Ethereum Founder Confronts Self-Proclaimed Bitcoin Creator Craig Wright, Calls Him a Fraud (businessinsider.com)

The dispute between Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin and self-proclaimed "Bitcoin creator" Craig Wright is far from over. At the 2018 Deconomy conference, Buterin asked, "Given that he makes so many non sequiturs and mistakes, why is this fraud allowed to speak at this conference?" From the report: Audience members applauded him. The confrontation (video) happened during a question-and-answer session after a panel called "Bitcoin, Controversy over Principle" featuring Roger Ver and Samson Mow; Wright gave a talk just before the panel.

[...] Wright first shot to fame when stories from Gizmodo and Wired both identified him as the likely inventor of bitcoin. In May 2016, Wright published a blog post and spearheaded a media push in news outlets including the BBC, The Economist, and GQ in which he said he was, in fact, Satoshi Nakamoto. But the evidence in Wright's blog post made little sense on a technical, cryptographic level. Cryptography experts said at the time that it was nearly nonsensical.

Comments

Media Reports Muddled

[cstacy]

The media as usual muddled his story. He didn't create Bitcoin. He invented email.

Re:Media Reports Muddled

[cstacy]

cstacy:
  The media as usual muddled his story. He didn't create Bitcoin. He invented email.

AC:
  Uh, wrong. That was Christine Peterson

No, I believe it was Christine Peterson who invented "Open Email", one of the most common operations done on computers! She did that back in 1998, while email itself was invented in 1978 (and trademarked in 1982). During the years from 1978-1998 email was not used very much, as there was no way to open it.

I know, it's hard to keep all these things straight...

Re:Media Reports Muddled

[rickb928]

Funny, but PLATO was delivering email, blogs, chat rooms, and instant messaging in the mid 70s. Don Bitzer built a lot of this, long with flat panel displays and touchscreens in the 60s. People like Ray Ozzie saw the system and came away inspired. Some of the people who attended UIUC include Marc Andreessen, Thomas Siebel, that Ozzie guy, Peng T. Ong, Steve Dorner, Brendan Eich, almost a who's who of the computer industry. Lots of innovation there.

And yes, shamefully, I still play Avatar on Cyber1. I don;t use the email, notes, or Talkomatic stuff much though, just in-game chat.

Hard to tell who invented email. I suspect someone at DEC and/or IBM were doing this early on, as much of this must have been obvious to sharp people.

Re: Media Reports Muddled

[Bing Tsher E]

Make sure you're talking about the right brother, not the wrong one.

Re:Media Reports Muddled

[cstacy]

I was using email in the early 70s and it was old hat by then. In the mid-70s someone in my high school had implemented a fully fleshed out recognizable system (with CC, BCC, forwarding, marking, admins, ... all the "traditional" features) in BASIC on the schools HP 2000 Time Sharing system. He copied the functionality of existing systems that we knew about from "big computers". I had for years been using email on mainframes (such as APL*PLUS) so it was familiar to me. That's email "as we know it today" with the usual headers and system features. More primitive systems that could rightly be called email doubtless go back to the 1960s. By 1973, email was 75% of the traffic on the ARPANET ffs.

None of that is exactly the point my joke was making, though.

Re:Wait, did I miss an episode?

[cstacy]

I thought nobody knew who Bitcoin's creator was. They figured it out since then?

Yeah it was all over NEWSWEEK almost exactly 4 years ago, try to keep up!

Where is this? Can someone provide better links?

[jimtheowl]

I'm not removing my Add blocker, and given there are no other working links provided, can someone tell me where this conference took place?

Re:Where is this? Can someone provide better links

[AnthonywC]

2018 Deconomy conference was held in Seoul, South Korea on April 3-4th. https://www.deconomy.com/

Obvious Bitcoin is a Chinese Invention

[darronb]

Just wait, China will claim it invented Bitcoin soon enough.

The irony is richer than a serving of panna cotta

[JoeyRox]

The creator of a fake currency accusing someone else of faking their creation of a fake currency.

2nd comment was better

[psnyder]

Craig Wright gave a talk about the Lightning Network. Vitalik was pointing out something in that talk that made absolutely no sense (using basic mathematics). Craig Wright tries to defend himself. Then someone, who I believe was Joseph Poon, said,

"I wrote the Lightning Network paper. I straight up don't understand your presentation. I'm sure the rest of the audience does not as well."

Craig Wright is a fraud. The conference organizers should be embarrassed to include him.

Re:2nd comment was better

[Maritz]

is a fraud.

This was at a crypto-currency conference. They are all frauds. They're probably about to be sued by Baskin-Robbins, because of the 31 flavors of fraud.

I don't like cryptocurrency, and despite that, everything you say makes me cringe like fuck.

Isn't it easy to verify Bitcoin ownership?

[UnknowingFool]

I don't profess to understand Bitcoin completely but I thought Nakimoto owned a large number of coins that have never been spent. Since part of the system relies on assymetric key cryptography he could verify ownership by using Nakimoto's private key to sign something which the public key could verify. Also naming which his coins which the block chain could shown have never been spent. Sure it is possible Wright somehow stole or gained Nakimoto's key but ownership/knowledge of a private key is tantamount to ownership in the Bitcoin world.

Re: Isn't it easy to verify Bitcoin ownership?

[UnknowingFool]

He doesn't have to even do that. Using the private key, Wright could sign a message that the public key would verify.

Re:Isn't it easy to verify Bitcoin ownership?

[Khashishi]

Why would he want to do that though? He would rather bask in the ambiguity of the situation than prove his identity and make himself the target of thieves and governments.

Re:Isn't it easy to verify Bitcoin ownership?

[DRJlaw]

He would rather bask in the ambiguity of the situation than prove his identity and make himself the target of thieves and governments.

Why would thieves and governments wait for proof rather than simply taking him at his own word?

"I'd totally kidnap him, but I can't be positive that he actually holds millions upon millions worth of bitcoin, and because of that the risk is too much..."

Re: Isn't it easy to verify Bitcoin ownership?

[UnknowingFool]

Other than the fact that Wright has already claimed he was Nakimoto on many occasions. Also reading more about the situation, to prove that he was Nakimoto, Wright submitted a key signature. The problem was that the key signature provided was identical to one Nakimoto used in a 2009 forum posting. When asked to provide a unique key signature, Wright then refused to provide any more evidence.

According to a Bitcoin developer, Wright signed another message in his presence with what appears to be a private Nakimoto key but there is no recording of the event. It was not broadcast and we only have the word of the developer it happened as no one can verify the message.

Mere by claiming he was Nakimoto, Wright made himself the target of thieves. As for the target of governments, most governments understand the difference between paper wealth and actual wealth. Like stocks and bonds, Wright's Bitcoins are not worth taxing until he sells them.

Re:Isn't it easy to verify Bitcoin ownership?

[Khashishi]

Because thieves don't believe him any more than you do.

Re: Isn't it easy to verify Bitcoin ownership?

[bill_mcgonigle]

Yet the Aussies raided him within a few days on "unrelated matters". Sure they did.

Whether he had the keys or not it was obviously a stupid move in today's world. It's more important to see if he's contributing today or not. His talk on miner incentives and double-spend security seemed spot-on. I haven't seen the LN talk but if it's complete nonsense (I would not believe its primary advocate's protests) then he could be completely misunderstanding LN and still not be wrong about Bitcoin economics.

The search for trivially simple answers often leads to foolish conclusions.

Re:Isn't it easy to verify Bitcoin ownership?

[DRJlaw]

That's not ambiguity then, is it?

Re: Isn't it easy to verify Bitcoin ownership?

[UnknowingFool]

Yet the Aussies raided him within a few days on "unrelated matters". Sure they did.

Well let's review the facts regarding the raid: Wright told his landlord he was leaving for Australia by December for London but extended his lease to January. He had apparently already began the moving process. So Australia waiting to raid his home and offices any later would have been foolish if they wanted any evidence.

Also The ATO ruled in December 2014 (a year prior to the raid) that cryptocurrency would be treated as an asset for capital gains: "The treatment of bitcoin for tax purposes in Australia has been the subject of considerable debate. The ATO ruled in December 2014 that cryptocurrency should be considered an asset for capital gains tax purposes." So Australia had no reason to raid his home for Bitcoin purposes.

I haven't seen the LN talk but if it's complete nonsense (I would not believe its primary advocate's protests) then he could be completely misunderstanding LN and still not be wrong about Bitcoin economics.

Then you should read or research it more. The original author of Lightning Networks, Joseph Poon, did say that he did not understand Wright's talk in the presentation.

The search for trivially simple answers often leads to foolish conclusions.

And which trivial answers do you object to not understanding? At any time if Wright wishes to publicly show the world he is Satoshi Nakimoto, he can by signing any message. The fact of the matter is that Wright at first claimed he was Nakimoto and then provided underwhelming evidence. When asked to present irrefutable evidence, he then backed down and refused.

slightly off-topic

[beep54]

but I want to suggest that we start calling all cryptocurrency 'aspirational money' a la the aspirational pricing of real estate (Manhattan, London, etc.).

Re:slightly off-topic

[Bing Tsher E]

Better yet, we should start referring to it as 'virtual lottery tickets.'

Re:Wait, did I miss an episode?

[Kaenneth]

Actually, the inventor of Bitcoin was Time magazine's Person of the Year in 2006.

Re:The irony is richer than a serving of panna cot

[Daneel Olivaw R.]

Dear Troll, Thanks for that fake history of Ethereum Classic.

Re:Where is this? Can someone provide better links

[Megol]

I don't think many people here use Edge...

Re:It was me, Charlie

[Maritz]

Can you prove it by signing a message with Satoshi's key? If not, bugger off.

You seriously did not detect that this was a joke? Fucking hell man. Sort your life out.

Re:Where is this? Can someone provide better links

[Maritz]

The only way you could come by this info was to ask for it in the comments? How resourceful.

Re:The irony is richer than a serving of panna cot

[Maritz]

I don't own or use cryptocurrency. I sort of wish it would die so I could buy a better video card.

But I still find your criticism completely stupid and asinine because I'm capable of fucking nuanced thought. You should try it sometime.