The Australian entrepreneur, Craig Wright, who controversially says he’s bitcoin’s anonymous inventor Satoshi Nakamoto, has made another attempt to perfect that claim in the public domain.
Craig posted the bitcoin white paper on the scientific journal hosting site ‘SSRN’ on Thursday, citing himself as the author on Aug. 21, 2008..
The SSRN is a repository and international journal for the sharing scholarly research. It was formerly known as the Social Science Research Network.
The service is owned by major publishing house Elsevier, and allows paper authors including those claiming to be to upload pdfs of their work.
According to its website, the hosting site does not preview papers that are uploaded as uploads are reviewed by SSRN staff to ensure that the paper is a part of the scholarly discourse in its subject area. The authors are also to self-certify that the information submitted is correct.
This post on bitcoin white paper done by Craig Wright is another is to push further his claim on the authorship which it’s facts is still inconclusive after he also filed registrations with the U.S. Copyright Office to support his claim of authorship over the original bitcoin code and white paper in May.
Not long after his claim, the news caused uproar in the bitcoin community, the Copyright Office had to released a statement to cancel the notion that it had officially recognized anyone as the inventor of bitcoin.
According to a report from the copyright officials then which stated that:
“As a general rule, the Copyright Office does not investigate the truth of any statement made, it is when the Copyright Office receives an application for registration, the claimant certifies as to the truth of the statements made in the submitted materials”.
Similarly, Wright’s posting of Satoshi’s white paper on the SSRN is not likely to give his claim to have invented bitcoin any more validity, but appears to be an attempt to populate the web with instances of his claim authoritatively.
Meanwhile, some commentators have further claimed that the meta-data of the paper posted by Wright has been altered to display a different date of creation.
READ MORE :
Credits: Daniel PalmerJOIN OUR COMMUNITY