Quote from: TPTB_need_war on May 04, 2016, 07:44:35 AM

Quote from: yelllowsin on May 04, 2016, 12:58:29 AM

Quote

Craig "Satoshi" Wright said he was going to move them

hahah this guy is so funny lol. He doesn't need to move any coin to prove it, just sign the fcking message if he has the prive keys

Quote from: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609812

Something is weird. He provided a message and a signature, but there's nothing in the message to indicate that he signed it himself, or when it was signed. It could have been signed months or years ago and there's no way to prove otherwise.

To understand what is really going on, you need to read carefully what Craig Wright has always said and continues to reiterate:

Quote from: http://gizmodo.com/craig-wright-claims-he-will-move-satoshi-nakamotos-bitc-1774443766

In his initial blog post, Wright noted that Satoshi is dead... but this is only the beginning. He also said that he would follow up with a more detailed mathematical explanation for the revelation. Now, the world will likely have to wait for the coming dayshowever long that may befor more clues.

Quote from: http://www.drcraigwright.net/jean-paul-sartre-signing-significance/

If I sign Craig Wright, it is not the same as if I sign Craig Wright, Satoshi.

I think this is true, but in my heart I wish it wasnt.

Since those early days, after distancing myself from the public persona that was Satoshi,

Satoshi is dead.

But this is only the beginning.

You need to remember that Craig Wright has never claimed he is Satoshi Nakamoto. Instead, he has claimed that his former colleague (who died) was Satoshi. He claims he was backing his colleague's the development of Bitcoin.

Quote from: http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692

This Australian Says He and His Dead Friend Invented Bitcoin

Quote from: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hq3rz/david_kleiman_craig_wrights_friend_more_likely/

David Kleiman, Craig Wright's friend more likely Satoshi Nakamoto

OK so this might get a little meandering but I keep finding tidbits of David Kleiman's life that makes him a far more likely candidate for Satoshi than Wright. So here are some in no specific order.

Remember that Craig Wright had obtained funding for and was running a the largest Supercomputer in Australia. So what Craig has ostensibly done is he is used supercomputer resources to find the inverse of a hash function and then used one of Satoshi old transactions to pretend he has the private key:

Quote from: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/technical-proof-craig-wright-not-satoshi-nakamoto/

The implication is that either Craig Wright has stumbled upon an infinitesimally rare occurrence of an SHA256 collision, or that he had used the signature from block 258 to reverse engineer a hash (the first shown in his blog demonstration) and hoped that nobody would notice. ycombinator user JoukeH noticed.

Realize that he has probably promised to endorse Andresen's block chain scaling preferences and thus probably why Gavin wants him to be Satoshi:

Quote from: https://www.wired.com/2016/05/craig-wright-privately-proved-hes-bitcoins-creator/

Andresens only attempt at an explanation for Wrights bizarre behavior, he says, is an ambivalence about definitively revealing himself after so many years in hiding. I think the most likely explanation is that he really doesnt want to take on the mantle of being the inventor of Bitcoin, says Andresen, who notes that his own credibility is at stake, too. Maybe he wants things to be really weird and unclear, which would be bad for me.

That uncertainty, Andresen says, seemed to be evident in Wrights manner at the time of their demonstration. Andresen describes Wright as seeming sad and overwhelmed by the decision to come forward. His voice was breaking.

Remember that after his death, David Kleiman's family recovered his USB flash drive and gave it to Craig Wright. Thus likely Craig Wright may have an unpublished transaction but not the actual private key. So he may be about to fool the world into thinking he is Satoshi, or making some proof that he was the man behind the man who was the real Satoshi.

This theory does seem to have some merit.

I found it interesting that Craig went out of his way to refuse accepting any prize money, even instructing lawyers, but didn't actually refuse to accept any prize award.

So, if this theory holds up, he can claim to be Satoshi as Satoshi can be a group.