Recently, Craig Wright revealed a report clarifying the origin of his supposed false name “Satoshi Nakamoto.” The blurry passage found from an academic journal has appeared timestamped to early 2008, yet closer examination demonstrated that not only the date format was wrong, but also the whole date would have been photoshopped.
In an interview made public by the industry news outlet, Modern observer on December 19th, Wright has revealed a document to the interviewer showing an article from the digital database of academic journals JSTOR, dated January 5th, 2008.
Nonetheless, nothing has made Craig slow down from the hits he has taken from the last six months. After losing the Kleiman case in August, Craig, who had self-proclaimed himself as Satoshi Nakamoto, kept on weaving more false claims than the one that got him in a tough situation the first time.
In an offer to claim that he is the creator of Bitcoin, Wright presented what must be depicted as one of the most negligently altered documents in crypto history. Further, in the interview with the Modern Observer, Wright remarked that he had been occupied with uncovering “old documents” indicating the beginning of Bitcoin.
“Not too bad. I’ve just been digging up old documents. Trying to figure out what the horrible, horrible start of bitcoin was.”
Craig then presented a printout of an article from JSTOR, a digital database of academic journals indicating it was accessed on January 5th, 2008. Moreover, in 1967, the article was initially published in a Japanese academic journal known as Monumenta Nipponica, which was co-created by Tominaga Nakamoto, an eighteenth-century Japanese philosopher.
Tominaga Nakamoto’s ideas on “honest money and the rational nature of things” had to get on well with Wright, who said he had the option to relate to both his ideas and his character. He said, Satoshi really signifies “intelligent learning,” which Wright accepts that it fits completely with Nakamoto’s achievement.
OpenTimestamps, a well known Bitcoin timestamping service ran by Peter Todd, stated that contrary to blockchain stamps, which are a progression of hash functions and concatenation operations implemented in a sequence that results in a Bitcoin Merkle block; Wright’s timestamp is just a number on a bit of paper held up to a webcam. In its tweet,
An OpenTimestamps proof is a series of hash functions and concatenation operations, executed in sequence, that result in a merkle root of a Bitcoin block.
A Craig Wright timestamp proof is a number on a piece of paper held up to a webcam. pic.twitter.com/0mKWjuvXLI
— OpenTimestamps (@opentimestamps) December 20, 2019
Besides, the clarification took no time to be exposed, however. Additionally, Crypto researcher, seeking Satoshi, known for exposing the most of Wright’s past claims, called attention to that the date on the document as though they were messed with. Several twitter users had pointed the first thing fault with this document was that the date format appeared to be wrong.