Working through it now -- lets say I am rapidly heading towards "Not a hoax" territory.
[Edit: Or, possibly, totally quackadoodle -- but very convinced-in-himself quackadoodle. I've gotten as far as proving "OK, he knows how to reverse a Bitcoin address into a public key, and picked a good address for the purpose."]
I was unable to torture the inputs into verifying, despite worksmanlike effort, unless I trusted calculations made by "the adversary."
I consider the posts by others of this thread of a Bitcoin transaction with the same signature to be dispositive that he was not signing any variant of the Sartre message.
Conclusion: a) The linked blog post is pure hokum. b) I'm very clear on how he got this past generalist media but unsure of how he got it past Gavin.
Patrick, Gavin is just a person and as fallible as any other person. If a long con is being attempted, everything may appear to be right. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Time will tell.
He found, maybe by brute force, maybe some other way, a comment signed by whoever mined block 9 (Satoshi himself?) and now he's using this to claim that he just signed this himself.
He's making all this up. Unless the message signed contains Craig Wright's name it's not proof of anything.
> "OK, he knows how to reverse a Bitcoin address into a public key, and picked a good address for the purpose."
Yeah, but I can do that. Can it be my turn to be Satoshi now? It's specialized knowledge only insofar as you need to have read how to do it and understand enough to write some commensurate code. This is widely-published stuff. It doesn't take a Satoshi or even an expert.
Working through it now -- lets say I am rapidly heading towards "Not a hoax" territory.
[Edit: Or, possibly, totally quackadoodle -- but very convinced-in-himself quackadoodle. I've gotten as far as proving "OK, he knows how to reverse a Bitcoin address into a public key, and picked a good address for the purpose."]