
Everything makes sense if David Kleiman was Satoshi Nakamoto. Here’s why - hmsln
https://seebitcoin.com/2016/05/everything-makes-sense-if-david-kleiman-was-satoshi-nakamoto-heres-why/
======
nickpsecurity
Seriously, this is at TV soap opera level now. And this...

"Whatever is happening is fascinating, it’s a plot worthy of Hollywood."

...is terrible judgment. No, it's not a plot worthy of Hollywood. It's a known
fraud continuing to make grandiose claims that people publish and debate for
some reason. Now, he's concocted a trail of evidence leading to a person
that's paralyzed, hospitalized, and maybe nearly dead. The type of person that
can't fight a disinformation campaign effectively. And the crowds go wild!
Internet soap opera...

Maybe I need to leak some emails that some other HN people and I created
Bitcoin as a prank to see how many people would waste that energy and CPU when
they could just use decentralized transactions with real currency. That I was
holding onto my Satoshi stash out of regret for how far my prank would go.
Then, a third-world bank invests its holdings in the scheme to save their
economy from impending hyperinflation. The same country that previously
canceled my contracts for locals due to bribes to their corrupt government.
So, I go Bond villain and dump all my Satoshi bitcoins at once to drive the
value to near zero. The country is begging IMF for a bailout the next day.

Or some other Hollywood-style bullshit that Wright wasn't bright enough to
come up with. :)

~~~
acqq
> Now, he's concocted a trail of evidence leading to a person that's
> paralyzed, hospitalized, and maybe nearly dead.

Klieman is dead since 2013.

As far as I understand, Wright "concocted a trail of evidence" last year, the
"leaked" documents that point to Klieman, referred to by various online media
are with great probability from Wright alone.

And he openly proved twice that he's able to construct false proofs (the PGP
mails story last year and this "old signature" trick now). And he's quite
capable when presenting them: whenever he just shows his "proofs" to only a
few people, most people believe him. We have enough articles to confirm that.

------
kbart
I wish HN had downvote post button (similar to downvote comment), all this
"Who is Satoshi Today" soap opera is getting boring already.

~~~
cronjobber
As far as I understand things around here, there is a hidden "downvote post"
button, and you just pressed it!

(May be wrong, but that's what I read once: The more comments a post has
compared to upvotes, the faster it sinks.)

------
jl6
How much do we believe that the Dorian Nakamoto denial comment on
p2pfoundation was from the real Satoshi?

[http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-
sour...](http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-
source?commentId=2003008%3AComment%3A52186&xg_source=activity)

Because that was posted in 2014, and Kleiman died in 2013.

~~~
medlazik
Not him

[http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/xn/detail/2003008:Comment:5527...](http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/xn/detail/2003008:Comment:55276)

[https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=775174.0](https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=775174.0)

------
Svip
Didn't the Satoshi Nakamoto account comment on the Newsweek article claiming
Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto was the man?[0] That was in 2014. Since Kleiman died
in 2013, then someone else would have had access to the Nakamoto account,
right?

Indeed, I wonder why the Nakamoto account haven't made a comment on the Craig
Wright claims.

[0]
[http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/m/discussion?id=2003008%3ATopi...](http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/m/discussion?id=2003008%3ATopic%3A9402)

------
kriro
Reminds me of the mystery about +ORC back in my reversing days. I shortly
talked to Francesco during a CCC but couldn't get more info on the topic :D

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Red_Cracker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Red_Cracker)

[http://www.home.aone.net.au/~byzantium/found/found4.html](http://www.home.aone.net.au/~byzantium/found/found4.html)

------
ifdefdebug
It is clearly obvious that Craig Wright will be accused of identity theft by
many if he really provides the crypto proof he announced yesterday.

Too many people prefer to think of Gavin Andresen as a complete idiot easy to
fool with some stupid tricks or even a fraud one can buy, rather than to
accept Craig Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto. They also think about Craig Wright as
a complete idiot who gives false proof easily debunked in a matter of a few
hours, when he never ever stated that his discussion of "Key Verification" was
a proof of anything.

So if he is who he claims, which is something I don't know, then he has good
reasons to try to proof it far beyond a signed message. The signed message, if
it appears, won't settle things for him. Many people will just say he had the
keys stolen.

~~~
anoonmoose
It seems to me that there's two Satoshis to talk about here. One is the
Satoshi that created Bitcoin. The other is the Satoshi that owns the private
key to the genesis block, and also a whole lot of other bitcoins that are
worth a lot of money.

Everything I've read about Craig Wright makes it seem pretty unlikely that
he's the former. I just don't see enough in his CV to believe he created
Bitcoin. This is the Satoshi I'd be more interested in actually learning the
identity of.

As for the latter, all he needs to do to prove that is sign a message. That's
pretty easy to do relative to the magnitude of the claim. Any proof beyond
that isn't proof of identity, it's proof that he obtained that identity
legitimately. I kind of don't care about who this Satoshi is unless they are
the same person.

I don't think these two Satoshis have to be the same person, I don't think
they need to be only one person, and I don't think they need to be alive, but
right now I've personally seen nothing that makes me thing Craig is either.

~~~
ismatopius
> I just don't see enough in his CV to believe he created Bitcoin

Have you researched the guy? I would say his CV is quite impressive.
[https://archive.is/HdKeA](https://archive.is/HdKeA)
[https://archive.is/http://gse-
compliance.blogspot.com.au/*](https://archive.is/http://gse-
compliance.blogspot.com.au/*)

------
wslh
Nobody suggested yet a scifi twist in the story like Satoshi Nakamoto was an
AI project using deep learning. The project was dismantled and the keys can't
be recovered. The model was trained with papers in cryptography.

Note to downvoters: think that every Satoshi story is hilarious until someone
MOVES those F*ing prehistoric bitcoins on a transaction.

------
bobwaycott
Genuinely curious:

Why does anyone care about who Satoshi is IRL? Is it the mystery? The hunt? Is
there a Bitcoin prize to be had?

~~~
buro9
It could be argued that if Satoshi is a person, and that person created
Bitcoin on equipment provided by a workplace, during work time... and if those
first 1 million bitcoins were mined on equipment owned by a workplace...

Then depending on the legal jurisdiction of that person...

* The employer have a claim on the IP and the initial licence was incorrect

* The employer have a claim on the bitcoins

* The employer could have a claim on any core patent that arises

This is just from a UK patent law based view where it is repeatedly made clear
to employees not to work on side projects or other things on work equipment
and time.

So there is a potential legal risk, if it's determined that Satoshi was
working on this using his employers resources.

~~~
bobwaycott
Well, shit. That's pretty heavy. I suppose I would want to remain anonymous if
I was concerned about that scenario.

~~~
PakG1
Doesn't matter if you did a good job documenting and proving that you didn't
use work equipment. I remember a speaker once telling an audience something
like don't even use the same brand pens or notebooks purchased by your
employer to jot down your ideas and stuff.

~~~
bobwaycott
Well, of course, as long as those are the rules and the scenario. The
grandparent offered a bit different scenario.

The moral is quite clear, though: don't ever, ever use someone else's
equipment and time to build your own thing.

~~~
PakG1
And now I realize how heavy that scenario is too. Dang. That's heavy.

------
seba_dos1
Everything makes sense if I'm Satoshi Nakamoto. At least for today.

------
tempodox
I don't give a hoot any more.

------
jbmorgado
Seriously what's with all this bitcoin propaganda on Hacker News these days?

Is this kind of stuff even interesting except to the few people that have
money invested in bitcoin?

~~~
gruez
How is this bitcoin propaganda? It doesn't promote bitcoin in any way. Or are
you calling anything bitcoin related "propaganda"?

~~~
jbmorgado
We had at least 6 articles about bitcoin in the front page in the last 3 days
and only 1 of them was about anything technical or factual. So yes, that's
propaganda.

~~~
seba_dos1
That's just tabloid-like excitement. People are eager to be the first to prove
whether somebody is or is not the Satoshi. It's the taste of important mystery
that gets people going, not propaganda.

