Topic: Craig Wright's lawsuit against Kraken - page 3. (Read 489 times)
One of those rare occassions where you side with the CEX or the company behind it to win hehe.
first CSW has to establish which network CSW defines as "bitcoin"
because even this forums posts in 2010 show the actual satoshi described bitcoin as the network of the BTC coin. and BSV was not even an invention of satoshi nor existent until 2018
however CSW if he wants to define BSV as bitcoin. though it only existed as of 2018.. then all lawsuits bout trying to get "bitcoin" to have coin robbery code added. are only lawsuits wanting BSV to have such code.
if he wants to define btc as bitcoin then that makes BSV not bitcoin.
he cant have it both ways
..
now lets look at the "WRIGHT INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED"
created 2016.. ok not 2008-10 although legal documents in tweet says that WII "has traded at all material times in the commercial and technical development of Bitcoin."
development of WHICH? bitcoin?. is CSW referring to.. i can see this as a first paragraph failing of CSW
next error (ignoring the obvious falsities (reality is CSW not being the creator))
"based on what the paper described as “a chain of digital signatures”. Such chains are now generally referred to as “blockchains”.
bitcoins blockchain is PoW using hashes. its not a chain of digital signatures. as that is PoS.
seems he cant tell the difference between PoW vs PoS
signature chains. are not a think. because signatures are not chained in bitcoin.
transaction UTXO's are, which are something else but the term of the chain of OTXO is called "taint"
next error
pretending he owns bitcoin.org
CSW should have stayed with pretending to own bitcoin.com and bribed
R.Ver to sell it to him years ago
next error
bitcoin was not described in the white paper as:
"Bitcoin can be bought, sold and transferred through digital exchanges."
because there were no such things in 2008
the white paper was actually about coin rewards from PoW mining and the transfer peer to peer
next error
CSw description of successful minded block and coin reward
"In respect of nodes which are successful in their
mining efforts a distribution is made comprising a quantity of Bitcoin together with
the transaction fees relating to the transactions recorded in the new block."
a 'distribution is made'.. um distribution. excuse me but what english is this..? i guess he meant a contribution.. but had bad autocorrect..
next error
CSw says he set up businesses to control the commerce of bitcoin and development. then he uses other things like handing development over to independent devs in 201. and that other independents set up businesses. yet wants to say WII was in control of bitcoin commerce and development!!
again which direction is this guy trying to walk along.. he is saying two things at once and getting the lines crossed
next error
again he says "During the period of 2009 – 2016, Dr Wright set up, owned and controlled various trading
entities, including WII, to develop his ideas for blockchain technology."
yet WII was not around in 2009-2015
next error
describing forks as "air drops"
CSW has no clue about crypto systems or terminology.. it pains my eyes just reading his errors of crypto history and terminology
next error
was where segwit activation "requires
information relating to the digital signature to be stored on side networks or “off chains”,
seriously. he really has no clue..
even though i did not like the procedure used to activate segwit. CSW is by far going complete idiot by not understanding what the activation triggered or the layout of data thereafter.
..
here is the kicker.
he admits the bitcoin using the BTC ticker is the one that has segwit.. and the core dev team maintaining it...
so he admits that the btc network is the network of the real satoshi who also used the term btc..
..
next error
he confuses which network he defines as the "airdrop"
he ends up calling the BCH as the airdrop. which means that its a new network giving away free coins..
and then admits that BSV is another airdrop that was created that gave away free coins..
so thus he is admitting that BSV is not the original network but a fork of a fork. or to use his words an airdrop of an air drop
thus.. his BSV is not bitcoin
..
point 32 quoting for emphasis
hmm BCH was created august 2017.. BSV was created november 2018
seems he doesnt even know when his own network begun or which network to speak of
ok im getting a headache im stop reading at point 32. and ill come back later to add to my post about al the crap thats just stupid about that filing document
because even this forums posts in 2010 show the actual satoshi described bitcoin as the network of the BTC coin. and BSV was not even an invention of satoshi nor existent until 2018
however CSW if he wants to define BSV as bitcoin. though it only existed as of 2018.. then all lawsuits bout trying to get "bitcoin" to have coin robbery code added. are only lawsuits wanting BSV to have such code.
if he wants to define btc as bitcoin then that makes BSV not bitcoin.
he cant have it both ways
..
now lets look at the "WRIGHT INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED"
created 2016.. ok not 2008-10 although legal documents in tweet says that WII "has traded at all material times in the commercial and technical development of Bitcoin."
development of WHICH? bitcoin?. is CSW referring to.. i can see this as a first paragraph failing of CSW
next error (ignoring the obvious falsities (reality is CSW not being the creator))
"based on what the paper described as “a chain of digital signatures”. Such chains are now generally referred to as “blockchains”.
bitcoins blockchain is PoW using hashes. its not a chain of digital signatures. as that is PoS.
seems he cant tell the difference between PoW vs PoS
signature chains. are not a think. because signatures are not chained in bitcoin.
transaction UTXO's are, which are something else but the term of the chain of OTXO is called "taint"
next error
pretending he owns bitcoin.org
CSW should have stayed with pretending to own bitcoin.com and bribed
R.Ver to sell it to him years ago
next error
bitcoin was not described in the white paper as:
"Bitcoin can be bought, sold and transferred through digital exchanges."
because there were no such things in 2008
the white paper was actually about coin rewards from PoW mining and the transfer peer to peer
next error
CSw description of successful minded block and coin reward
"In respect of nodes which are successful in their
mining efforts a distribution is made comprising a quantity of Bitcoin together with
the transaction fees relating to the transactions recorded in the new block."
a 'distribution is made'.. um distribution. excuse me but what english is this..? i guess he meant a contribution.. but had bad autocorrect..
next error
CSw says he set up businesses to control the commerce of bitcoin and development. then he uses other things like handing development over to independent devs in 201. and that other independents set up businesses. yet wants to say WII was in control of bitcoin commerce and development!!
again which direction is this guy trying to walk along.. he is saying two things at once and getting the lines crossed
next error
again he says "During the period of 2009 – 2016, Dr Wright set up, owned and controlled various trading
entities, including WII, to develop his ideas for blockchain technology."
yet WII was not around in 2009-2015
next error
describing forks as "air drops"
CSW has no clue about crypto systems or terminology.. it pains my eyes just reading his errors of crypto history and terminology
next error
was where segwit activation "requires
information relating to the digital signature to be stored on side networks or “off chains”,
seriously. he really has no clue..
even though i did not like the procedure used to activate segwit. CSW is by far going complete idiot by not understanding what the activation triggered or the layout of data thereafter.
..
here is the kicker.
he admits the bitcoin using the BTC ticker is the one that has segwit.. and the core dev team maintaining it...
so he admits that the btc network is the network of the real satoshi who also used the term btc..
..
next error
he confuses which network he defines as the "airdrop"
he ends up calling the BCH as the airdrop. which means that its a new network giving away free coins..
and then admits that BSV is another airdrop that was created that gave away free coins..
so thus he is admitting that BSV is not the original network but a fork of a fork. or to use his words an airdrop of an air drop
thus.. his BSV is not bitcoin
..
point 32 quoting for emphasis
Quote
The 2018 Airdrop
32. On 15 November 2018, a further airdrop occurred in relation to the Bitcoin System using
the Bitcoin Characteristics, using the name Bitcoin Cash and the ticker, BCH.
32. On 15 November 2018, a further airdrop occurred in relation to the Bitcoin System using
the Bitcoin Characteristics, using the name Bitcoin Cash and the ticker, BCH.
hmm BCH was created august 2017.. BSV was created november 2018
seems he doesnt even know when his own network begun or which network to speak of
ok im getting a headache im stop reading at point 32. and ill come back later to add to my post about al the crap thats just stupid about that filing document
https://twitter.com/itswillmack/status/1594667376020267010
He's demanding they stop using the word Bitcoin to refer to Bitcoin and that they pay him billions of dollars in damages. (The particulars of claim is the interesting document)
He's demanding they stop using the word Bitcoin to refer to Bitcoin and that they pay him billions of dollars in damages. (The particulars of claim is the interesting document)
Jump to: