Topic: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi) - page 3. (Read 701 times)

franky,
Honestly, I don't see anything that Core has done to change bitcoin vision generally and axiom of resistance specially.

The only one suspicious behavior of Core was and is the fact that they refused and continue to refuse rethinking/fixing mining pressure flaw as the main centralization threat to bitcoin at the same time that they fight against straightforward performance upgrades (let's not use 'scaling proposals' term) in the name of decentralization! I don't fully support this guys, but I think it is more about them being devs rather than strategists.

Now, please tell me about your opinion about axiom of resistance.  

craig scammed the australian government by making a fake trust containing a file of copy-paste public keys (no private keys)
and is in big trouble for that.
he then double downed by getting private investors funds too.
he spiralled into alot of legal and financial issues and is just on a non stop campaign to hope he can ponzi his way out of trouble by grabbing funds from any source he can.

he is trying to make a name for himself hoping it will give him some legal leniency for when the courts gavel(hammer) finally knocks

the old banker excuse.. 'if i go prison thousands of employees lose their jobs, millions of people lose money'
but in the end.. if he doesnt get sorted out soon more will suffer by his games

as for the ethos of bitcoin.
it has changed from the 2009-2013 vision.. but trying to point at non-coders like craig as the controversy. the fingers should be pointing at those that have coded the changes made to bitcoin that have diverted the path away from the original vision
and sorry to say this.. but that would be the core devs

laws can stop businesses from publicly running smoothly but cannot switch off individualised activity. take the century old alcohol prohibition era. or the so called 'war on drugs'

people still got drunk and high

as for axiom of resistance
bitcoin was not meant to become fiat2.0. it was meant to be a second option away from fiat. to de-monopoly fiat as being the only option.
the anarchist ethos (in prohibition terms) is not to say "everyone needs to be constantly drunk and high or else" as an only option to rage against the state.. its simply allowing choice and Independence to be sober or be drunk.

government laws can be made to scream "the only option is to not get drunk/high" but that didnt stop people.
as long as bitcoin remains as a OPEN OPTION that doesnt want to become the only option. then people get to have a choice.

anyone saying bitcoin needs regulation. needs government to tax it, ar truly missing the point of bitcoin

In early days of May 2016, when Craig Wright claimed to be Satoshi, by rejecting most of the community members demanding for Satoshi private keys, I argued somehow in favor of him. I don't believe in keys, keys are not our identities, they are certifications to our rights, nothing more. Losing/having access to a couple of keys won't change anything about who Satoshi is or is not. I like Gavin Anderson (personally) and I followed him, it was not a big deal after all, who cares about Satoshi real identity?

Even in the past couple of years, being informed about Wright's suspicious behaviours and moves in the ecosystem, I have not decided about him being a hoax or Satoshi himself. Actually didn't follow the man at all.

Now, I have encountered this article : Drugs, fraud, and murder By Craig Wright and I'm now fully convinced about him being a hoax. Thank you Craig, you are absolutely helpful in making an embarrassment exemplary out of your carrier.

In this article, besides repeatedly denouncing bitcoin and advertising for bcash, Craig Wright is crusading against:

Other than its poor writing, this article shows a radical difference in philosophy and vision between the fake Satoshi and the original one:

I, personally, wouldn't care about bitcoin if it was not against state control.
Libbitcoin guys have formalized this issue as Axiom of Resistance. The word 'axiom' is used intentionally to prevent any further disputes. They simply ask whether you believe in desirability and feasibility of resisting against state control or not? Yes? You are a bitcoiner. No? You are not! Their words:

I didn't started this to re-new an old hoax story. I'm curious about how other bitcoiners think about this issue.