woah.. i need to make a new category just for insane idiots..
just to have somewhere to put people like leezhamilton into
Topic: Updates from the COPA v Craig Wright trial - page 11. (Read 3581 times)
According to the Lord Grabiner statement,
His arguments include that he had a unique set of skills, knowledge and qualification to come up with bitcoin - and his opponents do not propose an alternative candidate for 'Satoshi'.
As the real Satoshi Nakamoto has not come forward to claim his Bitcoin stash and credential or may be a Nobel Prize on economic science, so Craig Wright is a good candidate. Lord Grabiner does not understand that the real Satoshi knows and own his Bitcoin stash. I am confused, why the COPA has not found the real Satoshi Nakamoto and request him to come to the Court to prove that Craig Wright is just a fraud or liar or something else. If the real Satoshi stand up and gives his evidence then the matter could be solved without further wasting court's time.
The twist is, if whether this Australian man is '' the real Craig Steven Wright ? '' who is gentle and wise, but I think he is just a look alike of the real Craig Steven Wright the computer hacker, who was spotted by the real Satoshi Nakamoto in IRC Channel back in 7th May 2007. It is the same story to the MT. Gox real CEO, Mark Karpeles, who went to a Japanese Island back in the year 2013 for a holiday but never returned to Tokyo. So the MT. Gox few officials found a look alike of the real Mark Karpeles and hired him to assumed the CEO position of the MT. Gox. The real Mark Karpeles was a honest geek but the fake Mark Karpeles is dishonest who really mismanaged the MT. Gox fund. Now if the real Craig Wright come forward ad tell the court that man COPA is suing is not the real Craig Wright, who has disappeared after he went for a holiday in Hawaii. Then the case could be dismissed. Other wise the real Satoshi Nakamoto has to come forward either to debunk CSW claims or bail him out.
But if this whole case has been setup and orchestrated by Jack Dorsey, COPA team and Craig Wright together mutually just to bank on Satoshi's Stash of Bitcoin then there is another story. Journalists must dig out the truth.
His arguments include that he had a unique set of skills, knowledge and qualification to come up with bitcoin - and his opponents do not propose an alternative candidate for 'Satoshi'.
As the real Satoshi Nakamoto has not come forward to claim his Bitcoin stash and credential or may be a Nobel Prize on economic science, so Craig Wright is a good candidate. Lord Grabiner does not understand that the real Satoshi knows and own his Bitcoin stash. I am confused, why the COPA has not found the real Satoshi Nakamoto and request him to come to the Court to prove that Craig Wright is just a fraud or liar or something else. If the real Satoshi stand up and gives his evidence then the matter could be solved without further wasting court's time.
The twist is, if whether this Australian man is '' the real Craig Steven Wright ? '' who is gentle and wise, but I think he is just a look alike of the real Craig Steven Wright the computer hacker, who was spotted by the real Satoshi Nakamoto in IRC Channel back in 7th May 2007. It is the same story to the MT. Gox real CEO, Mark Karpeles, who went to a Japanese Island back in the year 2013 for a holiday but never returned to Tokyo. So the MT. Gox few officials found a look alike of the real Mark Karpeles and hired him to assumed the CEO position of the MT. Gox. The real Mark Karpeles was a honest geek but the fake Mark Karpeles is dishonest who really mismanaged the MT. Gox fund. Now if the real Craig Wright come forward ad tell the court that man COPA is suing is not the real Craig Wright, who has disappeared after he went for a holiday in Hawaii. Then the case could be dismissed. Other wise the real Satoshi Nakamoto has to come forward either to debunk CSW claims or bail him out.
But if this whole case has been setup and orchestrated by Jack Dorsey, COPA team and Craig Wright together mutually just to bank on Satoshi's Stash of Bitcoin then there is another story. Journalists must dig out the truth.
Day three.
More of the same from the second half of the day, but today was the first time I've seen Craig get visibly flustered. He'd presented a notepad as evidence that pre-dated the release of bitcoin allegedly containing the minutes of a meeting where they discussed the things relating to the creation of bitcoin in 2007.
More of the same from the second half of the day, but today was the first time I've seen Craig get visibly flustered. He'd presented a notepad as evidence that pre-dated the release of bitcoin allegedly containing the minutes of a meeting where they discussed the things relating to the creation of bitcoin in 2007.
gotta laugh how CSW is trying to act like bitcoin was some "business" thing from 2007 ("minutes of meeting")
everyman and his dog can see real satoshi was a solo guy patchworking idea's together from the cypherpunks idea's of digital money as a hobby that grew into an invention. and not some business product with employees
the real satoshi putting it into MIT open licence. yet CSW trying to corporate patent/licence it is another bit of comedy
overall i think the just will just say "bitcoin was put under MIT open licence, so CSW can just go F**K himself" (**= uc/or, you choose)
as for the forgeries.. well CSW is digging himself a hole and his sponsors seem to not want to bail him out when he falls this time, literally this could be his latch ditch effort(unless he finds new sponsors to scam money out of)
Day three.
More of the same from the second half of the day, but today was the first time I've seen Craig get visibly flustered. He'd presented a notepad as evidence that pre-dated the release of bitcoin allegedly containing the minutes of a meeting where they discussed the things relating to the creation of bitcoin in 2007. The only issue was the manufacturer of the notepad had confirmed that particular item wasn't even released until 2012
. Craig also irrelevantly boasted about his 4000 patents. Maybe one of them is a time machine he used to collect the notepad from the future and bring it back to 2007. Not only does Craig try - and fail - to forge digital documents but now physical ones are proven as nonsense. COPA's lawyer asked Craig why he seems to be more knowledgeable than someone who actually works for the manufacturer. He waffled on about some nonsense. Caught out again.
So far so good, the case has had its first hearing and as it is, the case has been adjourned till further notice as new evidences is expected to surface.
I don't see any reason for the case to even hold in the first place, but one fact is that the case would help enthusiast of BTC gain better insight into why and how the come about of BTC idea and the brains behind it.
I don't want to believe that Dr. Wright is Nakamoto Satoshi because it would sure dent the believe of many of us who have come to believe that Satoshi Nakamoto is just a pseudonym for the original founder of the popular and top cryptocurrency, Bitcoin.
See. This is how Coingeek spin the narrative. Craig is sitting there getting called a liar after every piece of info presented to him. He's not winning here; he's getting embarrassed continually.
Well he owes a pretty good explanation for his lies. Pretty much everyone in the crypto community would be instantly silenced by a signing. He tried to do this behind the scenes to hoodwink Gavin so I'm not sure why he can't do it for everyone else. Well, we do know, because he can't do it and his excuse after that was the bonded courier and then that he stamped on the hard drives in a rage. One excuse after the other to cover lies built upon more lies.
Not ownership , but possession . There is a huge difference in between .
If i steal your keys am i the owner of your coins ? Or am i a thief who illegally posses your coins ? And more importantly , if i steal your keys am i you ?
Then at least prove possession. If Satoshi came back and signed the genesis block would you not believe that? This is all we require. I would be instantly silenced if Craig could sign anything belonging to Satoshi. What Craig does it pure distraction and misdirection with nonsense analogies. He says things like house keys don't mean you own the house, the deeds do, and then hands you a bad photocopy of a forged deed he's edited to have his name on it and go see, I own your house. People laugh at this nonsense then he says well I'll try to prove it in court and doesn't prove anything just has more forgeries to try claim he does actually own your house in a poor attempt to try fraudulently steal it from you. He doesn't own anything.
Well , from what i see in the court things might not be as how Arthur Van Pelt wants to be . We will see if judge decides these are forged . I guess he will know better than you and me .
Well, the documents have already been accepted as forgeries by all parties involved including Craig's own witnesses and the court process is for Craig to provide his excuses/reasoning to try dispute that and he's not doing a good job so far. He hasn't said anything that is a viable excuse.
https://twitter.com/CryptoDevil/status/1755215312851537938
I'm living in the real world. Craig is living in a fantasy land where he thinks he created bitcoin and here's some nonsense documents to prove it. You don't prove you invented bitcoin with forged documents. You know how to prove it, but when you're not Satoshi you're going to have to invent a fantasy world to live in.
Well yeah, everyone would love that, but the he's only sat in court right now because fake documents are the only cards he has in his deck. If Craig could sign he would have done it years ago, but it's literally impossible for him to do so s he has to resort to fakery.
More of the same from the second half of the day, but today was the first time I've seen Craig get visibly flustered. He'd presented a notepad as evidence that pre-dated the release of bitcoin allegedly containing the minutes of a meeting where they discussed the things relating to the creation of bitcoin in 2007. The only issue was the manufacturer of the notepad had confirmed that particular item wasn't even released until 2012
. Craig also irrelevantly boasted about his 4000 patents. Maybe one of them is a time machine he used to collect the notepad from the future and bring it back to 2007. Not only does Craig try - and fail - to forge digital documents but now physical ones are proven as nonsense. COPA's lawyer asked Craig why he seems to be more knowledgeable than someone who actually works for the manufacturer. He waffled on about some nonsense. Caught out again. So far so good, the case has had its first hearing and as it is, the case has been adjourned till further notice as new evidences is expected to surface.
I don't see any reason for the case to even hold in the first place, but one fact is that the case would help enthusiast of BTC gain better insight into why and how the come about of BTC idea and the brains behind it.
I don't want to believe that Dr. Wright is Nakamoto Satoshi because it would sure dent the believe of many of us who have come to believe that Satoshi Nakamoto is just a pseudonym for the original founder of the popular and top cryptocurrency, Bitcoin.
See. This is how Coingeek spin the narrative. Craig is sitting there getting called a liar after every piece of info presented to him. He's not winning here; he's getting embarrassed continually.
Does he owe something to the community to do it the way community wants if he is satoshi ?
Well he owes a pretty good explanation for his lies. Pretty much everyone in the crypto community would be instantly silenced by a signing. He tried to do this behind the scenes to hoodwink Gavin so I'm not sure why he can't do it for everyone else. Well, we do know, because he can't do it and his excuse after that was the bonded courier and then that he stamped on the hard drives in a rage. One excuse after the other to cover lies built upon more lies.
Not ownership , but possession . There is a huge difference in between .
If i steal your keys am i the owner of your coins ? Or am i a thief who illegally posses your coins ? And more importantly , if i steal your keys am i you ?
Then at least prove possession. If Satoshi came back and signed the genesis block would you not believe that? This is all we require. I would be instantly silenced if Craig could sign anything belonging to Satoshi. What Craig does it pure distraction and misdirection with nonsense analogies. He says things like house keys don't mean you own the house, the deeds do, and then hands you a bad photocopy of a forged deed he's edited to have his name on it and go see, I own your house. People laugh at this nonsense then he says well I'll try to prove it in court and doesn't prove anything just has more forgeries to try claim he does actually own your house in a poor attempt to try fraudulently steal it from you. He doesn't own anything.
Well , from what i see in the court things might not be as how Arthur Van Pelt wants to be . We will see if judge decides these are forged . I guess he will know better than you and me .
Well, the documents have already been accepted as forgeries by all parties involved including Craig's own witnesses and the court process is for Craig to provide his excuses/reasoning to try dispute that and he's not doing a good job so far. He hasn't said anything that is a viable excuse.
https://twitter.com/CryptoDevil/status/1755215312851537938
Nonsense , i laughed on that part . Are you living in the real world or at some fantasy island ? That's not how you prove identity .
I'm living in the real world. Craig is living in a fantasy land where he thinks he created bitcoin and here's some nonsense documents to prove it. You don't prove you invented bitcoin with forged documents. You know how to prove it, but when you're not Satoshi you're going to have to invent a fantasy world to live in.
Edit . I have to mention that i think he should sign from an early block , just do it after proving his identity the legal way and not the other way .
Well yeah, everyone would love that, but the he's only sat in court right now because fake documents are the only cards he has in his deck. If Craig could sign he would have done it years ago, but it's literally impossible for him to do so s he has to resort to fakery.
*image containing lies removed*
You'd have to be delusional to think that was an "early victory" for the con-man. I would suggest that you find a new source for your "articles" (in the loosest possible sense of the word), but I suspect your choices are deliberate at this point. It seems some people are determined to support this crook until the bitter end.
Don't embarrass yourself please .
I can't personally think of anything more embarrassing than being a self-professed BSV supporter, so I'll find it difficult to top that.
dont think that someone can just make claims they are satoshi, god, jesus, mohamed, moses, superman and that we should innocently just trust and believe it as fact unless proven otherwise. its actually the other way round. if someone makes a claim of difference. they need to prove it.
Anyone can claim , but only one in each case can prove it . That's the point we are now , proving in court . Either he is or he goes to jail for perjury and other things . Isn't that great ?
The laws of mathematics have already proven him a liar. If you're waiting for the laws of man to play catch-up, then most of us will assume it's because you aren't ready to accept that you were wrong and fell for a scam:
You aren't waiting because it's civilised, you're waiting because you got conned.
And i'm pro bsv because i'm a man that lives in my time . I don't use my pentium and my 56kbps modem . Times move on .
You aren't waiting because it's civilised, you're waiting because you got conned.
The laws of mathematics say that when you have 4 aces there are 1 in 165 million chances to lose . But you know , s**ts happen some times .
Being pro bsv doesn't mean i follow craig blindly . In fact i was pro increasing blocksize before craig ( same as Back , Lopp and others ) . So , don't try to find things when there aren't any . Don't embarrass yourself please .
The courts shouldn't be deciding. Craig can prove it to the entire crypto community in 5 minutes if he wanted to, but he can't.
Does he owe something to the community to do it the way community wants if he is satoshi ?Quote
Satoshi expertly designed bitcoin this way so someone can prove ownership of their keys, but Craig seems to want to conveniently ignore this.
Not ownership , but possession . There is a huge difference in between .
If i steal your keys am i the owner of your coins ? Or am i a thief who illegally posses your coins ? And more importantly , if i steal your keys am i you ?
Quote
If I claimed to be Satoshi would you assume I'm innocent unless a court decides? You should assume anyone who claims to be Satoshi is lying unless they can prove otherwise. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We have nothing from Craig other than his mountains of forged documents. If he's satoshi then let him prove it cryptographically, not just go here's a printout of an email alluding to I'm satoshi. It's nonsense.
Well , from what i see in the court things might not be as how Arthur Van Pelt wants to be . We will see if judge decides these are forged . I guess he will know better than you and me .
Nonsense , i laughed on that part . Are you living in the real world or at some fantasy island ? That's not how you prove identity .
And a question to the community , if somehow a miracle happens for craig and judge says that he is satoshi , what will be your reaction ?
Edit . I have to mention that i think he should sign from an early block , just do it after proving his identity the legal way and not the other way .
So far so good, the case has had its first hearing and as it is, the case has been adjourned till further notice as new evidences is expected to surface.
I don't see any reason for the case to even hold in the first place, but one fact is that the case would help enthusiast of BTC gain better insight into why and how the come about of BTC idea and the brains behind it.
I don't want to believe that Dr. Wright is Nakamoto Satoshi because it would sure dent the believe of many of us who have come to believe that Satoshi Nakamoto is just a pseudonym for the original founder of the popular and top cryptocurrency, Bitcoin.
They've adjourned for lunch now and will be back at 2. Nothing really exciting happened so far. COPA is presenting forgery after forgery and Craig either just disagrees or has some bullshit excuse and they move onto the next one.
Since this guy has over 500 instances of document forgeries, it should be relatively simple for cross-examiners and experts to put them all together and prove him guilty, right?
The judge made them whittle it down to 25 documents I believe. You would think that it's easy but Craig just disagrees and half of the time either COPA's lawyer moves on or just calls him a liar (but in my lighter terms) and then they move onto the next forgery. Hopefully the judge is seeing through it all as he hasn't really said much so far and rarely gets involved but I would be surprised if he's buying any of it.
Since this guy has over 500 instances of document forgeries, it should be relatively simple for cross-examiners and experts to put them all together and prove him guilty, right?
i havnt read any transcript of the copa case yet, but if the 500 docs are things CSW filed in relation to this case (rather than documents he sent out publicly over the years)
knowing how CSW operates. i bet right near the end or after he will say, "those 500 documents were on my hard drive last year when i was about to file, but maybe a ex-employee/adversary got into my computer and tweaked the documents to now be forgeries.. so what i submitted, i thought was the original but is actually tweaked stuff someone replaced when i filed the documents, .. it wasnt me judge"
He's already been using this line and has said it's not him that publishes his blogs or papers etc but an assistant, college, student, ex wife, employee etc. He claimed today that he has a four year backlog of papers he's yet to publish (or more likely yet to forge haha). He's very cunning and conniving and confidently has at least some sort of excuse for everything no matter how ridiculous it may be.
Would anyone who has ever read posts from Satoshi on this forum or private correspondence with any of the developers really think that CW is the real Satoshi even if he signed a message from any BTC address believed to belong to Satoshi? At some point, we have to accept that it may happen that someone will come into possession of the private keys of those addresses, which means that even a signed message cannot mean that someone is the original owner.
Well probably not now but it would be pretty hard to dispute if Craig signed the genesis block, Satoshi's known addresses or his PGP keys. It's moot point though because he can't do that. It's not very likely that someone could cryptographically prove he was Satoshi other than Satoshi himself unless we get to a point in the future where these things can be bruteforced or exploited by a supercomputer somehow.
Would anyone who has ever read posts from Satoshi on this forum or private correspondence with any of the developers really think that CW is the real Satoshi even if he signed a message from any BTC address believed to belong to Satoshi? At some point, we have to accept that it may happen that someone will come into possession of the private keys of those addresses, which means that even a signed message cannot mean that someone is the original owner.
That's exactly the reason identity isn't proven the way community wants satoshi to come forward and introduce himself . Keys can be stolen , public identity can't be altered ( well , that doesn't apply to rainbow people ) .
That's Craig's convenient excuse. Sure, keys can be stolen but signing them at least proves he is in possession of them currently. If he was serious, he would just sign a message whilst also saying this is not proof or something. Satoshi expertly designed bitcoin this way so someone can prove ownership of their keys, but Craig seems to want to conveniently ignore this. If what Craig is saying is true then he would have designed bitcoin differently and maybe put in some sort of backdoor or allowance for court orders etc, but he didn't, because he's not Satoshi so has to merely rely on bullshit.
Well , by looking at everything craig said and showed of how bitcoin works all these years i tend to think that he is an extremely intelligent person with better understanding of the network than anyone else . Is he satoshi ? Court will decide .
The courts shouldn't be deciding. Craig can prove it to the entire crypto community in 5 minutes if he wanted to, but he can't. If he somehow unbelievably manages to hoodwink a court into saying he's Satoshi then that still wouldn't mean anything to me. An idiot could be convinced by the nonsense documents that he provides and that's the case with many BSV-ers. It's entirely possible that the courts will decide that you can't prove a negative even if it's likely that they find the documents are all forgeries and not outright proclaim he is or isn't Satoshi but just that the documents he provided hold no validity and what then? We're still meant to pretend he could quite possibly be Satoshi?
If I claimed to be Satoshi would you assume I'm innocent unless a court decides? You should assume anyone who claims to be Satoshi is lying unless they can prove otherwise. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We have nothing from Craig other than his mountains of forged documents. If he's satoshi then let him prove it cryptographically, not just go here's a printout of an email alluding to I'm satoshi. It's nonsense.
Craig is a charlatan and a conman plain and simple. Don't let him bamboozle you with hot air and unearned qualifications of which he's been caught plagiarising content for his degrees. He's only a possible candidate in the same way that you or I are. In fact, I'd say there's more chance of either of us two being Satoshi than Craig. Nobody's disproved either of us yet, yet there's over 500 documents against Craig that have proven to be frauds. Craig is just a scammer trying to utilise the fact that Satoshi is both anonymous and AWOL to further his financial frauds. If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
Since this guy has over 500 instances of document forgeries, it should be relatively simple for cross-examiners and experts to put them all together and prove him guilty, right?
The judge made them whittle it down to 25 documents I believe. You would think that it's easy but Craig just disagrees and half of the time either COPA's lawyer moves on or just calls him a liar (but in my lighter terms) and then they move onto the next forgery. Hopefully the judge is seeing through it all as he hasn't really said much so far and rarely gets involved but I would be surprised if he's buying any of it.
Craig is a charlatan and a conman plain and simple. Don't let him bamboozle you with hot air and unearned qualifications of which he's been caught plagiarising content for his degrees. He's only a possible candidate in the same way that you or I are. In fact, I'd say there's more chance of either of us two being Satoshi than Craig. Nobody's disproved either of us yet, yet there's over 500 documents against Craig that have proven to be frauds. Craig is just a scammer trying to utilise the fact that Satoshi is both anonymous and AWOL to further his financial frauds. If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
Since this guy has over 500 instances of document forgeries, it should be relatively simple for cross-examiners and experts to put them all together and prove him guilty, right?
i havnt read any transcript of the copa case yet, but if the 500 docs are things CSW filed in relation to this case (rather than documents he sent out publicly over the years)
knowing how CSW operates. i bet right near the end or after he will say, "those 500 documents were on my hard drive last year when i was about to file, but maybe a ex-employee/adversary got into my computer and tweaked the documents to now be forgeries.. so what i submitted, i thought was the original but is actually tweaked stuff someone replaced when i filed the documents, .. it wasnt me judge"
He's already been using this line and has said it's not him that publishes his blogs or papers etc but an assistant, college, student, ex wife, employee etc. He claimed today that he has a four year backlog of papers he's yet to publish (or more likely yet to forge haha). He's very cunning and conniving and confidently has at least some sort of excuse for everything no matter how ridiculous it may be.
~snip~
If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
Would anyone who has ever read posts from Satoshi on this forum or private correspondence with any of the developers really think that CW is the real Satoshi even if he signed a message from any BTC address believed to belong to Satoshi? At some point, we have to accept that it may happen that someone will come into possession of the private keys of those addresses, which means that even a signed message cannot mean that someone is the original owner.
Well probably not now but it would be pretty hard to dispute if Craig signed the genesis block, Satoshi's known addresses or his PGP keys. It's moot point though because he can't do that. It's not very likely that someone could cryptographically prove he was Satoshi other than Satoshi himself unless we get to a point in the future where these things can be bruteforced or exploited by a supercomputer somehow.
Would anyone who has ever read posts from Satoshi on this forum or private correspondence with any of the developers really think that CW is the real Satoshi even if he signed a message from any BTC address believed to belong to Satoshi? At some point, we have to accept that it may happen that someone will come into possession of the private keys of those addresses, which means that even a signed message cannot mean that someone is the original owner.
That's exactly the reason identity isn't proven the way community wants satoshi to come forward and introduce himself . Keys can be stolen , public identity can't be altered ( well , that doesn't apply to rainbow people ) .
That's Craig's convenient excuse. Sure, keys can be stolen but signing them at least proves he is in possession of them currently. If he was serious, he would just sign a message whilst also saying this is not proof or something. Satoshi expertly designed bitcoin this way so someone can prove ownership of their keys, but Craig seems to want to conveniently ignore this. If what Craig is saying is true then he would have designed bitcoin differently and maybe put in some sort of backdoor or allowance for court orders etc, but he didn't, because he's not Satoshi so has to merely rely on bullshit.
Well , by looking at everything craig said and showed of how bitcoin works all these years i tend to think that he is an extremely intelligent person with better understanding of the network than anyone else . Is he satoshi ? Court will decide .
The courts shouldn't be deciding. Craig can prove it to the entire crypto community in 5 minutes if he wanted to, but he can't. If he somehow unbelievably manages to hoodwink a court into saying he's Satoshi then that still wouldn't mean anything to me. An idiot could be convinced by the nonsense documents that he provides and that's the case with many BSV-ers. It's entirely possible that the courts will decide that you can't prove a negative even if it's likely that they find the documents are all forgeries and not outright proclaim he is or isn't Satoshi but just that the documents he provided hold no validity and what then? We're still meant to pretend he could quite possibly be Satoshi?
That's what a large part of the community's opinion , i tend to have mine . If court decides he is not satoshi i will put him in my list of fraudsters . Till then he has the presumption of innocence , which i think is the most reasonable and civilised .
If I claimed to be Satoshi would you assume I'm innocent unless a court decides? You should assume anyone who claims to be Satoshi is lying unless they can prove otherwise. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We have nothing from Craig other than his mountains of forged documents. If he's satoshi then let him prove it cryptographically, not just go here's a printout of an email alluding to I'm satoshi. It's nonsense.
If court decides he is not satoshi i will put him in my list of fraudsters . Till then he has the presumption of innocence , which i think is the most reasonable and civilised .
The laws of mathematics have already proven him a liar. If you're waiting for the laws of man to play catch-up, then most of us will assume it's because you aren't ready to accept that you were wrong and fell for a scam:
And i'm pro bsv because i'm a man that lives in my time . I don't use my pentium and my 56kbps modem . Times move on .
You aren't waiting because it's civilised, you're waiting because you got conned.
That's what a large part of the community's opinion , i tend to have mine . If court decides he is not satoshi i will put him in my list of fraudsters . Till then he has the presumption of innocence , which i think is the most reasonable and civilised .
he is innocently just craig. and we have to presume innocent that he is just craig..
if he or others want to make claims of other things. well proof is needed.. until then he is just craig
dont think that someone can just make claims they are satoshi, god, jesus, mohamed, moses, superman and that we should innocently just trust and believe it as fact unless proven otherwise. its actually the other way round. if someone makes a claim of difference. they need to prove it.
i know we are in a weird era where a guy can just claim he is a women to perve into womens changing rooms. but thats where they need to declare in law and have proof of their change, rather than just their random unproven say so. (when it comes to declarations that affect others)
you can wear a superman costume, old robes or a dress in your own home. but if your claims affect others. expect others to question your claims to protect themselves
Would anyone who has ever read posts from Satoshi on this forum or private correspondence with any of the developers really think that CW is the real Satoshi even if he signed a message from any BTC address believed to belong to Satoshi? At some point, we have to accept that it may happen that someone will come into possession of the private keys of those addresses, which means that even a signed message cannot mean that someone is the original owner.
That's exactly the reason identity isn't proven the way community wants satoshi to come forward and introduce himself . Keys can be stolen , public identity can't be altered ( well , that doesn't apply to rainbow people ) .
Craig is a charlatan and a conman plain and simple. Don't let him bamboozle you with hot air and unearned qualifications of which he's been caught plagiarising content for his degrees. He's only a possible candidate in the same way that you or I are. In fact, I'd say there's more chance of either of us two being Satoshi than Craig. Nobody's disproved either of us yet, yet there's over 500 documents against Craig that have proven to be frauds. Craig is just a scammer trying to utilise the fact that Satoshi is both anonymous and AWOL to further his financial frauds. If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
That's what a large part of the community's opinion , i tend to have mine . If court decides he is not satoshi i will put him in my list of fraudsters . Till then he has the presumption of innocence , which i think is the most reasonable and civilised . 
~snip~
If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
Would anyone who has ever read posts from Satoshi on this forum or private correspondence with any of the developers really think that CW is the real Satoshi even if he signed a message from any BTC address believed to belong to Satoshi? At some point, we have to accept that it may happen that someone will come into possession of the private keys of those addresses, which means that even a signed message cannot mean that someone is the original owner.
According to everything we know about Satoshi and CW, they are two completely different people in every sense. CW is nowhere near intelligent enough to play the role of Satoshi, and he shows that every day with his forged evidence - would someone who invented Bitcoin be so incompetent that he couldn't forge a single document in a way that leaves even the slightest doubt of authenticity?
Craig is a charlatan and a conman plain and simple. Don't let him bamboozle you with hot air and unearned qualifications of which he's been caught plagiarising content for his degrees. He's only a possible candidate in the same way that you or I are. In fact, I'd say there's more chance of either of us two being Satoshi than Craig. Nobody's disproved either of us yet, yet there's over 500 documents against Craig that have proven to be frauds. Craig is just a scammer trying to utilise the fact that Satoshi is both anonymous and AWOL to further his financial frauds. If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
Since this guy has over 500 instances of document forgeries, it should be relatively simple for cross-examiners and experts to put them all together and prove him guilty, right?
i havnt read any transcript of the copa case yet, but if the 500 docs are things CSW filed in relation to this case (rather than documents he sent out publicly over the years)
knowing how CSW operates. i bet right near the end or after he will say, "those 500 documents were on my hard drive last year when i was about to file, but maybe a ex-employee/adversary got into my computer and tweaked the documents to now be forgeries.. so what i submitted, i thought was the original but is actually tweaked stuff someone replaced when i filed the documents, .. it wasnt me judge"
Craig is a charlatan and a conman plain and simple. Don't let him bamboozle you with hot air and unearned qualifications of which he's been caught plagiarising content for his degrees. He's only a possible candidate in the same way that you or I are. In fact, I'd say there's more chance of either of us two being Satoshi than Craig. Nobody's disproved either of us yet, yet there's over 500 documents against Craig that have proven to be frauds. Craig is just a scammer trying to utilise the fact that Satoshi is both anonymous and AWOL to further his financial frauds. If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
Since this guy has over 500 instances of document forgeries, it should be relatively simple for cross-examiners and experts to put them all together and prove him guilty, right?
Day three is just about to start.
However, I don't know about the judges, but they should have some technical knowledge as well. Do you guys remember the case between Hodlnut and CSW where the Judge said they do not understand these things well? If the Judge do not understand, how they will make a conclusion?
Judge Mellor has an engineering background , i think it will be easier for him to understand the technical aspects of the case
https://www.middletemple.org.uk/bencher-persons-view?cid=32113
I still think this case would be hard to follow or understand for most unless you have specific knowledge in bitcoin tech and digital forensics. Craig probably doesn't even know what he's talking about half of the time and usually just rambles on about irrelevance to try seem he's more knowledgeable than he is, but if he doesn't even know what he's talking about it's unlikely the judge or either parties representatives know either.
Craig is a charlatan and a conman plain and simple. Don't let him bamboozle you with hot air and unearned qualifications of which he's been caught plagiarising content for his degrees. He's only a possible candidate in the same way that you or I are. In fact, I'd say there's more chance of either of us two being Satoshi than Craig. Nobody's disproved either of us yet, yet there's over 500 documents against Craig that have proven to be frauds. Craig is just a scammer trying to utilise the fact that Satoshi is both anonymous and AWOL to further his financial frauds. If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
However, I don't know about the judges, but they should have some technical knowledge as well. Do you guys remember the case between Hodlnut and CSW where the Judge said they do not understand these things well? If the Judge do not understand, how they will make a conclusion?
Judge Mellor has an engineering background , i think it will be easier for him to understand the technical aspects of the case
https://www.middletemple.org.uk/bencher-persons-view?cid=32113
I still think this case would be hard to follow or understand for most unless you have specific knowledge in bitcoin tech and digital forensics. Craig probably doesn't even know what he's talking about half of the time and usually just rambles on about irrelevance to try seem he's more knowledgeable than he is, but if he doesn't even know what he's talking about it's unlikely the judge or either parties representatives know either.
As for the rest of the opinions , i will take the opposite stance and wait for the end of trial to finally come to a conclusion . I've been waiting for that outcome ( satoshi or not ) since 2016 . For sure Craig is a pricky dude but that doesn't mean he's not intelligent or polymath . He is definitely a possible candidate of being satoshi . Now it's on his hands to prove what he was saying for a long time , that identity is not being proven with a digital signature ( which i strongly agree ) .
will either celebrate him as satoshi or see him behind bars . In case he manages to prove that he is the one , we will have a story like Dostoyevky's .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Inquisitor
will either celebrate him as satoshi or see him behind bars . In case he manages to prove that he is the one , we will have a story like Dostoyevky's .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Inquisitor
Craig is a charlatan and a conman plain and simple. Don't let him bamboozle you with hot air and unearned qualifications of which he's been caught plagiarising content for his degrees. He's only a possible candidate in the same way that you or I are. In fact, I'd say there's more chance of either of us two being Satoshi than Craig. Nobody's disproved either of us yet, yet there's over 500 documents against Craig that have proven to be frauds. Craig is just a scammer trying to utilise the fact that Satoshi is both anonymous and AWOL to further his financial frauds. If Craig was Satoshi he would just sign a message and shut everyone up, but he can't, because he's not Satoshi, so has to try prove it with forged documentation and sheer talk.
COPA briefly went through a handful of the forged documents including the LaTeX whitepaper and Craig's defence seemed to consist of just letting the court know about Craig's autism and previous suicide attempt due to the stress of trying and failing to prove he's Satoshi. I guess they know they're probably not going to win this so are going for the sympathy route or at least bracing themselves for inevitable failure and using Craig's autism as an excuse for the lies and forged documents.
Ridiculous, especially when CSW never consider mental health on everyone he sued (or attempted to sue).
I don't have to follow up on any live feed when email notifications in the form of newsletters about same court case between COPA vs Craige Wright is delivered to my inbox.
This case is very interesting indeed:
[propaganda link]
This case is very interesting indeed:
[propaganda link]
Lol. Come on. CoinGeek is the BSV propaganda arm and you can't get anything unbiased out of them. Every time Craig loses a court case they somehow spin it into a win.
Anything unbiased? I would also say we can some lies about BTC, BCH and BSV on that website. And while we're at it, please remove the link since may raise their position on Google search result.
However, I don't know about the judges, but they should have some technical knowledge as well. Do you guys remember the case between Hodlnut and CSW where the Judge said they do not understand these things well? If the Judge do not understand, how they will make a conclusion?
Judge Mellor has an engineering background , i think it will be easier for him to understand the technical aspects of the case
https://www.middletemple.org.uk/bencher-persons-view?cid=32113
As for the rest of the opinions , i will take the opposite stance and wait for the end of trial to finally come to a conclusion . I've been waiting for that outcome ( satoshi or not ) since 2016 . For sure Craig is a pricky dude but that doesn't mean he's not intelligent or polymath . He is definitely a possible candidate of being satoshi . Now it's on his hands to prove what he was saying for a long time , that identity is not being proven with a digital signature ( which i strongly agree ) .
The sad thing for me is that most of the members of the community haven't done their own research of who this man is and just following "influencers" opinion ( Vitalik , Sirer , Heart , CZ etc ) and want to send this man to the fire without a trial . Vitalik , the guy who thinks possessing child porn should not be a crime , has discredited Gavin and Craig first , let's not forget that . Sirer also not one honest guys in the space . Heart is gonna face US justice sooner or later . CZ , well , things not going well for him
. All of them have personal interest for a non functioning bitcoin , so draw your conclusion .Anyways , grab your popcorn and enjoy the show . We will either celebrate him as satoshi or see him behind bars . In case he manages to prove that he is the one , we will have a story like Dostoyevky's .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Inquisitor
COPA is not suing CSW to reveal the true identity
of Satoshi but COPA is suing Craig to stop him suing the developers.
of Satoshi but COPA is suing Craig to stop him suing the developers.
copa is not in court asking CSW to reveal the true identity of satoshi.. correct.. but its because EVERYONE including COPA know that CSW knows nothing about satoshi, so its not even a question to need ask CSW about real identity of satoshi
any time anyone asks CSW to prove satoshi is not about revealing satoshi, its more of a trigger to make CSW admit he has no proof/association
copa is in court against CSW to stop him from pretending he is/he knows satoshi
which as a result stops CSW from being a continual lying idiot making false claims.. which results in CSW not able to sue others
According to Metta Data, the real Satoshi is known to the community leaders. Even Jack Dorsey
also know him because it is Satoshi Nakamoto first created a Bitcoin Twitter accounts known as
@Bitcoin and @Nakamoto or may be more.
those twitter accounts were not made by the real satoshialso know him because it is Satoshi Nakamoto first created a Bitcoin Twitter accounts known as
@Bitcoin and @Nakamoto or may be more.
jack dorsey doesnt know satoshi
Will the real Satoshi Nakamoto please stand up?
https://mugglehead.com/will-the-real-satoshi-nakamoto-please-stand-up/
Over the last 10 years, people are looking for information of the real man behind Bitcoin and
Blockchain but any body the news reporters suspected to be the wrong guy. Even a CSW has
claimed in some extend but there is no definite proof.
Now the time has come for the real Satoshi Nakamoto to emerge from the shadow, and tell the
barrister why he has not come forward to claim his stash of Bitcoin and fortune of credential.
Well, Satoshi does not need to claim it publicly as he has got all those BTC and may be more.
For recognition, yes he can just provide proof and evidence.
According to Metta Data, the real Satoshi is known to the community leaders. Even Jack Dorsey
also know him because it is Satoshi Nakamoto first created a Bitcoin Twitter accounts known as
@Bitcoin and @Nakamoto or may be more. COPA is not suing CSW to reveal the true identity
of Satoshi but COPA is suing Craig to stop him suing the developers. I thing enough is enough !
It is time for COPA to request the real Satoshi to come forward and reveal his identity with full
evidences so CSW will over out of UK either to Australia or to Caribbean Island to retire from his
elaborate hoax. I suspect, if COPA and CSW are mutually staging the Case for some other intention
to destroy BTC then I think the real Satoshi will jump up and challenge CSW to protect the Bitcoin
being get hijacked second times.
https://mugglehead.com/will-the-real-satoshi-nakamoto-please-stand-up/
Over the last 10 years, people are looking for information of the real man behind Bitcoin and
Blockchain but any body the news reporters suspected to be the wrong guy. Even a CSW has
claimed in some extend but there is no definite proof.
Now the time has come for the real Satoshi Nakamoto to emerge from the shadow, and tell the
barrister why he has not come forward to claim his stash of Bitcoin and fortune of credential.
Well, Satoshi does not need to claim it publicly as he has got all those BTC and may be more.
For recognition, yes he can just provide proof and evidence.
According to Metta Data, the real Satoshi is known to the community leaders. Even Jack Dorsey
also know him because it is Satoshi Nakamoto first created a Bitcoin Twitter accounts known as
@Bitcoin and @Nakamoto or may be more. COPA is not suing CSW to reveal the true identity
of Satoshi but COPA is suing Craig to stop him suing the developers. I thing enough is enough !
It is time for COPA to request the real Satoshi to come forward and reveal his identity with full
evidences so CSW will over out of UK either to Australia or to Caribbean Island to retire from his
elaborate hoax. I suspect, if COPA and CSW are mutually staging the Case for some other intention
to destroy BTC then I think the real Satoshi will jump up and challenge CSW to protect the Bitcoin
being get hijacked second times.
Craig Wright is a scum bag plain and simple. He has long abused the legal system in a failed attempt to get his name associated with the inventor of a breakthrough technology. Due to his own actions, Craig Wright's name has become synonymous with pathetic lying fraudster.
Jump to: