I am Craig Wright, inventor of Craig Wright "If you are going through hell, keep going." – Albert Einstein, 1991. I remember reading that quote on a motivational poster somewhere or other many years ago. I have carried it with me uncomfortably ever since. There's no easy way to fold a poster into your pocket. I think I am now finally at peace with what old Bertie meant …
Basically, in real life, some publicity-seeking person called "Craig Wright" claimed they were "Satoshi Nakamoto", the inventor of Bitcoin, they came up with a load of crypto nonsense to "prove" it, and they managed to persuade a bunch of mainstream media of this. Of course, they came out in a blaze of publicity in the mainstream media without posting all the crypto "proof" online, with just one stage-managed "proof" demo in front of a couple of "experts" who obviously missed the hole in the "proof".
This is the Reg's parody of that.
(The BBC News front page is still saying that "Craig Wright" will come up with "extraordinary proof" "soon". If he had such proof, why hasn't he done it already? Perhaps he doesn't have such proof, and just wants to prolong the media spotlight on himself and avoid everyone knowing he's a fraud? It's easy to claim you'll come up with proof even if you can't. And actually, IMO the real Satoshi Nakamoto knows enough about crypto that they could have conclusively proved their identity the first go, they wouldn't need time to come up with a second proof).
I figured that the whole "I am Craig Wright and I invented Bitcoin, here's some dubious proof" thing was just a rather lame attempt to smoke out the real Satoshi Nakamoto.
After all, why would the real Satoshi Nakamoto even want people to know who he is? He'd end up going through the hell of having his entire life placed under a microscope, and every minor defect plastered all over the media.
oversight, set the tone for the rest of the "article".
NB, isn't a crucial part of a hacks job to check A: the validy of facts and B: to proof read the article before posting it.
We all make mistakes, but fucking hell guys.. Thats not an error, error is insuffieicent an adjective to describe what complete bollocks that is.
NB Seems its not THE Albert Enstein so apologies, as for the remainder of the story: TL:DR
the hash also seems to be from that null output...
if you just enter:
shasum -a 256
and hit ctrl-D for EOF, you get:
e3b0c44298fc1c149afbf4c8996fb92427ae41e4649b934ca495991b7852b855 (what is posted in the article)
if you do it with the correct text, e.g. with
base64 craig.txt | sort | shasum -a 256
you get:
f647315455eba713c5b2ed7a77f878b5327dd60a111231af6da41dcf41a4a675
honestly can't tell if this article is satire or not
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
