If you believe Craig S. Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto, you can no longer follow him on Twitter. He is no longer on Twitter. Sources have confirmed this. All 10,000+ tweets have been deleted. The man is probably a ghost of his former self. The trolls have really done a number on him. Or have they? Perhaps it was on the advice of lawyers.
After all, Wright has said he will sue everyone who calls him a fraud. A Twitter thread emerged in which dozens of people did exactly that:
Craig Wright says he will sue anyone who calls him a fraud.
Is Craig Wright a fraud?
Craig Wright is a fraud.
Craig Wright is not a fraud.
— dark pill (@DanDarkPill) March 17, 2019
Wright wasn’t on that thread. There is a high likelihood that he’s actually blocked most of the people commenting there.
Who Will Prop Up The Popcorn Industry Now?
As a reporter, I follow him pretty closely.
He’s a millionaire, after all. He’s definitely been in Bitcoin a long time, as evidenced by the serious lawsuit against him. But is he Satoshi? Part of me hopes not.
I want Satoshi to retain his anonymity. The second Satoshi becomes a person, there’s a risk that Bitcoin becomes a security.
That’s only one reason why it’s better Satoshi stay beyond the grave, of course. The international banking cartel would surely whack him.
I’ve read that Satoshi was in fact an American citizen. I hope for his own sake he’s not here anymore.
Even since 2008, things have gotten worse and worse. As the song goes: he gave us all a protocol this world had never seen. And it pissed off a lot of bankers and money printers.
There’s always the chance he was a passable programmer with a passable knowledge of cryptography who’d read a few papers from the early 1990s and had an interest in disrupting the financial system. Satoshi doesn’t have to be a genius.
But he’s probably not Craig S. Wright.
Just Be Happy Being A Millionaire, Craig
All the same, as a journalist and full-time spectacle creator, it’s sad to see Craig go off Twitter.
Like Donald Trump, he couldn’t resist the urge to make ridiculous statements on Twitter. He recently spoke of being able to deanonymize Monero users. The most advanced cryptographers in the world struggle with such security research.
So Craig Wright is off Twitter. For now. He’ll find, as I did ten years ago, that you can’t get your old account back. He’ll have to come back as @realCraigWright or something when the urge strikes him too hard.
The chances of him carrying out all these lawsuits are slim. After all, Craig, what’s the point? If you’re not a fraud, you’re definitely not “100.” Satoshi was a quiet man, that much we know. He was excited by Bitcoin, something he built on the ideas of others which he cited. Satoshi would never use Twitter.
Blockchain Extremists Are The Detriment To Blockchain Enthusiasts
I’d prefer all the extremists just get lost.
If you think that 50 years from now there will be one blockchain and it will be called Bitcoin or Bitcoin SV or Bitcoin Cash, you are wrong.
If you think there will be one smart contract platform and it will be called Ethereum or Tron or EOS, you are also dead wrong.
This technological force is only shaping itself now. Developers are fickle in their loyalty. Solidity writers can work as well on Tron as they can Ethereum, and vice versa. Each have drawbacks and benefits, and the same goes for the various types of Bitcoin.
Therefore, the reasonable bet is that they will all exist, in “competition” with several new implementations, serving a new way of life. Much like the Internet now has a zillion providers. It’s not how you get online, it’s what you do when you’re there. It’s not how you blockchain, it’s what you do with your blockchain.
Resting on completely invented laurels like “got to BTC first” is probably a solid strategy to achieve financial ruin. If Bitcoin was actually a religion, those who say there can only be one are clearly the Osama bin Ladens of the movement.
The opinions expressed in this article belong to the author alone.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are solely those of the author and do not represent those of, nor should they be attributed to, CCN.