So now that Satoshi has said he is not Craig Wright, can we take the other path of the Wired story, that "he's a brilliant hoaxer who very badly wants us to believe he did."
Sad.
Edit to add PS: Also what is Satoshi's original mail. I hope satoshi@vistomail.com is the original, ans satoshin was created later on, which was the non evidence kanzure was so unhappy about yesterday?
> Edit to add PS: Also what is Satoshi's original mail. I hope satoshi@vistomail.com is the original, ans satoshin was created later on, which was the non evidence kanzure was so unhappy about yesterday?
I feel that in the interest of disclosure I should inform you that I am one of the moderators of the bitcoin-dev mailing list and I approved that email. I regret it already. (Email is trivially forged, it's off-topic, etc. To my credit, there's some nebulous moderation policy in effect, and hopefully we will get that cleared up very soon.)
I am not a moderator, but that was my impression (and hope) for how the moderators would act. To determine what is signal and what is noise would be to inject subjectivity into the decision.
There is nothing about this new email that I would consider on-topic. But under the circumstances I wouldn't consider it disruptive either (on-list replies might be; watch out for them). And arguments could be made that using a communication medium other than the one Satoshi has traditionally used would be more disruptive, even if this email would be more on topic at bitcoin-discuss, due to the speculation that might ensue.
It is also worth pointing out that the system of moderation is that a person's FIRST post to the mailing list is moderated. After passing that hurdle your emails are auto-approved until such time as a moderator choose to re-enable moderation. It is because we changed servers that the satoshi email address was considered a 'new' user. This is also the case of everyone else, including me. But I hope the irony of Satoshi being subject to moderation because he is a 'new' user is not lost?
Anyway, the best reason for not moderating was that such a message had potential to keep people from getting hurt. I can only speculate that to be the reason Satoshi (if it is Satoshi) intervened at all. We don't know for sure, and it may even be low probability, but interfering with the distribution of that email could have gotten people hurt.
100% absolutely noise, even if from Real Satoshi. The bitcoin-dev mailing list is for development chatter regarding the Bitcoin consensus protocol and associated technology. However, moderation policy is uh... well, the best way to describe it would be "confused" at the moment. If maaku thought it was on-topic, while Luke-Jr thought it should have been rejected, that's an excellent sign that the policy is insufficiently clear.
I probably have rejected the email and asked 'em to send to bitcoin-discuss instead.
But really the only way to get any hard evidence is a signed message from what everyone believes to be the actual Real Satoshi key... or possibly an early coinbase output, I guess.
Aren't bitcoin addresses public keys? If it's good enough for signing a blockchain transaction it should be good enough for signing a short email message.
Got in touch with a friend last night who is one the Bitcoin inner circle and he said the PGP key used a different hash algorithm than the real Satoshi and it's a hoax. That was a good twelve hours before that story was in the press. I have a feeling if the inner circle doesn't know for certain who Satoshi might be they've got a pretty good idea.
Sorry for nitpicking. People claiming to be Satoshi did so and didn't sign. It could be the real deal, or not. Maybe I wrote all of those, and just typed "Satoshi" in the "from" field?
I also want to believe, but as long as something isn't signed cryptographically, it's likely just someone pulling things out of their arse (or SMTP server)
Obviously this is fake. I can't imagine satoshi saying "we are all satoshi" - so much cringe...
Plus, we know that the gmx account was hacked and it seems it was hacked through a simple guess of his birthday. As such, it seems reasonable to suggest that satoshi wanted that (gmx) email to be hacked since it had such a weak password. If that is the case I think we can assume that the vistomail is probably hacked too for the same reasons satoshi would have wanted the gmx email to be hacked.
Plus, I think it is now sort of obvious that Craig is not satoshi. There is speculations that this guy does not even have a supercomputer:
As such it may be the case that he conned the ATO out of a 45 million tax "rebate" and then tried to claim he is satoshi to perhaps keep the scam going or make it more credible (although his silence and even his apparent deletion of his online presence is somewhat puzzling.)
Moreover, the "trust fund" smoking gun document reads like one of those phishing emails you get - a puzzling misstated amount, an unended sentence, peculiar "against my advice" comments and looks overall amateurish. Furthermore, people have been trying to find peer reviewed journals from this guy (he claims he has 100) with no success so there is much doubt of his claims he has a PHD, well two PHDs and a dozen or more Masters.
Not to mention his seemingly inability to spell.
If, thus, it is somewhat obvious that this guy is not satoshi, I don't see why the real satoshi would find it necessary to make the somewhat cringy comment above which sounds like a "commoner". Same goes for the "I am not Dorian". Neither is in anyway evidence or in anyway proves anything and in both cases it is/was obvious the person was not satoshi so the comment was unnecessary.
Therefore, I think these accounts have simply been hacked and the real satoshi never made such comments in either case.
If Wright wanted to make it look like he was Satoshi, it would seem a bit absurd for him to try to claim that he would no longer be able to provide financial accommodation to Hotwire due to losing a substantial sum of money because of the Mt. Gox collapse (given that Satoshi is assumed to hold a lot more, and also because Satoshi wouldn't have been so stupid as to store such a large sum there, not being in control of the private keys):
"Hotwire hit problems in April of last year when it failed to receive another expected tax rebate worth millions of dollars, killing its cash flow. McGrath Nicol wrote to creditors in May 2014:
"The Directors have attributed the failure of the Company to:
– delays in receiving the $3.1 million GST refund for the September 2013 quarter; and
– Dr Wright, as the major shareholder no longer being able to provide financial accommodation to the Company due to the collapse of the Mount Gox Bitcoin registry where we understand Dr Wright had a significant exposure.""
> As such, it seems reasonable to suggest that satoshi wanted that (gmx) email to be hacked since it had such a weak password.
Wasn't that because the GMX password reset functionality was so shitty that it could be easily guessed, no matter what the user chose? This was nothing more than another demonstration, like the Sarah Palin hack, that password resets are just big security holes.
34 comments
[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 30.1 ms ] threadSad.
Edit to add PS: Also what is Satoshi's original mail. I hope satoshi@vistomail.com is the original, ans satoshin was created later on, which was the non evidence kanzure was so unhappy about yesterday?
I feel that in the interest of disclosure I should inform you that I am one of the moderators of the bitcoin-dev mailing list and I approved that email. I regret it already. (Email is trivially forged, it's off-topic, etc. To my credit, there's some nebulous moderation policy in effect, and hopefully we will get that cleared up very soon.)
re: gwern stuff, i assume you are talking about https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10702001
http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2015/12/10#l144...
I am not a moderator, but that was my impression (and hope) for how the moderators would act. To determine what is signal and what is noise would be to inject subjectivity into the decision.
There is nothing about this new email that I would consider on-topic. But under the circumstances I wouldn't consider it disruptive either (on-list replies might be; watch out for them). And arguments could be made that using a communication medium other than the one Satoshi has traditionally used would be more disruptive, even if this email would be more on topic at bitcoin-discuss, due to the speculation that might ensue.
It is also worth pointing out that the system of moderation is that a person's FIRST post to the mailing list is moderated. After passing that hurdle your emails are auto-approved until such time as a moderator choose to re-enable moderation. It is because we changed servers that the satoshi email address was considered a 'new' user. This is also the case of everyone else, including me. But I hope the irony of Satoshi being subject to moderation because he is a 'new' user is not lost?
Anyway, the best reason for not moderating was that such a message had potential to keep people from getting hurt. I can only speculate that to be the reason Satoshi (if it is Satoshi) intervened at all. We don't know for sure, and it may even be low probability, but interfering with the distribution of that email could have gotten people hurt.
Already happened, but looks like the reject mailing list isn't configured correctly: https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev-moderation/
> It is also worth pointing out that the system of moderation is that a person's FIRST post to the mailing list is moderated.
Hard to moderate for signal-to-noise with that, eh?
edit: for reference, this is also discussed over at https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w6vy4/i_am_not_cr...
No idea what to make of the situation anymore, or what to believe. I guess there's no way to know?
I probably have rejected the email and asked 'em to send to bitcoin-discuss instead.
But really the only way to get any hard evidence is a signed message from what everyone believes to be the actual Real Satoshi key... or possibly an early coinbase output, I guess.
Guy clearly wants to remain away from the public eye, no idea why it's so hard for people to respect that.
I have some bad news.
I also want to believe, but as long as something isn't signed cryptographically, it's likely just someone pulling things out of their arse (or SMTP server)
Plus, we know that the gmx account was hacked and it seems it was hacked through a simple guess of his birthday. As such, it seems reasonable to suggest that satoshi wanted that (gmx) email to be hacked since it had such a weak password. If that is the case I think we can assume that the vistomail is probably hacked too for the same reasons satoshi would have wanted the gmx email to be hacked.
Plus, I think it is now sort of obvious that Craig is not satoshi. There is speculations that this guy does not even have a supercomputer:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/3w5ro9/wright_not...
As such it may be the case that he conned the ATO out of a 45 million tax "rebate" and then tried to claim he is satoshi to perhaps keep the scam going or make it more credible (although his silence and even his apparent deletion of his online presence is somewhat puzzling.)
Moreover, the "trust fund" smoking gun document reads like one of those phishing emails you get - a puzzling misstated amount, an unended sentence, peculiar "against my advice" comments and looks overall amateurish. Furthermore, people have been trying to find peer reviewed journals from this guy (he claims he has 100) with no success so there is much doubt of his claims he has a PHD, well two PHDs and a dozen or more Masters.
Not to mention his seemingly inability to spell.
If, thus, it is somewhat obvious that this guy is not satoshi, I don't see why the real satoshi would find it necessary to make the somewhat cringy comment above which sounds like a "commoner". Same goes for the "I am not Dorian". Neither is in anyway evidence or in anyway proves anything and in both cases it is/was obvious the person was not satoshi so the comment was unnecessary.
Therefore, I think these accounts have simply been hacked and the real satoshi never made such comments in either case.
Either way; who cares.
"Hotwire hit problems in April of last year when it failed to receive another expected tax rebate worth millions of dollars, killing its cash flow. McGrath Nicol wrote to creditors in May 2014:
"The Directors have attributed the failure of the Company to:
– delays in receiving the $3.1 million GST refund for the September 2013 quarter; and
– Dr Wright, as the major shareholder no longer being able to provide financial accommodation to the Company due to the collapse of the Mount Gox Bitcoin registry where we understand Dr Wright had a significant exposure.""
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/revealed-the-ato-hit-suspe...
Wasn't that because the GMX password reset functionality was so shitty that it could be easily guessed, no matter what the user chose? This was nothing more than another demonstration, like the Sarah Palin hack, that password resets are just big security holes.