Post
Topic
Board Press
Re: [11-15-2021]WSJ - Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Could Be Unmasked at FL Trial
by
PrimeNumber7
on 07/12/2021, 11:55:02 UTC
It is also very difficult to prove a negative, and without knowing who satoshi is, it is very difficult to prove that someone is not satoshi.
The onus is not on us (or anybody else) to prove that CSW (or anybody else) is not Satoshi. That is not how the burden of proof works. If you make a claim such as "I am Satoshi", then the onus is on you to provide evidence or proof to substantiate that claim. If you fail to do so, then that claim can be completely disregarded, and does not require any further discussion, counter proof, refuting evidence, etc. This is essentially a case of Russell's Teapot. Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
Agreed.

Although CSW has shown evidence, even if that evidence does not show anything with regards to him potentially being satoshi, despite his claims that it does. <-- this is true for a reasonable person with modest knowledge about bitcoin (in my opinion).
Having said all that, even if CSW came forward with a signed message from the genesis block (he won't), the mountain of evidence against him being Satoshi is more than enough to allow such a signed message to also be dismissed as a stolen private key or similar.
Well the evidence against CSW being satoshi amounts to CSWs actions after he started claiming to be satoshi. I might point you to the experience of Dorian "Satoshi" Nakamoto in 2014 after Newsweek claimed that he was the person that invented bitcoin.

CSW has an ideology that is very different than those who currently (or who have historically) use bitcoin today, however, we don't know what satoshi's ideological beliefs are. There is very little evidence that satoshi created bitcoin for any reason other than to solve a computer science problem. The only potential exception to this is the message he put into the genesis block. The fact that CSW thinks differently than how I think is not evidence that he is not satoshi. Similarly, the fact that I don't like CSW is not evidence that he is not satoshi.

If there was substantial evidence that CSW is, in fact, satoshi, such as him signing a GPG signed message from his known GPG key, or signing a message from a suspected block he mined, or signing a message from the genesis block, the only reason evidence possible evidence that CSW is not satoshi would include evidence that would make it impossible for him to be satoshi if said evidence was proven to be accurate.


CSW won his case yesterday, and will not be liable to the family of his previous business partner.