really dont care who satoshi is or if CSW is satoshi but isn't that kind of the point of keys? (however not having a key doesn't prove anything one way or the other)
I just tried to show logic: If you can open a door (cause you have a key for) - it does not prove you own the house. - So it does not help to scream for 'show the key'!
What proof do you have of any of the accomplishments on CSW’s CV? How do you know the world around you isn’t a simulation? Or you aren’t a brain in a vat?
We only derive truth from many coherent facts. Singularities are useless, esp in virtual environments. And I m fine to ignore personal factors in Bitcoin anyway.
What point do you accept the person is who they say they are? Very quickly you could ask how can we be sure of anything? How do you know CSW is even a real person?
Wont sign with his key? Not him. Audio? Falsified. Video interview? Computer generated. Speech in person on the balcony? Body double.
This reasoning has plagued the people discussing Julian Assange.
No it is not absolute proof, but the probability that you own the house or are the person you say goes up a lot. What % of times is a door opened with a key by the owner vs not?
Like this guy. It is just trolling or not very clever to ask for.
I can agree with this guy. If Craig proved it with signed messages or moved the coins from block 1, then I would believe he was Satoshi.
I'm not convinced he cares whether anyone believes he is Satoshi. It's everyone else that cares.
read this:
https://archive.fo/kjuLi ...he doesn't want to prove it; CSW believes he will just end up like Ross Ulbricht if he provides proof
For all those who 'believe' such a weak proof, its not worth doing. For all others i'ts wasted anyway. Better option: Satoshi has no human instance.
I would rather believe this proof than anything else...
