
Silicon Graphics, Craig Wright, and the Untold Story - mbgaxyz
https://coingeek.com/sgi-craig-wright-untold-story/
======
TD-Linux
CoinGeek is either run by or paid for by Craig Wright. You can see that all of
the articles are either strongly in his favor or in line with his recent
opinions [1].

Craig Wright is a known fraud and scammer, who claims to be Satoshi. He not
only failed to prove it, but created a clearly fabricated PGP key to do so
[2]. He has recently threatened to sue anyone who questions his claims [3].
Stay far, far away.

[1]
[https://coingeek.com/author/eliafram/](https://coingeek.com/author/eliafram/)

[2]
[https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/jpgq3y/satoshis-p...](https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/jpgq3y/satoshis-
pgp-keys-are-probably-backdated-and-point-to-a-hoax)

[3]
[https://gist.github.com/harding/b7067d2943706e2e3d3f7aab539a...](https://gist.github.com/harding/b7067d2943706e2e3d3f7aab539a67c5)

~~~
Aqueous
If there was any lingering possibility that Craig Wright could still be
Satoshi, this pretty much settled the question for me once and for all, from
the "talk" you posted from _Future of Bitcoin_ dated 30 June 2017. A direct
quote:

"Very simple; very easy: good! When every single person on this globe pays for
their cup of coffee---pays for their whatever they want---every day using one
single central currency (and I'll say central; one distributed central
currency) that is not controlled, that is hard money.

That's what Bitcoin is about: hard central controlled, no one can change,
money."

To anyone with even a passing familiarity with Bitcoin, this makes obvious
that he very simply doesn't understand what Bitcoin is. I mean, not even a
little bit. Not even superficially. If this doesn't settle the question for
everyone, once and for all, there is little point in further discussing Craig
Wright, or for that matter anything related to Bitcoin.

~~~
cornchips
The transcript is off. And biased (Co-author of the
[http://Bitcoin.org](http://Bitcoin.org) developer documentation)

It excludes his self correction.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAcOnvOVquo#t=2h29m15s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAcOnvOVquo#t=2h29m15s)

"distributed central currency"

~~~
Aqueous
Merely using the word "central" to describe Bitcoin betrays that he hasn't
even the faintest clue what it is or how it works.

------
EthanHeilman
This story says:

>The article then mentions the above claim that SGI had no relationship with
Craig Wright, and also attacks Wright’s academic credibility by stating he
lied about his PhD degree – stating that Charles Sturt University never
provided him with any PhD. But CoinGeek and I have already verified and
confirmed that the degrees all do exist.

Whereas Forbes says:

> His now-wiped LinkedIn page [..] suggested he had a PhD in computer science
> with Sydney's Charles Sturt University (CSU). But a statement sent to FORBES
> today from the university said it had never handed Wright any PhD. "Mr
> Wright has not been awarded a PhD from CSU," the statement read. [0]

Both of these statements can not be correct, right? Maybe he could he have
gotten his PhD after the Forbes article? If so this article should make it
clear that the early claims he did not have a PhD from CSU were correct but
that this state of affairs has changed.

This story also says:

>CoinGeek has since received mounting evidence which in fact provide strong
proofs that SGI did work closely with Craig Wright. Countless emails, records,
documents, training material, reference letters, including a signed Non-
Disclosure Agreement by both Chris Clarkson (formerly) of SGI, and Craig
Wright. Also on hand is evidence of conference video footage of the two
parties in question.

However the linked article reads:

>SGI says that “Cloudcroft has never been an SGI customer and SGI has no
relationship with Cloudcroft CEO Craig Steven Wright.” [1]

It could well be the case that Cloudcroft was not an SGI customer and that SGI
has no relationship with Cloudcroft and also that Cloudcroft and SGI had
communications. These are not mutually exclusive claims.

[0]: Forbes: Time To Call A Hoax? Inconsistencies On 'Probable' Bitcoin
Creator's PhD And Supercomputers Revealed \-
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2015/12/11/bitco...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2015/12/11/bitcoin-
creator-satoshi-craig-wright-lies-hoax/#30ec33ad6794)

[1]: Wired: New Clues Suggest Craig Wright, Suspected Bitcoin Creator, May Be
a Hoaxer - [https://www.wired.com/2015/12/new-clues-suggest-satoshi-
susp...](https://www.wired.com/2015/12/new-clues-suggest-satoshi-suspect-
craig-wright-may-be-a-hoaxer/)

~~~
cornchips
I remember this well. Never seen smearing until then. Which included advocates
of bitcoin and other coins for various reasons. Happened the week of Craig's
outing by the people extorting him.

Here's some information class about he was teaching right until they scrubbed
it:
[https://web.archive.org/web/20120430035605/http://www.itmast...](https://web.archive.org/web/20120430035605/http://www.itmasters.edu.au/WhichQualification/MasterofInformationSystemsSecurity/DigitalForensics.aspx)

And another: [https://archive.is/ttLth](https://archive.is/ttLth)

This was on their youtube page:
[https://archive.is/gXPkX](https://archive.is/gXPkX) "Presented by Dr Craig
Wright of Charles Sturt University and the Global Institute for Cyber Security
+ Research."

The SGI endorsement letter existed. I have a copy, but the web version was
scrubbed. The remaining evidence is in the form of a copy of press release
[http://archive.is/cqI6S](http://archive.is/cqI6S)

~~~
TD-Linux
If you have such a copy of the SGI endorsement letter, why don't you post it?
I don't think a press release written by Craig Wright is particularly
compelling evidence.

That said, I don't actually doubt that the SGI letter exists, but also believe
it was totally fabricated by Craig Wright.

~~~
asfjklasjfkd
There's a copy of the text here, not sure where you can find the PDF but the
quote from the cloudcroft site is there:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w8efk/wikileaks_s...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w8efk/wikileaks_sgi_supercomputer_letter_removed_from/cxujuna/)

------
asfjklasjfkd
If cloudcroft and the demorgan group were legit companies then why did they
seemingly evaporate after these stories broke? Shouldn't the matter have been
handled professionally by a PR rep for the company?

Surely they must have had customers to support and significant assets to
support a 2 year old supercomputing company and 9 other ventures. Instead they
have been scrubbed from the internet completely in a matter of hours since
their ceo was taking PR heat. Can anyone find the new owner of the CO1N
supercomputer or evidence that cloudcroft is still using it?

~~~
cornchips
Improper investigation by the ATO wasn't comfortable so they jumped islands.

No customers, just investments.

Before they were deleted there were videos of pieces of the equipment.

~~~
asfjklasjfkd
There wasn't a single video of a datacenter or server racks instead there were
videos of Craig receiving shipments of xeon phi cards (as in 1 or 2 not dozens
or hundreds) and constructing a xeon phi based desktop computer. He also
points to a box saying it's full of infiniband cards and xeon phi cards
(doesn't open it).

In Craig Wright's supercomputing class, students are given access to a single
node of the purported supercomputer. The only evidence of the supercomputer
ever existing is on the green500 list.

If it was an improper investigation then fight it in court and release a
public statement on the company's site like a normal company. Nuking your web
presence and hiding in another continent is not exactly normal behavior.

~~~
cornchips
Shipments of xeon phi represents the supercomputer. The desktop machines
loaded with them is for developers. He had 3 phase going into his private
residential area home. In an already 230v country, means a LOT of power...

The evidence weighs with the expenditure of large investments.

The court fights will probably come as evidenced by a segment in his recent
public talk. Especially in countries with libel laws. Court costs a lot of
time and money which could be used for better things.

~~~
asfjklasjfkd
Shipments of 1 or 2 xeon phis constitutes a supercomputer? Pointing to a box
and saying it's full of infinibands and xeon phis means that we should believe
they are full of them? If this guy is one thing he's definitely not modest, if
those boxes really were full of expensive computer parts he would show them.

At every turn in this saga of signings, supercomputers, and credentials
there's always something sketchy going on. At some point you can no longer
accept what this guy says at face value.

~~~
cornchips
_Shipments of 1 or 2 xeon phis constitutes a supercomputer? Pointing to a box
and saying it 's full of infinibands and xeon phis means that we should
believe they are full of them?_

There were racks too.

The small stuff you probably saw is for developers.

I find it more likely a technology person would spend a lot money than saving
it. If spending millions we are talking DIY supercomputer territory.

 _At every turn in this saga of signings, supercomputers, and credentials
there 's always something sketchy going on. At some point you can no longer
accept what this guy says at face value._

Name one thing about bitcoin that isn't sketchy.

------
powera
The author doth protest too much.

Craig Wright is not Satoshi. He could have proved it a dozen ways, and has not
done so.

I neither know nor care if the rest of his resume is fabricated.

------
mbgaxyz
Moderators, why was this submission flagged?

------
cornchips
Why was this flagged?

