3 ms·

Did any tech person actually think he was legit? He's been a phony from the start... seemed pretty obvious to me.

scintill76 2y ago
Gavin Andresen did for years. Even after a recent walkback statement, people are saying he still does and that his statement isn’t a complete repudiation. I haven’t really kept up with it, so this is just a summary of quick googling.
- lupire 2y ago
  Which years? In just a few months in 2016 he expressed support for Wright and then expressed regret for doing so.
  - nullc 2y ago
    Probably the most comprehensive example is the 2020 deposition for the Kleiman v Wright trial. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/590/5/kleiman-v-wright/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/590/5/kleiman-v... https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/590/6/kleiman-v-wright/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/590/6/kleiman-v...
    - mike_hearn 2y ago
      In which part does he say that? Because I just scan read it and couldn't find where he says he believed in Wright in 2020. He does say he isn't sure anymore which bits of what Wright told him were true or not i.e. he accepts that Wright is untrustworthy.
      - scintill76 2y ago
        I have also only scanned, but I agree I didn't see somewhere he outright says he still believes Wright as of the deposition date in 2020. I think these might be some of the strongest statements people are talking about: * Page 88 in 590/5: 7 A Sitting here today, I think it's more 8 likely than not that I saw a proper signature, but 9 I -- but I do have some doubt. * Page 163 in 590/5: 5 A I meant that he bamboozled me about the 6 gobbledygook proof, but I still think it's most 7 likely that he did not bamboozle me during the 8 signing ceremony. From my viewpoint on the sidelines, these are too irrationally close to endorsing Wright as Satoshi, because they cling to some hazy jetlagged memories in a hotel that looked like a real signature, over every other sign pointing to Wright being a fraud. I feel for Mr. Andresen -- the signature may have just barely been 50.5% credible to him and he can't arrive at another conclusion on it in isolation. But with all the other evidence, I suppose a lot of people feel like his refusal to clearly denounce Wright may as well be continued support. Also, according to his blog post at http://gavinandresen.ninja/satoshi http://gavinandresen.ninja/satoshi , it took until 2023 for him to state "I now know it was a mistake to trust Craig Wright as much as I did" (excerpted), yet he still doesn't outright denounce him. Maybe my original statement that Mr. Andresen believed him for years was not quite correct, but if he let his website support Wright for years (2016-2023), it's too close to a continuing endorsement. (I regret having jumped into this earlier with such a strong statement, when I didn't really know.)
freedomben 2y ago
Yes some really did. Craig Wright was pretty good at faking it as long as you didn't get to close. What kept me (and I suspect the majority) of tech people from it was his failure/refusal to use Satoshi's keys. IMHO if Satoshi were still alive, it's extremely unlikely that he would have lost those keys.
- tmottabr 2y ago
  he might not have lost, but he might have chosen to destroy it on purpose early on...
tim333 2y ago
He was backed for quite a while by Canadian businessman Calvin Ayre, who runs Coingeek which used to go on about Craig being Satoshi. They apparently fell out in Sept 23 with Ayre calling him a moron. Some of that story here https://www.ft.com/content/83dc246e-99ca-4af3-bd07-a815fdafa7c0 https://www.ft.com/content/83dc246e-99ca-4af3-bd07-a815fdafa... Not a tech guy I guess but one of the main backers.

Gavin Andresen did for years. Even after a recent walkback statement, people are saying he still does and that his statement isn’t a complete repudiation. I haven’t really kept up with it, so this is just a summary of quick googling.

lupire 2y ago
Which years? In just a few months in 2016 he expressed support for Wright and then expressed regret for doing so.
- nullc 2y ago
  Probably the most comprehensive example is the 2020 deposition for the Kleiman v Wright trial. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/590/5/kleiman-v-wright/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/590/5/kleiman-v... https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/590/6/kleiman-v-wright/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/590/6/kleiman-v...
  - mike_hearn 2y ago
    In which part does he say that? Because I just scan read it and couldn't find where he says he believed in Wright in 2020. He does say he isn't sure anymore which bits of what Wright told him were true or not i.e. he accepts that Wright is untrustworthy.
    - scintill76 2y ago
      I have also only scanned, but I agree I didn't see somewhere he outright says he still believes Wright as of the deposition date in 2020. I think these might be some of the strongest statements people are talking about: * Page 88 in 590/5: 7 A Sitting here today, I think it's more 8 likely than not that I saw a proper signature, but 9 I -- but I do have some doubt. * Page 163 in 590/5: 5 A I meant that he bamboozled me about the 6 gobbledygook proof, but I still think it's most 7 likely that he did not bamboozle me during the 8 signing ceremony. From my viewpoint on the sidelines, these are too irrationally close to endorsing Wright as Satoshi, because they cling to some hazy jetlagged memories in a hotel that looked like a real signature, over every other sign pointing to Wright being a fraud. I feel for Mr. Andresen -- the signature may have just barely been 50.5% credible to him and he can't arrive at another conclusion on it in isolation. But with all the other evidence, I suppose a lot of people feel like his refusal to clearly denounce Wright may as well be continued support. Also, according to his blog post at http://gavinandresen.ninja/satoshi http://gavinandresen.ninja/satoshi , it took until 2023 for him to state "I now know it was a mistake to trust Craig Wright as much as I did" (excerpted), yet he still doesn't outright denounce him. Maybe my original statement that Mr. Andresen believed him for years was not quite correct, but if he let his website support Wright for years (2016-2023), it's too close to a continuing endorsement. (I regret having jumped into this earlier with such a strong statement, when I didn't really know.)

freedomben 2y ago

Yes some really did. Craig Wright was pretty good at faking it as long as you didn't get to close. What kept me (and I suspect the majority) of tech people from it was his failure/refusal to use Satoshi's keys. IMHO if Satoshi were still alive, it's extremely unlikely that he would have lost those keys.

tmottabr 2y ago
he might not have lost, but he might have chosen to destroy it on purpose early on...

tim333 2y ago

He was backed for quite a while by Canadian businessman Calvin Ayre, who runs Coingeek which used to go on about Craig being Satoshi. They apparently fell out in Sept 23 with Ayre calling him a moron. Some of that story here https://www.ft.com/content/83dc246e-99ca-4af3-bd07-a815fdafa7c0 https://www.ft.com/content/83dc246e-99ca-4af3-bd07-a815fdafa... Not a tech guy I guess but one of the main backers.