\n
![\"article](\"https:\/\/u.today\/sites\/default\/files\/2019-11\/alex-m-ava.jpg\")
\n<\/a><\/p>\n
David Schwartz and Craig Wright have been debating about what it takes to prove the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Earlier today, a\u00a0heated exchange<\/a> took place on Twitter between Ripple CTO David Schwartz<\/a> and self-proclaimed Satoshi\u00a0Craig Wright.<\/p>\n At the heart of the debate is whether Wright has sufficient proof that he is indeed the anonymous inventor of Bitcoin.<\/p>\n Wright claimed that a court case\u00a0he\u2019s been involved in, Kleiman v. Wright, shows that he is Satoshi\u2013\u2013only to be countered by Schwartz. “You are absolutely hilarious, Craig. Kleiman v. Wright shows that you are Satoshi precisely the same way Stambovsky v. Ackley shows that the house at one LaVeta Place in Nyack, New York is haunted,” the Ripple executive said.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n This statement seemed to have struck a chord with Wright who fired back at Schwartz.\u00a0The Australian computer scientist\u00a0retorted back by pointing out how the Ripple CEO seems oblivious about certain details presented in the case.\u00a0<\/p>\n Wright then went on to reference copyright letters sent by him to American entities as proof of his identity as Satoshi Nakamoto. Again, Schwartz seemed unconvinced.\u00a0“These are yet more Craig lies. Kleiman v. Wright had nothing whatsoever to do with whether Craig could prove that he was Satoshi because both sides agreed that he was,” he said.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/p>\n The public exchange raises another layer of intrigue in one of crypto’s oldest questions: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? Despite the fact that Bitcoin recently turned 14<\/a>, this question remains unanswered.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n