August 21, 2026

Capitalizations Index – B ∞/21M

Wright is Wrong: Timestamps indicate Satoshi Nakamoto’s location and refute CSW’s “claims”

Wright is wrong: timestamps indicate satoshi nakamoto’s location and refute csw’s “claims”

Wright is Wrong: Timestamps indicate Satoshi Nakamoto’s location and refute CSW’s “claims”

The world is one step closer to the true identity of Satoshi Nakamoto being revealed after latest developments allegedly pinpoint the location of the pseudonym, based on the timestamps of his/her posts.

According to “Cyberpunk” Jameson Lopp, CTO of CasaHodl, “Timestamps tell a story.” If the reported information is true, it would seem so and the curious case of Satoshi Nakamoto and Craig Wright can finally be put to bed.

DIVERGENCE BEGINS

Lopp charted both Satoshi Nakamoto and Craig S Wright’s hourly public activities over the 2009-2010 period, during which the “creator of bitcoin” was active on a number of bitcoin forums. If this evidence checks out, based on the variability of the two charts, Wright’s claim of being Satoshi Nakamoto can be heavily disputed.

Wright is wrong: timestamps indicate satoshi nakamoto’s location and refute csw’s “claims”

Wright is wrong: timestamps indicate satoshi nakamoto’s location and refute csw’s “claims”

Source: Twitter

Satoshi’s hourly activity is based on the “posts/code commits,” while Wright’s is based on “blog posts,” as per Lopp’s charts. Nakamoto’s location at the time was not revealed. However, Wright was residing in Australia at the time and hence, the time zones can be analyzed to present a clearer picture.

Given the variance of the hourly activity on the chart, Nakamoto’s fewest posts were between 0600 and 1300 UTC, while peak activity was recorded between 1600 and 2300 UTC. Wright’s chart showed less streamlined movement, with several spurts and dips. However, activity was relatively low between 1200 – 1900 UTC, with no blog posts between 1500-1700 UTC for the nChain chief scientist.

ASSUMPTION

On the assumption that the creator of bitcoin hit the pillow between 2300 – 0100 and slept for a period of 6-7 hours, an inference can be made with respect to the charts.

TIME ZONES ANALYSED

Based on this assumption, if we consider Nakamoto to be based somewhere on the East Coast of the US [Eastern Time Zone, UTC-0500], a sleeping pattern of 0600 – 1300 would translate to the ETC time of 0100 – 0800, a fairly regular sleeping pattern. The West Coast of the United States can also be considered to be the location of the creator of bitcoin. Based on the Pacific Time Zone, UTC-0800, the aforementioned sleeping pattern would be 2200 – 0500 PA. However, ETC time seems justifiable.

Since Wright was based in Australia, the time zone considered for the analysis is Australian Central Time [UTC + 0930]. When Lopp’s Nakamoto activity and Wright’s time zone are put together, the sleeping hours for the creator in Australian Time be 1530 – 2230, an irregular sleep cycle.

In light of this deviation, Lopp hypothesized that Nakamoto could be based in “eastern North America or western South America,” since the time zone coincides. His tweet read,

“If you assume standard sleeping patterns then it appears Satoshi resided in eastern North America or western South America while Wright’s posts line up with eastern Australia.”

When considered in isolation, Wright’s chart solidifies Lopp’s claim. As mentioned above, Wright’s hourly activity dips between 1200 – 1700 UTC, which when converted to ACT, is 2130 – 0330, with no activity between 0130 – 0330. This corresponds to normal resting and sleeping patterns.

MOUNTING EVIDENCE

The variance between the public activities of the two is further exhibited by a set of charts posted by a Dr. Funkenstein, on the same thread. The handle claims the charts show “before and after” activities of Satoshi Nakamoto and Craig Wright, attesting to the above divergence.

Wright is wrong: timestamps indicate satoshi nakamoto’s location and refute csw’s “claims”

Source: Twitter

Further, the aforementioned Twitter handle also posted public activity by the two from August 4, 2008 to November 1, 2011, showing a further difference. Based on the chart, Wright was very active towards the end of 2008, particularly November and December. Throughout 2009, his activity declined but was still more than Nakamoto’s.

The alleged creator only began picking the pace in October 2009, with consistent activity till the close of 2010. Nakamoto’s peak activity began only in May 2010, fading out by the close of the year. During this period, Wright was active only in late-August to early-September.

Wright is wrong: timestamps indicate satoshi nakamoto’s location and refute csw’s “claims”

Source: Twitter

All the above charts, correlations, and variances indicate an alleged deviation between the activities of Satoshi Nakamoto and Craig Wright. Many in the community have already claimed that these charts will be the death knell to Wright’s claims of being Nakamoto.

The post Wright is Wrong: Timestamps indicate Satoshi Nakamoto’s location and refute CSW’s “claims” appeared first on AMBCrypto.

Published at Fri, 26 Apr 2019 22:09:25 +0000

Previous Article

Ford Stock Storms to Best Day in 10 Years & Races Past Tesla Trainwreck

Next Article

Tether (USDT), A Blip and Another Opportunity For Bitcoin (BTC) Bulls

You might be interested in …

$530 million hack of a cryptocurrency exchange: security flaws

$530 Million Hack of a Cryptocurrency Exchange: Security Flaws

$530 Million Hack of a Cryptocurrency Exchange: Security Flaws One of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges in Japan has fallen victim to hackers thanks to their negligent storage practices. Coincheck Inc., have announced today that around […]

安徽一邮递员专拆纪委信件 给被举报人通风报信换钱

安徽一邮递员专拆纪委信件 给被举报人通风报信换钱

安徽一邮递员专拆纪委信件 给被举报人通风报信换钱 奇案安徽一投递员鲍某,打起用自己天天经手的信件换钱的主意。为此,他专门私拆寄给县政府、县委和纪检等部门的举报信件,不仅如此,鲍某还将3封举报县教育局副局长和7封举报县法院副院长的信件提供给被举报人以换取钱财。 深读记者今日(4月4日)获悉,安徽省阜阳市中级人民法院于2017年2月7日作出终审判决,以私自开拆、隐匿邮件罪,判处鲍某有期徒刑一年十个月。 案情邮递员私拆举报信卖给被举报者深读(微信ID:shenduzhongguo)记者了解到,44岁的鲍某是安徽省颖上县人,初中文化,案发前在安徽省阜阳市颍上县邮政局做投递员。因涉嫌犯私自开拆、隐匿邮件罪,于2016年6月2日被颍上县公安局刑事拘留,2016年7月4日被逮捕。 安徽省颍上县法院审理认定,2007年至2016年4月,鲍某利用担任安徽省阜阳市颍上县邮政局投递员的职务之便,私自开拆邮寄至颍上县委、颍上县人民政府、颍上县纪律检查委员会等部门的信件30余封,隐匿40余封。 此后,鲍某将私自开拆的举报颍上县教育局原副局长李某的3封信件提供给李某;将私自开拆的举报颍上县人民法院原副院长王某某的7封信件提供给王某某,并收取王某某给予的白酒及现金。其余信件被鲍某隐匿于其驾驶的工作车辆内的座位下方和黑色公文包中。 一审举报信私交被举报人应从重处罚颍上县法院审理认为,鲍某身为颍上县邮政局的邮政工作人员,利用职务之便,非法私自开拆邮件30余封、隐匿邮件40余封,其行为已构成私自开拆、隐匿邮件罪,应依法惩处。 鲍某到案后能够如实供述犯罪事实,当庭自愿认罪,构成坦白,依法可从轻处罚。但鲍某为谋取个人私利,私自开拆、隐匿人民群众邮寄给党委、政府、纪检等部门的信件并将部分举报信件私自交给被举报人,严重损害了党和政府在人民群众心中的光辉形象,破坏了国家廉政制度建设,依法亦应从重处罚。 该案经安徽省颍上县法院审判委员会讨论决定后作出一审判决,以鲍某犯私自开拆、隐匿邮件罪,判处有期徒刑一年十个月。 终审破坏国家廉政建设应从重处罚一审判决后,鲍某不服,提起上诉。 鲍某表示,自己能如实供述自己的罪行,并未造成严重的后果,原判对其量刑过重,请求法院从轻、减轻处罚。鲍某的辩护人亦提出了同样的辩护意见。 针对鲍某的上诉理由及其辩护人的辩护意见,二审法院经查,鲍某利用工作之便私拆、隐匿邮件,侵犯了公民的通信自由权,破坏了国家邮电事业的正常运行秩序。鲍某将举报信件私自交给被举报人,严重损害了党和政府在人民群众心中的光辉形象,破坏了国家廉政制度建设,依法亦应从重处罚。 鲍某私自开拆、隐匿邮件犯罪事实清楚,原判根据其犯罪事实、性质、情节及对社会的危害程度,依法在法定刑幅度内量刑,且已就其到案后如实供述自己罪行的情节予以从轻处罚,二审期间鲍某及其辩护人亦未提交影响本案犯罪事实认定及量刑的新的证据,因此鲍某请求再次从轻、减轻处罚于法无据。对于鲍某的上诉理由及其辩护人的辩护意见不能成立,法院不予支持。 法院认为,鲍某身为国家邮政工作人员利用职务之便私拆、隐匿邮件,其行为已构成私自开拆、隐匿邮件罪。原判认定事实清楚,证据确实、充分,定罪准确,量刑适当,审判程序合法。 2月7日,安徽省阜阳市中级人民法院于作出终审裁定,驳回上诉,维持原判。 法条链接私自开拆、隐匿邮件罪私自开拆、隐匿、毁弃邮件、电报罪,是指邮政工作人员私自开拆或者隐匿、毁弃邮件、电报的行为。根据刑法第253条规定:邮政工作人员私自开拆或者隐匿、毁弃邮件、电报的,处二年以下有期徒刑或者拘役。犯前款罪而窃取财物的,依照本法第二百六十四条的规定定罪从重处罚。 (Why?) Published at Tue, 04 Apr 2017 12:05:54 +0000 [wpr5_ebay kw=”bitcoin” num=”1″ ebcat=”” cid=”5338043562″ lang=”en-US” country=”0″ sort=”bestmatch”]penny wise […]