- 
Topic: If the bug doth fit you can't acquit! Craig Wright's fradulent list of Bitcoins (Read 362 times)
December 26, 2020, 08:39:59 PM
Sometime ago I have got 100% information about one big crypto market hack. I have evidence and everything else to convict the offender. I have sent evidence to CEO and support. They said that will inform me if they are interested in this information. Very strange that they have not replied me. I have asked it twice, but no answer... I have evidence that some of the money was invested in another fintech company, but it's not the same person like hacked cryptomarket CEO. They can back some coins, but it's very strange that they just ignoring me... I have sent old wallets and hacked wallets private key, I think it's 100% evidence, I have not asking any bounty. I am willing to get some coins after arrest or some coins back...
-
- 
May 18, 2020, 09:30:22 AM
CWS is such a bad liar, it's a wonder he got so much followers in the first place. This dude can't do anything right, his claims had severe technical flaws right from the start (like when he copypasted a signature), but some people just want it all to be true, because they hate Bitcoin so much.
I'm not surprised by the nature of CSW who always wants to be recognized as the Inventor of Bitcoin. He has many followers from people who don't understand what Bitcoin is really about and its history. Every time CSW just can't prove it. If CSW is a great person, of course it will be recognized, without having to admit that it was he who discovered Bitcoin.On a sidenote, is there any chance CWS will finally get punished for presenting false evidence or something?
The possibility of CSW being convicted of false evidence, may be possible. But remember that CSW has enough support about the law, even anyone who opposes his claim will deal with it.
May 17, 2020, 05:13:35 PM
CWS is such a bad liar, it's a wonder he got so much followers in the first place. This dude can't do anything right, his claims had severe technical flaws right from the start (like when he copypasted a signature), but some people just want it all to be true, because they hate Bitcoin so much.
On a sidenote, is there any chance CWS will finally get punished for presenting false evidence or something?
On a sidenote, is there any chance CWS will finally get punished for presenting false evidence or something?
May 17, 2020, 06:27:38 AM
The scammer talks about other scammers!? Amazing.
May 16, 2020, 06:44:22 PM
Also in February he falsely claimed that he owned the full rights to Bitcoin registry, and no one had rights change the protocol using the underlying database without his permission which is absurd as he owns no rights over the bitcoins registry.
The real Satoshi could have rights over the database in the U.K. or Europe from a cursory reading of this. I had never considered that. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/3A 
May 13, 2020, 01:08:57 AM
Just a reminder that Faketoshi claimed to have a plan on crashing bitcoin's price this halving lmao. 🤡
Screenshot courtesy of Marianne Jett: https://twitter.com/tweetybirdbrain/status/1133128376347181056?lang=en
Screenshot courtesy of Marianne Jett: https://twitter.com/tweetybirdbrain/status/1133128376347181056?lang=en
May 13, 2020, 12:37:55 AM
It must be very frustrating for Ira Kleiman and his lawyers and whoever funded the case, because they obviously believe that Wright and Dave Kleiman owned a lot of bitcoin. Now they can never have any hope of getting them because they can't even identify them.
you got it allll wrong
CSW and dave NEVER owned btc. ira knows this. whats really going on is CSW sought ira out many years ago to actually bring him into the scam... to play a game of waste courts time. i think IRA know its all a scam but is being paid to keep the ruse alive for as long as possible so that CSW can excape the statute of limitations on the australian tax scam he done.
May 13, 2020, 12:11:21 AM
Craig is the biggest liar and fraudster in the modern crypto industry. And it is unlikely that he will be able to change the opinion of the crypto community about him.
That's for sure. He will never convince the crypto community. In fact, he hates the crypto community.@irukandji you won’t believe it but many people yet fall for the trap thinking that he’s the real Satoshi, but I believe now days the number or those people would be very low thanks to the continuous efforts of the community. Also in February he falsely claimed that he owned the full rights to Bitcoin registry, and no one had rights change the protocol using the underlying database without his permission which is absurd as he owns no rights over the bitcoins registry.
Quote
“As the sole creator of Bitcoin, I own full rights to the Bitcoin registry,” Wright asserted. “People can fork my software and make alternative versions. But, they have no rights to change the protocol using the underlying database.” Wright continued:
Quote
Wright says he’s taking action and “control” over his system. “Those involved with the copied systems that are passing themselves off as Bitcoin, namely BTC or Corecoin and BCH or Bcash, are hereby put on notice — Please trust me when I say that I’m far nicer before the lawyers get involved,” Wright stated.
Source:
https://news.bitcoin.com/craig-wrights-100b-theft-btc-bch-database/
May 12, 2020, 10:11:37 PM
Craig is the biggest liar and fraudster in the modern crypto industry. And it is unlikely that he will be able to change the opinion of the crypto community about him.
That's for sure. He will never convince the crypto community. In fact, he hates the crypto community. May 10, 2020, 09:44:55 PM
It must be very frustrating for Ira Kleiman and his lawyers and whoever funded the case, because they obviously believe that Wright and Dave Kleiman owned a lot of bitcoin. Now they can never have any hope of getting them because they can't even identify them.
Of course I doubt Wright can access all those bitcoin, but since the other side does they must be very disappointed.
Of course I doubt Wright can access all those bitcoin, but since the other side does they must be very disappointed.
May 09, 2020, 09:48:48 PM
The latest published expert testimony in the Wright court case are amazing.
Wright submitted several lists of the Bitcoin he claims to own to the court.
The first was claimed to be a strict over-estimate, submitted because wright claimed that he couldn't determine what coins were his until they were submitted by a bonded courier. This first list was generated by his employ using a list of supposed characteristics of Satoshi's mining provided by Wright (but really plagiarized from old research by bitcoiner that linked together that may have been mined by a single large miner early in Bitcoin's life). The code they used to generate this list had an embarrassing bug and as a result it also included a bunch of other coins matching a complicated additional pattern in addition to the pattern Wright specified. Since this list was supposed to be a conservative list, the fact that the bug added some more didn't seem to be a big deal, but it later became a smoking gun.
The other lists were provided months later and wright claimed they were generated years ago (e.g. 2011) and in delivered recently by the mysterious bonded courier. These new lists were strict subsets of the first list: Unsurprising because he'd swore before the court that the first list was a superset-- that all the blocks he mined matched that pattern. However, the way they were subsets was extremely revealing.
In particular, these new lists included most of the coins that were only on the first list due to the bug! One of the criteria used to generate the first list was that none of the coins had been spent, to match wright's story about his temporary lack of possession of the keys keeping him from spending them--- but they apparently looked only at the BSV blockchain to generate their lists and included some spent ones, and also some were just spent after their filings-- so as a result wright's list included coins that were spend when he swore he had no access.
Finally, the "bonded courier" excluded enough of the first list to bring the total number of coins down to match Wright's earlier provably forged "tulip trust" documents ... but it did so mostly by leaving out coins in two big blocks of _consecutive txids_. TXID's are sha256 hashes, so they're close to uniformly random. The only way to get big gaps in a list of your txids is if you specifically filter out ranges by rejecting transactions.
In other words, Wright's court submitted address list which he claims is an authentic document from 2011/2012 was almost certainly generated by a process similar to:
1. In 2019, directing his employee to use a list of criteria identifying an early miner's blocks which Wright copied out of a webpage. The employee messed this task up, but their mistake makes any data derived from this list without correcting the bug extremely identifiable.
2. Taking that list removing some coins that had been spent (either on BSV or after the first list was created), but ... unable to predict coins that would be spent later, he failed to remove those.
3. With it sorted by txid, he removed two bug chunks of consecutive transactions to bring the total down to match his earlier claims.
4. Fraudulently submitting this list to the court as an authentic document written years ago when it couldn't have been because it was clearly derived from a list created by recently written buggy software.
The really fun part is that by the time Wright's employee testified before the court they knew about the bug in their initial list. Wright's inclusion of these bug coins in the list he provided the courts much later must either be due to another instance of gross incompetence in his forgeries or because he'd already shared a bug-list-derrived-list with someone else (his lawyers or one of his victims) prior to learning about the bug.
Wright submitted several lists of the Bitcoin he claims to own to the court.
The first was claimed to be a strict over-estimate, submitted because wright claimed that he couldn't determine what coins were his until they were submitted by a bonded courier. This first list was generated by his employ using a list of supposed characteristics of Satoshi's mining provided by Wright (but really plagiarized from old research by bitcoiner that linked together that may have been mined by a single large miner early in Bitcoin's life). The code they used to generate this list had an embarrassing bug and as a result it also included a bunch of other coins matching a complicated additional pattern in addition to the pattern Wright specified. Since this list was supposed to be a conservative list, the fact that the bug added some more didn't seem to be a big deal, but it later became a smoking gun.
The other lists were provided months later and wright claimed they were generated years ago (e.g. 2011) and in delivered recently by the mysterious bonded courier. These new lists were strict subsets of the first list: Unsurprising because he'd swore before the court that the first list was a superset-- that all the blocks he mined matched that pattern. However, the way they were subsets was extremely revealing.
In particular, these new lists included most of the coins that were only on the first list due to the bug! One of the criteria used to generate the first list was that none of the coins had been spent, to match wright's story about his temporary lack of possession of the keys keeping him from spending them--- but they apparently looked only at the BSV blockchain to generate their lists and included some spent ones, and also some were just spent after their filings-- so as a result wright's list included coins that were spend when he swore he had no access.
Finally, the "bonded courier" excluded enough of the first list to bring the total number of coins down to match Wright's earlier provably forged "tulip trust" documents ... but it did so mostly by leaving out coins in two big blocks of _consecutive txids_. TXID's are sha256 hashes, so they're close to uniformly random. The only way to get big gaps in a list of your txids is if you specifically filter out ranges by rejecting transactions.
In other words, Wright's court submitted address list which he claims is an authentic document from 2011/2012 was almost certainly generated by a process similar to:
1. In 2019, directing his employee to use a list of criteria identifying an early miner's blocks which Wright copied out of a webpage. The employee messed this task up, but their mistake makes any data derived from this list without correcting the bug extremely identifiable.
2. Taking that list removing some coins that had been spent (either on BSV or after the first list was created), but ... unable to predict coins that would be spent later, he failed to remove those.
3. With it sorted by txid, he removed two bug chunks of consecutive transactions to bring the total down to match his earlier claims.
4. Fraudulently submitting this list to the court as an authentic document written years ago when it couldn't have been because it was clearly derived from a list created by recently written buggy software.
The really fun part is that by the time Wright's employee testified before the court they knew about the bug in their initial list. Wright's inclusion of these bug coins in the list he provided the courts much later must either be due to another instance of gross incompetence in his forgeries or because he'd already shared a bug-list-derrived-list with someone else (his lawyers or one of his victims) prior to learning about the bug.
Jump to: