Skip to content

There is no Satoshi conspiracy in Bitcoin SV

[Recommend my two-volume book for more reading]:

BIT & COIN:  Merging Digitality and Physicality

Let me explain why the recent events concerning the former nChain CEO Christen Ager-Hanssen are costly signals that are an attestation of the validity of Bitcoin SV (BSV).

The mass opinion and assessment of anything usually has multiple layers. In the case of BSV, the base layer of the world’s judgment against BSV is a most hideous and cynical conspiracy charge against it. Specifically, people believe that three individuals (Calvin Ayre, Stefan Matthews, and Dr. Craig Wright) conspired to steal Satoshi’s coins and technology.

Particularly, the charge is that Calvin and Stefan know Craig is not Satoshi, but the three conspired to play as such in order to achieve their hideous goal.

Not everyone against BSV believes in this charge, but it is the most deeply anchored that has the worst effect. The market price of BSV is a manifestation of this cynical belief being not only operative but fundamentally dominating.

(Need I cite more than the fact that BTC, BCH, and LTC, each a modification of Bitcoin with far less utility development than BSV, are priced around 800, 8, and 7 times that of BSV, respectively? A mere misunderstanding of the technology or personality does not explain even 1/100th of this strange effect. Besides, it is a fact that the voice of the conspiracy theorists is the leading voice that the masses can hear from the media. This is even manifested in large-scale lawsuits.)

But suddenly, a signal emerges:

There is disagreement among the suspected ‘conspirators’. Calvin is shown to try to persuade, in the most direct language, Craig to sign as Satoshi.

Now, if you are working against or doubting BSV before you proclaim that the conspiracy has fallen apart, please take a deep breath and think about this objectively from a signaling viewpoint.

First, ask yourself a question: are you willing to double down your conspiracy theory by pushing it to the next level: that Christen has become the fourth member of the conspiracy and leaked the letter as part of a well-designed psyop signal to deepen the deception?

If you say yes, you need not to think further. You are in the game of illusion at the ninth level, and no one can get you out.

But let me assume that you don’t go that far, but that you are seeing the signal came from Christen more objectively.

You should come to the following conclusion:

There is absolutely no conspiracy among Calvin, Stefan, and Craig.

The new signal, which is costly (see below), clearly indicates that Calvin firmly believes in Craig’s Satoshi identity. But he’s losing confidence in Craig’s insistence on a particular method of proving identity without a signature first.

Craig’s insistence on this has a reason. It is based on the correct principle that legal identity cannot be proved by a digital signature that is not legally and certainly associated with the identity in the first place. It is a principle that Craig holds dear to his heart. Few understand why he does this. But I do, and I wrote about it.

But as a practical matter, I’m sympathetic toward Calvin’s position because he’s the one who bears the largest financial risk in the outcome of the identity dispute.

Calvin is a prudent and successful businessman, while Craig is a Quixotic scholar, idealistic savant, eccentric genius, and many other things, of which ‘businessman’ constitutes only a small portion.

Hence the conflict.

But the fact that even Calvin went along this far with Craig’s stubborn insistence on proving identity first without a signature should tell you that their relationship is built on a genuine agreement on truth rather than a conspiracy.

Finally, let’s look at the cost of the signal. The signal comes from Christen, at an extremely high cost. First, one needs to assess the value of the signal by putting himself in Christen’s position with his motivations. Second, one needs to differentiate what is objective and what is subjective.

The strongest affirmative attestation often comes from one’s adversary, especially when the cost of the signal is high.

That Christen had turned into an adversary of nChain is evident. That his signal is highly costly is also evident. Regardless of what he intends to prove, once the signal is out there, its existence is objective and is available for the observing world to fit into its interpretation.

What this event has proven beyond a shadow of doubt are the following:

(1) There is no conspiracy between Calvin, Stefan, and Craig.

(2) Calvin and Stefan believe Craig is Satoshi, and they are willing to stake their money, career, and reputation in their beliefs.

(3) Calvin’s support of BSV technology and ecosystem is unreserved.

(4) Calvin’s support of Craig’s ‘purity of the principle’ with regard to how the identity should be proved was remarkably strong, but is finally wavering.

(5) Christen had his own plan for nChain and BSV, but his plan conflicted head-on with Calvin’s. Frustrated, he went bonkers. (As to exactly what his plan was, outsiders can only speculate, and I only wish to say that I do not believe Christen is part of the COPA conspiracy, at least not a conscious part of it.)

Everything else is just speculation because the weight of the costliness of the signal can go either way, and the evidence can be explained both ways.

Applying the new event to the Bayesian probability estimate, we have a new iteration that increases the credibility of BSV. Perhaps some are already getting the signal.

I don’t care what price speculators think about genuine Bitcoin (BSV), but I do care about what developers, entrepreneurs, and real investors think. From the latter viewpoint, I say bullish.

[Recommend my two-volume book for more reading]:

BIT & COIN:  Merging Digitality and Physicality