu.be/_E7iuVM4CIA?t=2133 https://youtu.be/_E7iuVM4CIA?t=2133
- throwaway4good 6y agoAnd if you read the whitepaper it is pretty obvious that the author did not intent bitcoin to be a "digital gold" secondary settlement layer. And the low transaction fee "BSV" version is a lot closer to the original idea than the current "BTC" version.
- garmaine 6y agoYes. There is strait up clear evidence of his fraud. The tricks he used to convince Gavin were revealed later and shown to be fraud—he used slight of hand to reuse a historical block chain signature rather than produce one.
- throwaway4good 6y agoRevealed how? By Gavin Andressen or Craig Wright?
- garmaine 6y agoBy CW. He later did a blog post showing the same "proof" that he had done in person with Gavin.
- joseluis 6y agoyou're not alone. it's pretty obvious when you care enough to listen to him directly talking about bitcoin, economy, law, history... There's a lot of quality interdisciplinary information coming from him, that makes infinite more sense than anything anybody else says about bitcoin. you just have to understand his aspergers manierisms, but for me it's clear he's the real deal, despite all the vicious fud coming from interested parties. It's a shame that even in HN people aren't immune to the shallow crypto propaganda...