Jon Matonis in a blog post,[57] stated "For cryptographic proof in my presence, Craig signed and verified a message using the private key from block #1 newly-generated coins and from block #9 newly-generated coins (the first transaction to Hal Finney)." Gavin Andresen said that he performed a careful cryptographic verification of messages signed, [by Craig], with keys that only Satoshi should possess.[58]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Steven_Wright

Pues el caso es que tras leer esto http://archive.is/kjuLi creo que Craig, si no es Satoshi directamente, estuvo involucrado en la creación de Bitcoin junto con otros tres o cuatro.

Sigo pensando que no es importante quien es Satoshi.
Pero parece que podría ser él.
La excusa que ponen para justificar que finalmente no proporcionara en público la prueba de identidad que sí que proporcionó en privado a Gavin Andresen y Jon Matonis, es que en aquella época se dijo que el gobierno del Reino Unido se estaba preparando para acusarle y meterle en la cárcel si se confirmaba que era el creador de Bitcoin.
Me parece plausible.

algunas de las personas que han expresado abiertamente su apuesta por BCH:

Dr Craig S Wright @ProfFaustus ‏
Jimmy Nguyen @JimmyWinMedia
nChain @nChainGlobal
Gavin Andresen @gavinandresen
Jihan Wu @JihanWu ‏
Rick Falkvinge @Falkvinge ‏
Olivier Janssens @olivierjanss ‏
Ryan X. Charles @ryanxcharles
Erik Voorhees @ErikVoorhees
Roger Ver @rogerkver ‏
Jon Matonis @jonmatonis ‏
Calvin Ayre @CalvinAyre
Tiffany Hayden @haydentiff
John McAfee @officialmcafee ‏
Vinny Lingham @VinnyLingham
Wang Chun @f2pool_wangchun Alejandro DeLaTorre @bitentrepreneur
Peter R. Rizun @PeterRizun ‏
BitcoinUnlimited @BitcoinUnlimit
Nishant Sharma @nishantsharma87 ‏
Haipo Yang @yhaiyang ‏
Emil Oldenburg @emilolden ‏
Nikita Zhavoronkov @nikzh ‏
Tom Harding @dgenr818 ‏
Mate Tokay @MateTokay ‏
David Shares @DavidShares
Julian Smith @jsmith_dev ‏
Lorien Gamaroff @gamaroff ‏
Michael Matthews @mikerelentless ‏
Juan Garavaglia (BCH Comando) @GaravagliaJuan ‏

Eso que se lo digan a Gavin Andresen cuando los desarrolladores a los que el dió poder le quitaron los permisos del github de Bitcoin Core, echándole, con la excusa de que se cuenta había sido hackeada. Se demostró que no había sido hackeada pero aún así jamás le devolvieron los permisos. O los ataques DDOS en 2015 a los nodos de Bitcoin XT, un proyecto similar a Bitcoin Cash de escalar aumentando el tamaño de bloques, o los ataques personales a Gavin Andresen y Mike Hearn hasta que decidieron abandonar la comunidad para que les dejaran en paz.

Un poco de historia de Bitcoin, esta es la presentación que hizo Gavin Andresen a la CIA, Satoshi desapareció tras saber que esto iba a pasar --> https://s3.amazonaws.com/gavinandresen-bitcoin/GavinAndresenCIATalk.pdf

People should get the full story of r/bitcoin because it is probably one of the strangest of all reddit subs.

"Users, developers and businesses (which at the time was pretty much the only real bitcoin subreddit) started to discuss how we should solve the problem r/bitcoin. There was significant support from the users and businesses behind a simple solution put forward by the developer Gavin Andresen. Gavin was the lead developer after Satoshi Nakamoto left bitcoin and he left it in his hands. Gavin initially proposed a very simple solution of increasing the limit which was to change the few lines of code to increase the maximum number of transactions that are allowed. For most of bitcoin's history, the transaction limit had been set far higher than the number of transactions that could potentially happen on the network. The concept of increasing the limit one time was based on the fact that history had proven that no issue had been caused by this in the past".


https://np.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/6rxw7k/informative_btc_vs_bch_articles/dl8v4lp/?st=jaotbt8m&sh=222ce783

La gente "seria" de BCH está diciendo pestes de CSW o simplemente dejándolo apartado. Emin Gun Sirer, Peter Rizun, Gavin Andresen... Otros como Mike Hearn, ni se acercan, no sea que se les pegue algo.

kinda.
It was the "core" devs who would remove Gavin Andresen's repo access and those same developers would later go on to form Blockstream.
They're the same people who decided the direction of BTC and did things like remove OP_codes, and even cripple important ones like OP_RETURN. reducing the amount of space from 80 to 40 bytes.
the OP_RETURN nerf did permanent damage to the xcp project.
BCH will have something like 220~ bytes on may 15th, and restore many OP_CODES

Y el último post que le dedicó Gavin Andresen a Craig también es muy revelador:
http://gavinandresen.ninja/either-or-ignore

Frases de la comunidad en 2015, cuando no existía la bifuración y todo era Bitcoin:
(6) Who would benefit from RBF?
"Hopefully this will give Bitcoin payment processors a financial incentive to support Lightning Network development."
"RBF breaks zero-conf. Satoshi supported zero-conf."
"RBF is agaisnt Satoshi's Vision. Peter Todd and others attacking Satoshi's vision again, while Gavin Andresen upholds his original vision steadfastly."

This Might Be Satoshi Nakamoto on Mainstream Media https://t.co/UXyt6OxtdK https://t.co/S0iaZOzW1z

‌Who is Gavin Andresen: Meet Satoshi’s First Formal Bitcoin Lead Developer

🔗 https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/who-is-gavin-andresen-meet-satoshis-first-formal-bitcoin-lead-developer/

Cryptocurrency Headlines|News | August 7, 2018