A "popular" bitcoin podcaster who professes to lack any technical understanding of cryptography or coding says he wants to see more technical proof from Craig Wright demonstrating that he's actually Satoshi Nakamoto.
Pedro McBedford, who regularly publishes his amazingly high and increasing listener count to Twitter, says that he would like Craig to sue him, because he's so confident that Craig is not Satoshi.
We spoke with Pedro about his desire for more evidence.
"Yeah like, I couldn't actually understand that book Andreas wrote about Bitcoin, and I never did figure out how elliptical cove cryptography or whatever it's called works, but when I read that article today from Craig saying he had proof that he purchased the Bitcoin dot org domain on his credit card, I realised I really want to see some kind of digital signature or something. I don't exactly know what a digital signature is, so in all honestly I'd be relying on my anonymous twitter followers to let me know if it was valid."
Pedro was a little confused when we spoke about other experts in the field who backed Craig Wright's claims of being Satoshi, including the likes of Gavin Andresen, Joseph VaughnPerling, and others.
"Look, I've never heard of those guys. But honestly, would 5000 anonymous twitter accounts lie to me? Of course not. I don't see Nchain with a sockpuppet army as big as the BTC sock puppet army. Clearly if Craig invented Bitcoin he would be able to make a bigger sock puppet army than the BTC one. I think that speaks volumes. And I've spoken with heaps of people who hate Craig, and even though honestly I didn't understand a friggin thing they were saying, I feel like there's more people involved in BTC right now, and that's going to be the best for attracting advertisers. And hey, if I get sued, I've got all my money in Bitcoin so he can't touch it right? I'm pretty sure that's how the law works. I don't know much about the legal system either to be honest but I heard about this conference called unconfiscatable and even though that's not a word, I think the correct term is non-confiscatable, I guess it's safe for me to assume courts can't get to my Bitcoin! Ha. Courts can't confiscate Bitcoin! Tone Vays let me know that! Those courts are suckers. Bitcoin is bringing in a new age of anarchy where courts can't even put people in jail any more because they won't have any Bitcoin to pay the guards. It's a fool proof system."
We spoke with Pedro about evidence he provides publicly of his own claims, with respect to his listener count.
"Yeah look, basically I would say me writing them down and making that nice little graph is pretty robust proof that those are the numbers. Anyone who wants more evidence than that can go get f…."