Topic: First impressions on Craig Wright ( Satoshi Nakamoto ? ) (Read 386 times)

there is nothing that he can prove that bitcoin is his creation, he only claims unilaterally with super high self-confidence so that others believe that he is a satoshi.  he has gone mad and also lost in court on copyright to bitcoin whitepaper..

COPA@opencryptoorg (twitter @jack retweeted 22/Dec/2021)

'COPA just won its first hearing against Craig: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2021/3440.html
Interesting read. Why did he try to get the court to block that evidence though?'


edit:
--> moved to new thread https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/copa-just-won-its-first-hearing-against-craig-5378263

OP, you're probably the kind of person who will easily fall to fraud.

By the way, are you putting your money where your mouth is? You do believe that Craig Wright is the real Satoshi Nakamoto, right? You do believe in the genius in him, right? You do trust him, right? How much BSV you bought, then?

Surely, this forum is a more or less credible place to consult for opinions on CSW's claim. Why don't you start a poll whether the people here believes or not that CSW is the real Satoshi? That would at least give you an idea whether your view on the matter is false or true.

Craig Wright is a complete fraud. Most people understand this. He's an embarrassment to himself and to crypto in general.

Pretty much everything he does is the exact opposite of what you'd expect Satoshi to do: he's constantly promoting himself, constantly using gross legal maneuvers to try to attack people, patents all the blockchain stuff his company comes up with, made a crappy centralized altcoin that he controls. All these things are the exact opposite of who satoshi showed himself to be.

Then there's the forging/fraudulent documents in court and other nasty stuff. Wright is a pathological liar and a lowlife conman and proves that every time he opens his mouth about Bitcoin. He's the Trump of the crypto world.

As long as he cannot give very actual and also trusted evidence, I only consider and think that he is on his daydreaming and some people believe in his daydreaming 

Whenever we heard about CW statement about Satoshi, I am really going to laugh.
But maybe it is not important anymore for me. I personally preefer to think about others than thinking about the real Satoshi, moreover about CW

HE DOES NOT OWN THEM

there is no waiting game
he simply grabbed a list of public addresses in 2013, which he found on the blockchain by looking at address of 2009 that had coins. and put the list of public addresses into a text file.

he then got dave to act as notary to say that craig must own these because he presented the text file of public addresses (without daves knowledge of the private key process)

that is all.
it has been proven that craig has no access to the private keys, because other people have been able to sign messages using their keys to say that craig does not own them because they own them instead.

so give up waiting or thinking he owns them. he does not.
craig was virtually bankrupt in 2013 when he started hotwire and W&K. and used the aussie tax rebates as a way to get out of debt.

so as of 2008-2012 craig had no value, no money, nothing to his name.

he did not even get into bitcoin until 2013. and even then he was pretending to be a miner yet when audited by the aussie tax office in 2014 he could not even show he had the 'super computers' he pretended to have as his R&D 'mining' businesses to have earned the aussie tax rebate.

so please. accept that other people have shown proof that other people own the coins and craig does not own them.. then move on from any lingering thought that craig 'could' show proof. accept he cant and move on

okay, let's say we will not question all those "questionable" degrees that he has or any other academic achievements he has. but one thing that we all been waiting for is the proof that he indeed own those bitcoin addresses deemed to be owned by Satoshi. because up until now, no news about the proofs. he said he will provide proofs if he wins. and what now? it is easy to provide proofs and you don't need to make a condition before you give one if you are the real deal. so nope, not buying the idea that he is the real satoshi, even if he is a decorated individual. we need tangible proofs, plain and simple. if he can't provide, then he is no satoshi

CSW only sleeps for 4 hours a night and listens to audiobooks at quadruple speed during those 4 hours. Calvin says so, so it must be true:


Excuse me while my eyes roll out of my skull.

No doubt CSW can also write a different paper with each hand simultaneously while on the toilet, which explains both how he can claim to have so many degree and also why his writing is the quality of toilet paper.

He is a fraud, plagiarizer, and identity thief.

it doesnt appear as if CSW requested one of his employee to sit in CSW's office for 6 weeks to write it on his behalf, nor just be a note taker, nor anything that could be deemed 1% acceptable as original/fresh work.
but more so appears as if he just paid a Fiverr kid to copy/paste and then edit an existing paper in a couple hours.

usually you see this poor attempt at copying papers when you go to places like Fiverr and pay some kid a small fee for doing things. they dont really even try hard to re-write a paper. they just grab existing papers copy and paste them and do a "find.. replace" of a few words just to trick the standard plagiarism checking sites.


looking at how many degree's CSW has proclaimed to have achieved in just a couple years. he has not done this just once. but dozens of times. its humanly impossible for a single human being to attain so many degree's in such a short space of time.

even a physics scientist would have an impossible task trying to explain how it was possible without breaking the laws of physics

First I've read about the plagiarism on Twitter, briefly. This time, for proving my point, I've just linked a web result on the topic. I didn't go into further details / links, but since you've pointed it out, I've read now that Medium post. And wow, it's bad. Indeed, it's plagiarism and a good example of copying without even understanding (I have a feeling that he may have even hired somebody to write this or that from the selected papers).

This should have been the final nail in the coffin for CSW, at least when it comes to any person who can actually think. CSW picks a bunch of old school addresses which haven't transacted in 10+ years, because he thinks they were owned by Satoshi and therefore "abandoned", and claims that they belong to him. The real owner of those addresses comes out with definitive proof that CSW does not own them and calls CSW a scammer. And yet CSW fanboys either ignore this or play Olympic level mental gymnastics to justify how someone else has possession of what they believe to be Satoshi's coins? Laughable.

Take a look at the Medium post I linked to above, which is the same one linked to in that article. It is blatant and barn door plagiarism. Not only has he copied entire paragraphs, but he has also copied entire equations and graphs. Even worse/funnier is that he has introduced multiple errors in to the various equations he plagiarized since he does not even understand what he is plagiarizing, resulting in incorrect equations and undefined terms. The whole thing is a joke.

Media doesn't care much what's real. They mostly cite what he said. Keep in mind that nowadays the news are written for 2 reasons:
1. To get people read the paper - so they have to impress, not necessarily tell the truth
2. Fill the spaces between ads

And since CSW is an attention whore, while he and many others (including Roger) want to "rewrite history" for their own benefit, it's clear that their version is more present everywhere.
But if you look deeper you'll find that CSW tried and failed to prove himself as Satoshi (has fooled the journalists, but not the people really understanding crypto and bitcoin), has along history of forgeries, got even his "evidences" ignored in the last lawsuit because they were found to be forgeries.

I am not even convinced about the validity of his actual PhD. I mean that his paper may be plagiarized.

---

Update: I've got my proof. See here, or even more direct, here. Thanks @o_e_l_e_o. It's indeed plagiarized.

Dude... You cannot be more wrong on this.

Craig Wright has been hunting for the Satoshi Nakamoto title for many years now.. for Only 2 reasons.... Fame & Fortune. He wants intellectual rights to cash in on that and he wants to be famous, because he is literally a Attention Wh@re.

The guy could not sign ONE of the Bitcoin addresses that are linked to Satoshi Nakamto.... Not ONE! .... He tried to fool people into thinking that he actually signed an address ... but the tech savvy guys out there quickly debunked all his evidence.   

the lawsuit is about a company called W&K. set up in 2013. craig 'won' ownership of the company. has to 'pay' $100m to his own company for damages of taking patents out of the company.

this is just a 'paper' thing. where he as the company owner just needs to tell the judge a payment was made and final, and wont be disputed. the judge does not need to see a real bank transfer occur just that the receiver is happy.. the receiver being craig


the lawsuit had nothing to do with the BTC. the btc was not in contest/dispute. both sides agreed they both thought the company had the funds so it was not part of the debate or argument over ownership.
just the ownership of the company name was in dispute.

as for the signatures. to clarify to the topic creator that is wrongly pro-craig.
the signature craig showed in 2016 was not a freshly made signature from a unique message made in 2016, it was simply a copy and paste job of a pre-existing signature found in the blockchain in 2009. it proves nothing about craig nor anything about any 2016 proof session. anyone can copy existing transaction signatures.

however craig also had a list of thousands of public bitcoin addresses and pretended that having a list of public addresses meant it was proof of ownership of such. again anyone can list public addresses. its meaningless. craig could not sign new unique messages for these addresses. yet dozens of other people that do actually own the addresses did sign it to say that craig is a lying scammer.

You really think this man doesn't want fame? After all, everything he does involves confusion around him. In my opinion, this man is still undervalued and even narcissistic. What would all this fuss be for? After all, if he is Satoshi Nakamoto, it's very easy task, just make a transfer from one of the first addresses and it's over.

The BTC community being divided about Craig Wright being the real Satoshi Nakamoto?Don't make me laugh.
The BTC community is actually UNITED around the fact that Craig Wright is NOT the real Satoshi Nakamoto.
If he was the real Satoshi,he would have proven this by providing a clear evidence years ago,and all this discussion would have been finished by now.
All he does is just shitting over Bitcoin Core and praising his forked BSV altcoin,while doing on some lawsuits and trying to "prove" his ridiculous claims.
If he was the real creator of Bitcoin,he wouldn't shit over and talk BS about his own creation,wouldn't he?

By the way,why do you like him so much?

Having phd doesn't mean the person can not be a scammer!
Besides if you have ever read any of those articles you can clearly see that none of them ever make any claims about this scammer being Satoshi. They are not in a place to make such a claim. They are just quoting him making the claim and they are all doing it to generate traffic.

It is not Divided , instead Only few listen to that Hoax and Majority of the people in crypto never even bother to Hear that beliefs .

and this is what you gone to believe?

If he is the real deal? then he must awarded you With Bitcoin from the Million in his hands , But first ask Him to open the wallet first.

Wrong , he is just there to claim but none are truthful pointing to him as satoshi .

Here is some real evidence. Not rumors or gossip.


While there is no direct evidence proving that CSW is not Satoshi, there are many instances of CSW lying, and fabricating, forging, and doctoring documents in order to support his fraud.

An example of a doctored post


The civil lawsuit did not and was not intended to establish whether or not he is Satoshi. In fact, the lawsuit is the source of much of the evidence against him. The plaintiff wanted their share of the bitcoins that CSW claimed to mine (but never proved that he actually mined them). BTW, he was ordered to pay the plaintiff $100 million, so it is hard to claim that he won the lawsuit.

"First, the Court is not required to decide, and does not decide, whether Defendant Dr. Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto,..."


As you say, there are other ways to prove his claim, but has yet to use any of those methods. The simplest way would be to sign a message using a private key known to be owned by Satoshi. That has never been done. The "few selected individuals" now say that they were probably fooled by CSW.

Bamboozled: Gavin Andresen Says He Could Have Been Fooled by Craig Wright

... searched, found ...

https://cswarchive.info/csw-filed
From that list:

... but also found signed messages (same message for several addresses) ...



You can check it here: https://www.verifybitcoinmessage.com

The signatures are valid.

- no comment - ... but you can.