Craig Wright: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 10:41, 3 July 2024

Craig Wright is a fraudster who claims to be the creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto. There has been no concrete evidence presented in favour of Wright's claim. There is overwhelming evidence against his claim, yet Wright was able to get lots of media coverage by sympathetic journalists with a limited understanding of technology after Wright tricked or bribed a couple of Bitcoin figureheads such as Gavin Andresen to back his claims without themselves having access to any supporting evidence. The Bitcoin community has a duty to explain our technology - we can't expect everyone to understand cryptographic proof -, hence this page can be a useful list of resources.

Evidence against Craig Wright being Satoshi

Wright's claimed PGP key was provably backdated. ^[1]^[2]
He was paid millions of dollars by nTrust to 'reveal' himself as Satoshi (this is for those who think he lacked motive)^[3]
Signature claimed to prove him to be Satoshi was worthless. ^[4]
Second claimed "signature" was also an obvious forgery. ^[5]
N-th claimed "signature" was yet another obvious forgery. ^[6]
Faked blog posts showing his early involvement in bitcoin. ^[7]
Craig Wright is apparently using his fame to run an advance-fee scam.^[8]
Gross technical incompetence. ^[9]^[10]^[11]
No evidence of any C++ proficiency.
Plagiarism^[12]
If Craig Wright really was the creator of Bitcoin, the proof would be trivial. We see an example by Charlie Lee the creator of Litecoin^[13]

Wright sometimes explains away his apparent technical incompetence by suggesting that the actual development of Bitcoin was performed by a deceased acquaintance, David Kleiman. Kleiman worked as a systems administrator and IT security consultant for law enforcement and does not appear to have any particular programming expertise, similar to Wright. Wright's unsubstantiated claims are the only known source suggesting Kleiman has any connection to the creation of Bitcoin. As a result, arguments that Wright was in some way "involved" with the creation of Bitcoin due to his relationship with Kleiman are circular.

On March 14, 2024, a judge in the UK High Court found that Craig Wright could not have been Satoshi Nakamoto, due to findings from the lawsuit he was litigating at the time.^[14]

References

[1] Prove of backdated PGP key

[2] ttps://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1282144.msg13196947#msg13196947

[3] Paid a million dollars by nTrust to 'reveal' himself as Satoshi

[4] ttps://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hflr3/craig_wrights_signature_is_worthless/

[5] ttps://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/81115/if-someone-wanted-to-pretend-to-be-satoshi-by-posting-a-fake-signature-to-defrau

[6] ttps://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/81115/if-someone-wanted-to-pretend-to-be-satoshi-by-posting-a-fake-signature-to-defrau/

[7] Faked early blog posts

[8] ttps://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4cdsna/craig_wright_nigerian_prince_and_other_unlikely/

[9] ttp://archive.is/6C3C9

[10] ttps://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/799xlz/csw_many_wonder_why_secp256k1_was_used_in/dp0azeb/

[11] ttps://i.imgur.com/fOn1BI9.png

[12] ttps://twitter.com/PeterRizun/status/983752297363660800 https://archive.is/9ymSC

[13] ttps://twitter.com/satoshilite/status/727157971428331520

[14] ttps://www.wired.com/story/craig-wright-not-satoshi-nakamoto-bitcoin-creator-ruling/

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-Craig Wright is an Australian Bitcoin enthusiast. On December 9 2015 articles in Wired<ref>[http://www.wired.com/2015/12/bitcoins-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-this-unknown-australian-genius/ Craig Wright is Nakamoto Wired]</ref> and Gizmodo<ref>[http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692 This Australian Says He and His Dead Friend Invented Bitcoin]</ref> pointed to him as a possible candidate for the identity of [[Satoshi Nakamoto]].
+Craig Wright is a fraudster who claims to be the creator of Bitcoin, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]]. There has been no concrete evidence presented in favour of Wright's claim. There is overwhelming evidence against his claim, yet Wright was able to get lots of media coverage by sympathetic journalists with a limited understanding of technology after Wright tricked or bribed a couple of Bitcoin figureheads such as Gavin Andresen to back his claims without themselves having access to any supporting evidence. The Bitcoin community has a duty to explain our technology - we can't expect everyone to understand cryptographic proof -, hence this page can be a useful list of resources.
-Despite being echoed by media worldwide, there is an increasing body of evidence contradicting this claim. On December 12th Wired<ref>[http://www.wired.com/2015/12/new-clues-suggest-satoshi-suspect-craig-wright-may-be-a-hoaxer Craig Wright is not Nakamoto Wired]</ref> published a new article suggesting that the weight of the evidence is against Wright being Satoshi.
+=== Evidence against Craig Wright being Satoshi ===
-On April 1st 2016 the FT published a story titled "Craig Wright’s upcoming big reveal"<ref>[http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2016/03/31/2158024/craig-wrights-upcoming-big-reveal/ FT Big Reveal April 1st]</ref> hinting at his soon-to-come outing as Satoshi. Some sources ignored the date, setting off the rumour mill again<ref>[http://www.wired.com/2016/04/prove-youre-bitcoin-creator-satoshi-nakamoto/ Wired: How to Prove you are Satoshi]</ref>.
+* Wright's claimed PGP key was provably backdated. <ref>[https://medium.com/@tbrice/wrights-appeal-to-authority-paper-disproved-its-own-thesis-8f2d45e5df24 Prove of backdated PGP key]</ref><ref>https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1282144.msg13196947#msg13196947</ref>
+* He was paid millions of dollars by nTrust to 'reveal' himself as Satoshi (this is for those who think he lacked motive)<ref>[http://archive.is/kjuLi#selection-729.989-732.0 Paid a million dollars by nTrust to 'reveal' himself as Satoshi]</ref>
+* Signature claimed to prove him to be Satoshi was worthless. <ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hflr3/craig_wrights_signature_is_worthless/</ref>
+* Second claimed "signature" was also an obvious forgery. <ref>https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/81115/if-someone-wanted-to-pretend-to-be-satoshi-by-posting-a-fake-signature-to-defrau</ref>
+* N-th claimed "signature" was yet another obvious forgery. <ref>https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/81115/if-someone-wanted-to-pretend-to-be-satoshi-by-posting-a-fake-signature-to-defrau/</ref>
+* Faked blog posts showing his early involvement in bitcoin. <ref>[https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6xkn24/bcc_bch_are_bitcoin_they_follow_the_whitepaper/dmjcyou/?context=3 Faked early blog posts]</ref>
+* Craig Wright is apparently using his fame to run an advance-fee scam.<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4cdsna/craig_wright_nigerian_prince_and_other_unlikely/</ref>
+* Gross technical incompetence. <ref>http://archive.is/6C3C9</ref><ref>https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/799xlz/csw_many_wonder_why_secp256k1_was_used_in/dp0azeb/</ref><ref>https://i.imgur.com/fOn1BI9.png</ref>
+* No evidence of any C++ proficiency.
+* Plagiarism<ref>https://twitter.com/PeterRizun/status/983752297363660800 https://archive.is/9ymSC</ref>
+* If Craig Wright really was the creator of Bitcoin, the proof would be trivial. We see an example by Charlie Lee the creator of Litecoin<ref>https://twitter.com/satoshilite/status/727157971428331520</ref>
-On 2 May 2016, Craig Wright's blog publicly claimed that he was in fact Satoshi Nakamoto. In articles released on the same day, journalists from the BBC and ''The Economist'' stated that they witnessed Wright digitally signing a message using the private key associated with the first bitcoin transaction.<ref name="wright-bbc">{{cite news|title=Creator of Bitcoin digital cash reveals identity - BBC News|url=http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36168863|accessdate=2 May 2016|work=BBC News|agency=BBC|publisher=BBC|date=2 May 2016|language=en-GB}}</ref><ref name="wright-economist">{{cite news|title=Craig Steven Wright claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto. Is he?|url=http://www.economist.com/news/briefings/21698061-craig-steven-wright-claims-be-satoshi-nakamoto-bitcoin|accessdate=2 May 2016|work=The Economist|date=2 May 2016}}</ref> Both [[Jon Matonis]] and [[Gavin Andresen]] supported Wright's claim based on in-person signing demonstrations they witnessed.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://gavinandresen.ninja/satoshi |title=Satoshi |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160505134626/http://gavinandresen.ninja/satoshi|date=May 2, 2016|archive-date=2016-05-05 |access-date=May 7, 2016|dead-url=no }}</ref>
+Wright sometimes explains away his apparent technical incompetence by suggesting that the actual development of Bitcoin was performed by a deceased acquaintance, David Kleiman. Kleiman worked as a systems administrator and IT security consultant for law enforcement and does not appear to have any particular programming expertise, similar to Wright. Wright's unsubstantiated claims are the only known source suggesting Kleiman has any connection to the creation of Bitcoin. As a result, arguments that Wright was in some way "involved" with the creation of Bitcoin due to his relationship with Kleiman are circular.
-However, [[Peter Todd]] said that the evidence provided by Wright's blog post, which appeared to contain cryptographic proof, actually contained no proof at all.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2016/05/02/craig-wright-satoshi-nakamoto-doubt/|title=Craig Wright Claims He's Bitcoin Creator Satoshi -- Experts Fear An Epic Scam|author=Thomas Fox-Brewster|date=2 May 2016|work=Forbes}}</ref> The [[Bitcoin Core]] project released a statement on Twitter saying "There is currently no publicly available cryptographic proof that anyone in particular is Bitcoin's creator."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://twitter.com/bitcoincoreorg/status/727079957537677312|title=Bitcoin Core Project|work=Twitter}}</ref><ref>http://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/050216/has-bitcoin-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-been-found.asp</ref> [[Jeff Garzik]] agreed that evidence publicly provided by Wright was insufficient, and security researcher Dan Kaminsky concluded Wright's claim was "intentional scammery".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://motherboard.vice.com/read/craig-wright-satoshi-nakamoto-evidence-signature-is-worthless|title=Craig Wright's New Evidence That He Is Satoshi Nakamoto Is Worthless|work=Motherboard}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://dankaminsky.com/2016/05/02/validating-satoshi-or-not/|title=Validating Satoshi (Or Not)|work=Dan Kaminsky's Blog}}</ref>
-On May 4, another post on Wright's blog promised "a series of pieces that will lay the foundations for this extraordinary claim".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/04/bitcoin-craig-wright-promises-extraordinary-evidence-prove-identity|title=Bitcoin: Craig Wright promises new evidence to prove identity|author=Alex Hern|work=the Guardian}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.drcraigwright.net/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-proof/ |title=Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Proof - Dr. Craig Wright BlogDr. Craig Wright Blog |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160504045648/http://www.drcraigwright.net/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-proof/ |archive-date=2016-05-04 |access-date=2016-05-07| dead-url=yes }}</ref> But the following day, he deleted all his blog posts and replaced them with a notice entitled "I'm Sorry", which read in part:
-{{Quote|I believed that I could put the years of anonymity and hiding behind me. But, as the events of this week unfolded and I prepared to publish the proof of access to the earliest keys, I broke. I do not have the courage. I cannot.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://drcraigwright.net/| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160507165900/http://www.drcraigwright.net/ | archive-date=2016-05-07| dead-url=no|title=Dr. Craig Wright|publisher=}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/05/craig-wright-u-turn-on-pledge-to-provide-evidence-he-invented-bitcoin|title=Craig Wright U-turns on pledge to provide evidence he invented bitcoin|author=Alex Hern|work=the Guardian}}</ref>}}
+On March 14, 2024, a judge in the UK High Court found that Craig Wright could not have been Satoshi Nakamoto, due to findings from the lawsuit he was litigating at the time.<ref>https://www.wired.com/story/craig-wright-not-satoshi-nakamoto-bitcoin-creator-ruling/</ref>
 ==See Also ==
 * [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Steven_Wright Craig Steven Wright on Wikipedia]
-* [[Satoshi Nakamoto]]
+* [https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/89cbsc/vitalik_buterin_calls_out_craig_wright_for_what/dwq8d1m/ Other list of evidence]
-* [[Dorian Nakamoto]]
+* [https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/b479rk/please_excuse_the_craig_wright_spam_but_this_is/ej4oxvj/ Even more evidence]
-* [[Nick Szabo]]
-* [[Hal Finney]]
 ==References==
 <references />

Craig Wright: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 10:41, 3 July 2024

Evidence against Craig Wright being Satoshi

See Also

References

Navigation menu

Search