A few thoughts:1) Why mild-mannered Satoshi now bombastic showman Craig?Well let me turn the question around: Can you fathom how much it would change you if you were Satoshi? 7 years of hiding, fame and praise heaped upon you but you cannot stand up to claim it, you have become a zillionaire on paper but worry about what would happen to your creation (and your notional wealth) if you move your coins, frequent nightmares about personal security, frequent daydreams about fame and fortune.These pressures cannot NOT change someone. I almost think I sometimes sense the look of having withstood that long pressure of hiding on Craig's face. (Or it could just be the look of a chronic conman.) The supercomputer hype? Perhaps wanting so badly to be recognized as a genius but not being able to, he believed he really was a universal genius and let it go to his head looking for a way to get that recognition personally rather than just, again, "notionally" as closet-Satoshi. Satoshi is on top of the world notionally, but gets to experience none of it except in the quiet of his own mind. Does Craig have that look? Don't his words just ooze that deep-seated desire to reveal himself? The anticipation of how it will feel when people finally know it's true?And maybe he wants to milk this for all it's worth, because once he is revealed with certainty the hounds will be loosed on him, from all quarters. 7 years of hiding...think he wants a quick and clean reveal? Not if he is Craig; this guy clearly relishes the attention and recognition that comes from continued uncertainty - which admittedly points just as easily to it being a hoax.If it's a group, due to the weirdness of group dynamics (not to mention legal entanglements) the possibilities can be even more surprising/counterintuitive.2) Knowing Satoshi was just a human (or group of humans), and the odds that he* coincidentally had some superhuman ability not to touch a ton of money he came into are staggeringly low - unless he already had a lot of money. Craig does seem to fit the bill here.*I don't say "he or she" because Satoshi is a common male name, and not used by females ever in my experience of many years in Japan. Imagine it as "David Winston."3) Neither Gavin nor Matonis are cryptographers (and don't need to be), and we know Gavin was inexperienced enough to make an amateur signing error on this very forum as @satoshis_sockpuppet also mentioned above. Gavin is a coder and has a good practical view of Bitcoin; that's all his job requires and all that should matter. Maxwell is a cryptographer, so good, let Maxwell handle that stuff. He can stay in the back office where he is suited to the job.4) @Roger_Murdock Why would Gavin put his credibility on the line unnecessarily? My only thought is if Gavin is really Satoshi and doesn't want to be found out (or is in some other way protecting the real Satoshi), letting people think it is Craig - even if Craig never releases the "proof" (what if Gavin signed it for him instead and Craig agreed to take the credit and keep Gavin's secret?) - keeps the spotlight off Gavin or the real Satoshi. Or more likely, Gavin was so convinced that he simply fell into the trap of, "Because something is true is always a good enough reason to say it." A bit of the Mike Hearn "honest to a fault" rubbing off on him? (And this applies whether Craig really is Satoshi or is just a good conman who managed to fool Gavin.)5) In any case, this is all just drama. Bitcoin stands unaffected in the long run, though if Craig is Satoshi things will get a lot more interesting. And if he isn't (or refuses to prove it), Gavin will lose credibility as a cryptographer, which he never had and never claimed, which means nothing except to those who already hated him. It's a bit like Janet Yellen losing credibility because she was conned into accepting some counterfeit $100 bills. People would of course use it to malign her, but in truth it doesn't say much of anything about her qualifications for the job.