This might just be what he wants you to think ?
The creator of Craig Wright, Craig Wright, has managed to stay in the news for a fourth day: this time for having a depressingly inevitable meltdown following his failure, yet again, to prove he is the inventor of digi-currency bitcoin. Earlier this week, the Australian went direct to three UK media outlets -– the BBC, …
Maybe he totally, utterly believes he is SN (as some people believe they are the Messiah and pull others along in their mesmerizing slipstream), but whenever he turns around and tries to prove it, reality conspires to thwart him!
It would be like a protagonist of a PKD novel. Just get romantically involved with young girls and add a bit of the IoT to make it complete.
Trump is a billionaire - being an asshole comes with the territory.
This numpty is nobody. Comparing him to Trump in any way is actually an insult to Trump because when Trump manipulates people his victims don't notice until they get the bill. Trump is actually far more shrewd than this looser, he knows when not to go claiming something that he might actually have to prove. Trump makes claims that are just vague enough and, when you challenge them, he takes you court and cleans you out.
This idiot, on the other hand, did go to court, all the way to the supreme court, and he lost all the way.
"In any case I suspect that you are from blighty because the highest court in the cuntry is the high court.."
I assume you mean "country", although High Courts can be cunts at time!!
"There was lots of cuntry in the High Court today as the judge passed his views on on-line privacy"
Ahh maybe thats what you meant?
Given that bitcoin seems to be the safest way for crooks to collect ransoms for cryptoware locked systems and this scam is earning increasingly big money, Bitcoin value seems set to increase as more marks can be induced to buy in for the purpose of paying up to get their data back. That's until it's seen as nothing more than a money laundry and regulators do the next logical thing by closing down the bitcoin for conventional exchanges. Replacement for conventional it isn't, as most folk won't ever get to like the idea of 1 wasted KWh = 1 vote.
That stash isn't actually worth that much as dumpong onto the market is sure to dilute the value considerably. Its still a lot but the size of the first hoard means the total number of bitcoins remaining is a lot lower and this scarcity is what makes bitcoins have any sort of value.
"I AM Satoshi, trust me. But oh, the burden of no longer hiding the fact that I am Satoshi is too much to bear, so nevermind."
I mean, really? He's probably hoping for some Barbara Streisand Effect here. How many Google searches for BitCoin are going to bring up this a-holes' name without him having actually done anything?
It's like I've always said, history is just a giant game of telephone. Thousands of years from now, after humanity has been wiped off the earth by climate change, alien archaeologists are gonna blame Al Gore for causing it.
I can't figure out what he wants from all this.
It does look odd, but perhaps we're not actually following the money here. What does his conversation with the tax department look like? Is he actually making money on tax returns? We're all so focused on the Satoshi thing that more personal and real details are not being investigated and reported.
Didn't Rory Cellan-Jones, and the guys from the Economist and GQ just give him £5 each, so that he could send them back from the same address as some famous Bitcoin transaction - thus entirely failing to prove that he was the founder in a more complicated way than just giving them an early Bitcoin each?
So, he's made £15 profit! Now if they also bought him lunch somewhere nice, you can quadruple that.
Here! BBC. Over here! I'm Lord Lucan. Now buy me a nice dinner, there's a good chap, and I'll tell you all about it.
>I can't figure out what he wants from all this.
As much as he looks the fool just read this morning about the case of Belle Gibson who Australian readers can tell you all about. She is about 100x more malicious than this tool. She lied about having terminal cancer, created a company that made a million dollars pushing the alternative bullshit she said cured her and the proceeded to lie about giving 300k to charity. Even more insidious this c*nt was using her influence to discourage people from getting childhood vaccines or to avoid regular medical care and to go only to "alternative" treatments for childhood cancer.
Actually its even worse she actually raised funds in the name of kids (used their name, story and picture) with terminal cancer she was "working" with and then kept it. The worse is she is not even looking at charges. I wish the Aussies were as hard on white devils as they are brown refugees. Shame on Apple as well for pushing her app for their flop of a watch.
Hmmm. Is this how you manage to recover your anonymity in the digital age?
You invent Bitcoin, then when everyone is breathing down your neck, (not least the tax man), instead of issuing denials, taking out injunctions etc, you do a high profile FAIL to prove that you invented Bitcoin, and thus go back to quiet life that you wanted from the start, (which is why you were anon in the first place, and didn't spend any of the hoard).
A bold move, genius even :-) Esp if tax planning is an issue best dealt with by being able to say "prove I own it" to the taxman. Lovely reverse ferret there Sir, well done!
Tax law note - depending on the law and the way the tax point is calculated there can be situations, esp re volatile assets currently below peak where a tax bill could exceed the asset value, esp if paying it required selling big chunks of said asset into a thin market.
>and thus go back to quiet life that you wanted from the start
Nice plan except for the next decade anytime anybody Googles your name it will come back with search terms such as fraud and douche nozzle. Its fine if you are independently wealthy and don't ever need a job. Better have proof for that wealth though as the tax man will certainly be watching.
This post has been deleted by its author
I just don't get it.
So you're 'Satoshi'*. You develop this Bitcoin technology which, as part of its design, is geared towards secrecy, privacy and anonymity. It is based on open cryptography so you can't show source code but you can prove you own the keys for the earliest blocks in the chain. For anyone in cryptography - as Wright is and 'Satoshi' must be - the solution is elementary: sign a message with those keys.
This is one of the very few ways to prove it and, as someone with a more than passing familiarity with cryptography, Wright should know this. After all - this is one of the fundamental parts of cryptography: you sign things with keys you own. If you can't do that then, in the crypto-world, you could be anyone.
Wright may indeed be Satoshi (though smart money is against it) but if he is then the only half-way logical conclusion I can draw is that he is try to quell rumors by this bizarre process. Not that that makes a great deal of sense either but it's the only way I can reconcile his failure to offer the simple proofs needed with an assertion that he actually is who he says he is.
As so often, however, the simplest answer is the best: he's not Satoshi.
* - Assuming, for the sake of simplicity, that 'Satoshi' is actually a single person, rather than a group.
This guy's invovled in some sort of tax thing at the minute isn't he?
So could it be possible that the sudden backtrack of proving he's one of Bitcoins founding fathers have something to do with the fact that he realises his 450 million quids worth of bitcoins could be taxed to?
Personally I don't think he's Satoshi, that Japanese-American who got pointed at a while ago, now he did seem like a much more likely candidate.
Not really, no.
The 'Tax thing' he's involved in is because he owns numerous companies which operate by buying things off each other and then claiming tax rebates from the AUS government - i.e., tax fraud. He was so blatant with this that several of the companies had no assets aside from outstanding sales tax rebates on deals with other companies of which he was the sole owner, and it's such an open-and-shut case that he has fled the country. Apparently, none of this in any way reduced the BBC's willingness to take his words at face value.
And just owning a lot of money is not, in itself, directly taxable. Interest on it would be, but bitcoins don't accumulate any. Selling the coins might make him eligible to pay CGT on the value that they'd gained, but he hasn't sold them (almost certainly because he doesn't actually possess them).
The one thing that Wright seems to have actually achieved from all this is nicking £5 from Rory Cellan-Jones: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36213588
This man has been hounded for six months. He's been moving between rented house and still the police search places he's lived.
A lot of people would buckle under the stress and all you can do is add to it.
You commentards are nothing but trolls. Will you be happy if he commits suicide?
It's immaterial who he is or what he's done. He's a human being. And you, the reg reporters included, are acting like baying hounds. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
Leave him alone.