Thanks to cxn from tv for the image.

 

Well, that escalated quickly. Hours after the latest round of Satoshi Wright shit storm events, things went from weird to weirder. Gavin claims that he wasn’t hacked after losing commit access, and a slew of additional pieces of information have become available. Does Gavin forget though, as evidenced by Kevin Mitnick, the most effective and simplest hacks sometimes don’t even involve a computer?

The community has been quick with their research, and are beginning to see that maybe this whole thing isn’t as simple as first thought. Duh… anyone who didn’t imply that after watching his BBC interview is probably a r/btc regular (seriously, those guys are hilarious), or just oblivious.

When asked: “Why have you decided to identify yourself as Satoshi Nakamoto?”

Wright answers: “I didn’t decide. I had people decide this matter for me. And they’re making life difficult, not for me, but my friends, my family, my staff. … None of it’s true.” (… is where he says something else in-between).

Full video here:

The first thing that we’re going to be attacked for is adding in the … above, and told that this is taking what he said out of context. With the situation as weird as it already is, would reading between the lines make things any weirder? Is the simple obfuscation tactic of “hiding in plain sight”, and injecting real data in-between semi-related statements that far fetched? Fuck, we did it at the very end of our last post.

For the sake of argument, let’s be fair and assume that it’s the “extortionists” that Ian Grigg (yeah, that guy again) mentions in December 2015. This is the most plausible scenario based on their public statements:

1/ I've been in contact with f&f of Dr Craig Wright.  Here's what pieced together. NB the facts are evolving as you will see.

— Ian Grigg (@iang_fc) December 9, 2015

2/ for some time, CW has been victim of an extortion plot for money and other outrageous things. Also persistent hacking events.

— Ian Grigg (@iang_fc) December 9, 2015

3/ when outrageous demands were ignored, extortionist threatened to reveal to ATO if demands not met.

— Ian Grigg (@iang_fc) December 9, 2015

4/ extortionist proved intent by revealing claims to press & others. Several were relayed back to CW, evidence is clear.

— Ian Grigg (@iang_fc) December 9, 2015

5/ It is understood that "hacker" and extortionist are working together, may be same person.  To cover tracks, or inside access?

— Ian Grigg (@iang_fc) December 9, 2015

6/ Precise timeline not clear, but 5 “journalists” 2 mags and ATO fell for extortionist/hacker doxing, raced each other to disgrace.

— Ian Grigg (@iang_fc) December 9, 2015

7/ Unclear if extortionist was coordinating or they coordinated directly. Extortionist/hacker dangerous & mentally unstable. End.

— Ian Grigg (@iang_fc) December 9, 2015

So these “extortionists” or “hackers” are after Wright’s “money”, and are still pursuing this even after it was widely established that the coins are held in the “Tulip Trust” until 2020, back in December 2015 as well? We’ll just disregard the fact that he’s bankrupt, because the hackers would clearly be after the coins.

As a community, bitcoiners globally have been contributing what they can via different internet outlets in an effort to put together the truth. While the full truth may never come to light, each piece of evidence potentially brings the community one step closer to realizing the vast scope and nature of this increasingly complex puzzle. While we always promote research, critical thinking and out of the box reasoning, we do not think that it is productive of the community to draw unreasonable conclusions without any type of supporting evidence. Fortunately, this time around, some have done their homework, and started to put forward some reasonable scenarios as to what they believe is happening. Additional pieces of information, such as Wright purchasing coins over $1,000 on Gox just don’t seem to add up. It’s public information via the ATO (Australian Taxation Office) that Wright claims to have mined around $5,000 btc at 3-4 cents. Assuming a generous 5 cents a piece, this would amount to at least 100,000 btc, but not much more. Unless, of course, his accountant is intentionally deceiving the tax authorities.

Read the full transcript here. Of course, they’re redacted. Additionally, here’s a PDF of the same conversation.

JC: We understand. Craig Wright took the Bitcoins that he had mined offshore. At the time, it
was worth 3-4 cents. The total value of this was around $5000. He then started up W&K Info
Defense LLC (W&K) with Mr Dave Kleiman. W&K was an entity created for the purpose of
mining Bitcoins. Craig Wright is a forensic computer expert. He is constantly updating himself
attending courses, workshops and training sessions. He is also a university lecturer at Charles
Sturt University and conducts courses. He even provides services to some Australian
government agencies including the ATO and the Defence Force. However, this is all done on a
very high level.

Disregarding the fact that there’s a blatant conflict of interest given he provides “services” to government agencies, including the one investigating him, the ATO. His story mathematically makes no sense, as it is widely known that Satoshi controls the keys to at least 1 million btc.This is implied later, in the exact same conversation, by Wright’s accountant John Chesher. How is it possible to overlook this? How easy is it to move to Australia and pay taxes there if the ATO is this bad at math (we’re interested, heard it’s nice)?

Craig Wright had mined a lot of Bitcoins. Craig then took the Bitcoins and put them into a
Seychelles Trust. A bit of it was also put into Singapore. This was run out of an entity from the
UK. Craig had gotten approximately 1.1 million Bitcoins. There was a point in time, when he had
around 10% of all the Bitcoins out there.

Craig “mined a lot of Bitcoins”. The wording of Chesher’s statement would imply that the majority of these coins were moved into a Seychelles Trust, with the minority (“a bit”) being put into Singapore. Craig “had gotten” approximately 1.1 million Bitcons. Is this mis-direction, a slip up, the truth? Did Craig mine 100,000 btc as suggested initially, and receive 1 million in another fashion? Did he mine 1.1 million, and his accountant blatantly lies to the ATO?

It isn’t hard to find these shell companies that he used via public tools. And there are significant questions surrounding all of them.

The American Lawyer outlines the motives undertaken by these parties, in case you need another source.

Included in the documents cited by Wired and Gizmodo is an email sent on Jan. 8, 2014, by someone using the account satoshi@vistomail.com who signs off on the missive as “Craig (possibly…).” Others included in the correspondence, which seeks to lobby Australian Sen. Arthur Sinodinos into adopting a more tax-favorable treatment of bitcoin in the country, are Wright’s wife, Ramona Watts; Wright’s accountant, John Chesher; and Clayton Utz’s Sommer.

In his response to the email a day later, Sommer said that he was happy to reach out to Sinodinos, but suggested that it was probably best to keep “Nakamoto-san’s involvement in the background for now.” Gizmodo and Wired obtained a transcript of a Feb. 18, 2014, meeting between Sommer and Australian tax officials, as well as the minutes of a subsequent gathering between both parties on Feb. 26, 2014.

The purpose of the meetings seems to be to convince the Australian government to treat Wright’s bitcoin holdings as currency, as opposed to another asset taxed at a higher rate. Sommer has been at the forefront of attempts to get Australian tax officials to treat bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as a commodity for tax purposes.

 

Just a few lines down, in the same ATO  document, things begin to get even more interesting:

Craig Wright was speaking in a conference in Melbourne. He was giving a talk about Bitcoins
and mining. He was then approached by a man by the name of Mark Ferrier and that was how
they met. This was how the relationship was formed. They started talking. Craig Wright told Mark
Ferrier that he wanted to start up a Bitcoin bank. They then started emailing. Mark Ferrier told
him that he knew someone who could help him start up the bank. This was all done in early June
2013. Everything was done very quickly- most of it was done in one weekend. Craig Wright, with
the help of Mark Ferrier, agreed to purchase banking software from Al Baraka. Mark Ferrier also
convinced him to purchase gold ore. He also offered Ian Ferrier’s services to Mark Ferrier. Ian
Ferrier is Mark Ferrier’s father. Before engaging in Mark Ferrier’s services, Craig Wright had
conducted lots of checks on him and everything came up clean. So in essence, Craig Wright
wanted the banking software and Mark Ferrier wanted Bitcoins.
Around mid-July/August, Craig Wright released funds from an entity located in the UK to MJF
Consulting. This was all going through a server located in Central West Africa.

Some additional research reveals that Wright paid a sum of 380,203 bitcoins to Ferrier in 2013. Where is this on the blockchain?

The 380,203 Bitcoins Wright paid to Ferrier was worth nearly 5% of all existing Bitcoins in 2013.

From Business Insider.

Of course, maintaining the weirdness of this situation, Ferrier is then arrested. Wright’s accountant corroborates the fact that the tx hit the blockchain, as he states to the ATO “This was all going through a server located in Central West Africa”, and this is all we hear.

How did Wright send over 300,000 btc to Ferrier in 2013, if the majority seem to be locked up in a trust? Again, where is this tx or series of tx on the blockchain? Where are the missing Gox and SR btc?

Almost a month ago, a strange Reddit post appeared from /u/whistleblower5470541(now deleted). Archive.is in case that disappears too.

The entire thing reads like a terribly written fantasy, but it’s worth a few minutes of your time. Pulled from the story:

What the Hack?

When the titan Prometheus offered this human the fire, I saw the heat. I knew that heat would burn away my life. I loved my life and did not want it burned. I’ve lived that life.

…

However, as a servant of the truth, this event must be recorded…

I’ve been attending the Netherlands quadrennial hacking conferences since HIP97.

Prometheus… where have we seen that before?

I met @haq4good, @iang_fc and a few others, who will be known later to prepare for Dec and recent tsunamis. We formed Prometheus Project.

— Tulip Boy (@Dr_Craig_Wright) May 6, 2016

And since Dec 2015, I have lived under strict physical protection from other Prometheus members. A price for being ghost in machine.

— Tulip Boy (@Dr_Craig_Wright) May 6, 2016

It wouldn’t surprise us if Craig Wright was part of some “secret” Prometheus project, as the name does have all the hallmark traits of his arrogant and overzealous personality. Come on, just read some of this joke of a person’s online ramblings and ask yourself – would you hire or work with this guy… ever? Keep in mind the intellectual capacity at which Satoshi was working, and the fact that it is widely known that he only made one spelling error throughout his tenure. This is even noted by The Guardian:

Behind it all was this anonymous figurehead, Nakamoto. But who the hell was he? The bigger bitcoin grew, the more people wanted to know. He has a Japanese name, a German email address and writes in almost impeccable British English. In the 80,000 words (more than a book’s worth) he wrote online as bitcoin was developed, I found just one spelling mistake (ideological was spelt “idealogical”).

At one stage he was estimated to have a net worth over a billion dollars. He was an immensely talented coder, a skilled mathematician and a meticulous writer, with an immense knowledge and ability in a wide range of subjects. He was also extremely practical. How could anybody with this much ability not be known to the world? He was even nominated for a Nobel prize.

Moving on – On May 5, perhaps the least understood and most underappreciated event in this entire saga took place. In an unexpected, but extremely insightful reveal by Bitcoin Magazine.

JVP then “confirms” on Twitter –

@Rassah @inthepixels @BitcoinMagazine Life would be a lot easier for me right now if it weren't so, but yes. I could not be more certain.

— JVP (@haq4good) May 4, 2016

If you need to re-read the piece on Bitcoin Magazine, please do so to refresh yourself.

In the interview, which took place via the internet, in real time JVP makes some very interesting statements. Keep in mind, that these answers were given in real time, in a period purportedly lasting 30 minutes. JVP’s language is deliberate and precise, unlike that of the Reddit post we mentioned earlier by /u/whistleblower5470541 which looks like it was meant to come from him. At shitco.in, we believe that one of the most underappreciated and underutilized tools that the community has available to them is the analysis of language.

From Bitcoin Magazine:

Aaron van Wirdum: The main question I have right now is: If Wright is Satoshi … why would he publish fake proof? Any idea?

JVP: I have some very good ideas. If I were in Dr. Wright’s position, I would do exactly as he has done.

I also have a message for Dr. Wright from the trustee of the Tulip trust that is controlling the coins that he wants to move. Not yet announced:

“The Tulip Trading Trust trustee, appointed by Dave Kleiman as of Oct 12nd 2012. It has been rumored that Craig Wright will need to access Tulip Trading Trust assets. Trustee acts in the interest of the beneficiary alone and must defend against undue influence by others. In order to authorize movements of trust assets the beneficiary must come forward and make a direct request of the trustee our way–NOT via 3rd party nor any intermediaries. Any coin movement affecting the trust asset without prior authorization will be considered a trust violation and invalid irrespective of any claim of constructive bailment. The Trust alone has control over its assets. Tampering or manipulating with trust assets by anyone (including the beneficiary) might have material legal and tax implications. Beneficiaries are invited to a conference call 12:00 UTC Friday to discuss interests. Principals only.”

…

AVW: Why do you have this message?

JVP: He will know why.

AVW: Why are you sharing it with me?

JVP: It will also be shared with some selected cryptographers.

…

VW: How does sharing that message help?

JVP: He is following a wrong path, because he must. He is doing it the least-wrong way possible. He is on Meifumando. It is as it has to be.

AVW: What is the wrong path? And what is the right path?

JVP: The world can learn much from what he has done and how. He is showing what cryptography does and does not do. It is a lesson that the world needs to learn before mass adoption can occur.

AVW: Mass adoption of Bitcoin?

JVP: The world was not ready for Bitcoin when it appeared. When the world learns these simple lessons, it will be more ready.

AVW: Why is Bitcoin not ready for mass adoption?

JVP: People do not understand what cryptography does and does not do. People do not understand pseudonymous. Having a key means you have a key. It does not mean you had it previously, or that you will have it in the future.

AVW: Right … So?

JVP: He is forced on a stage, so he provides a masterful lesson that many who call themselves cryptographers seem to have forgotten.

AVW: In what way is he forced?

JVP: He said it himself, the decision to appear was made by others. Did you not even watch his video on BBC?

AVW: Of course I did.

JVP: Watch it again. You missed a lot.

AVW: But he didn’t say in what way he was forced, did he? Or how, or why …

JVP: I will say this much. If I were in his situation, I would have done as he did, though probably not even as well as he did.

…

AVW: You realize all of this is a really weird story, right?

JVP: Yes, and you have seen only the snowdrift on the tip of the iceberg. The level of weird is off the scale.

AVW: Do you know the full story?

JVP: I doubt even Craig knows the full story, but I could fill about 20 books.

AVW: No offense, but: Why should I trust any of this? Why should I trust anything you say?

JVP: Do your own research. Keep on your quest for knowledge. When you find someone who can teach you, listen carefully. When you find someone that can learn from you, be kind.

AVW: You’re skilled at avoiding questions through what sounds like ancient wisdoms.

JVP: You are a reporter, the ancient wisdom is multiple sources, so … do your own research …

 

First, it seems that JVP is straight up sending a message, and that message isn’t just contained in the initial statement to Wright. The message is the entire interview. If true, you sir, should get an MVP award, and very clearly would have done better than him if you were in his position. Perhaps, that’s why you aren’t?

Make note of JVP’s closing statement, as it is one that we mention continuously.

And then this Tweet. What’s going on?

Satoshi Nakamoto's outed, discredited, hounded, persecuted, audited, taxed, mocked, and vanished. #Bitcoin unaffected. Proof of good work.

— JVP (@haq4good) May 6, 2016

Why does everything out of some players seem so desperate and on a whim, while other parties have a much more graceful and tactical style. Something reminiscent of an old bitcoin favorite, Plural of Mongoose/Variety Jones? Let us be clear here, we are NOT, in any way, attempting to draw a link between these parties. This is simply an illustration of variations in language, that can tell a lot about an entity and their intentions.

Some Reddit posts with additional information, not just in the original posts, but also in the comments.

Post 1 (although it seems like the author’s interpretation of what JVP is saying is incorrect)

Post 2

Post 3

Also, for reference, here are archives of two Wright publications which are widely linked to, but now scrubbed.

Post 1

Post 2

 

Now to take a trip down memory lane:

In December, 2010, PC World published an article titled – Could The Wikileaks Scandal Lead to New Virtual Currency?

When posted on BitcoinTalk, this article prompted Satoshi’s second to last post ever:

It would have been nice to get this attention in any other context.  WikiLeaks has kicked the hornet’s nest, and the swarm is headed towards us.

As if the community needed more doubt that Wright isn’t actually Satoshi, let’s firm up that conclusion a little bit more. And, the best part, have a few really, really good laughs in the meantime.

Luckily for us, Craig Wright is an incredibly arrogant person, who is no stranger to internet rambling. Perhaps, that’s why he is finding himself in the situation he’s currently facing.

Among many other sites, he was a regular at The Conversation.

His most revealing series of posts on this particular site, are comment replies under an article that he wrote himself, titled – LulzSec, Anonymous… Freedom fighters or the new faces of evil? Which was posted in August 2011, eight months after Satoshi’s departure.

Archive of that site in case it’s scrubbed.

Hilariously, and ironically, the article which is written by Wright himself includes and then ends with the following:

 

If only he knew what he would be in the middle of years later.

But things get even better. In the comments section, we have some gems which we will screenshot and post below. Readers can visit the actual post for additional context, and form their own thoughts.

 

So, there you have it. That’s the person we are being told is Satoshi. In a nutshell, Wright is, at the very least, an arrogant, self righteous prick, clueless of the real world and so over-indulged in himself and his perceived intelligence level that it’s almost as unreal as his claims that he’s Satoshi. Wright made more spelling errors in one page of replies than Satoshi had made in his entire tenure.

Any person with an internet connection has the resources to decisively prove to themselves that he isn’t Satoshi, but the “hackers” and “extortionists” who are presumably (from Ian Grigg’s statements) the ones pressuring him to do this (aka: possibly made the choice for him) didn’t have access to ANY of the information that the community has dug up? Come the fuck on. Let’s assume that the absolute worst case conspiracy that Reddit has compiled is true, that Wright and his Prometheus group are working to disrupt bitcoin. Who works in your HR/hiring department? Has that person lost their job yet? Do you people do ANY homework? Given their credentials, it would be very difficult to perceive them taking such missteps.

Perhaps, these highly visible character flaws are again, why Wright is finding himself in the situation. Is it possible that he is not only being exploited by one actor, but multiple? Has this whole thing blown up so far out of proportion, due to desperation and lack of preparation by one or more actors, that some of the involved entities (read: people, companies, groups, etc… not just individuals for “entities” or “actors”) be playing both (or more) sides, in an attempt to smooth the situation and keep this from unnecessarily blowing up any further than it has?

Back to the title, to clear up any further misconceptions. We don’t think that Craig is some secret agent, at least not in that sense. Judging by his actions and all facts which are publicly available on him, he clearly might think he is something similar. We like to be funny, and this was an easy joke. r/btc, don’t go too nuts.

Given the bizarre events and stature of the actors who have put much at stake in this game, it’s hard to believe that this is just a simple tax scam by Wright or (based on his personality and past) a megalomaniacal and extremely short sighted con. The roots of this complex and apparently (for at least one of the parties involved, but as it appears, not all)  not well thought out deception dates back to early 2011, which was another important time in bitcoin history.

The story will continue, and of course we will relay events as they unfold. We hope that the above information is enough to get you started in unraveling the Satoshi Wright mystery.