SCAM: Bitcoin SV (BSV) - fake team member and plagiarized white paper - page 53.

Hueristic

legendary

Activity: 3836

Merit: 4969

Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it

Quote from: gentlemand on August 30, 2019, 10:12:19 AM

I find the people mindlessly defending him no matter what is screaming in their face extremely strange.

You can easily believe in bigger blocks and at the same time believe Craigy is a lying asshole. Larger block fans are either silent on this or convinced he's The One.

Why is that?

Logical fallacy's.

Iamtutut

full member

Activity: 1120

Merit: 131

Quote from: cryptodevil on August 30, 2019, 06:18:21 AM

Quote from: hv_ on August 30, 2019, 05:52:04 AM

You would'nt ask such Thing from Satoshi, would you?

I think you'll find that is exactly what this community would, and does, ask of anyone asserting themselves to be Satoshi, that they sign a message with one of his keys. While that doesn't necessarily prove without doubt that such a person is Satoshi it would transfer the burden of proof to us to then show that they are not the original owner of the key they signed with.

So, seeing as Craig has not provided such cryptographic proof, what evidence do you have which would even serve to show he was aware of Bitcoin prior to 2013?

I'll answer that for you. You have zero evidence because there is no evidence. You are merely choosing to believe what you want to believe and that is solely derived from Craig, himself, making claims without proof.

Believing in claims that lack any evidence whatsoever is otherwise known as 'blind faith' and is not a healthy or reliable way to define the world around you.

Wright: "I'm a lawyer"
Satoshi "I'm not a lawyer and I can't possibly answer"

Wright couldn't code at all in 2018, he made a joke of himself by copy / pasting a "hello world" from sourceforge while pretending to have written it. Evidence is here: https://twitter.com/alistairmilne/status/1033459254425014272
Satoshi, well it's Satoshi, knows his stuff around code.

Iamtutut

full member

Activity: 1120

Merit: 131

Quote from: hv_ on August 30, 2019, 02:30:26 AM

Quote from: Iamtutut on August 30, 2019, 02:28:41 AM

Rats are leaving the sinking BSV boat.

Announcement from Kevin Pham (https://twitter.com/_Kevin_Pham/status/1167234860198445056)

"I have announcement:

I'm officially retiring from being a Bitcoin Civil War general.

I've been fighting, arguing, & trolling for almost three years now and I'm tired.

I just want to be a normal person again.

I'm going to return to my phamily & till my crops.

I bid you adieu."

Then precises

"I'm not going anywhere, I just retired from trolling and fighting.

My focus now is on using BSV technology to build products that help people."

After the Florida Barbecue Party, he can't shill and promote Bitcoin Shit Version anymore.

Wow - what a victory. Or did you get it as one ?

Lol

Because you seem to have eyes and / or reading issues, I've replied to your Bullshit of the two morons talking about a Court decision they are too dumb to understand.

Quote from: Iamtutut on August 30, 2019, 02:24:11 AM

I post this also here (sorry for double posting) because BSV shills are keeping on lying about the august 27th ruling in the Kleiman vs Wright case.

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: hv_ on August 29, 2019, 02:18:21 PM

If some of the little baby trolls herein would have some balls, they could come up with their pricky faces
And try to talk their "facts" in same manner as these decent ppl are capable of.

So show us ur counter facts (lol) pls

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoincashSV/comments/cx0vmh/kleiman_vs_craig_wright_getting_the_facts/

Usual lies from a BSV shill.

The Court ordered Wright to reveal his holdings, he refused to. Civil contempt of Court, Judge decides to use article 37B for proceeding.

Kleiman Estate Entitled to 500K coins of any Bitcoin fork, includes BCH and BSV.

Judge did not recommend, it is an ORDER
-> "WHEREFORE, it is ordered that:1.The Motion to Compel [DE 210] is GRANTED..."
-> "Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(i), the Court deems the following facts to be established for purposes of this action:"
-> "DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers this 27thday of August, 2019, at West Palm Beach in the Southern District of Florida."

BSV shills can't read.

I'm still waiting for BSV shills arguments, I'm in my ROLFCopter.

Anyone can read the decision here: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536.277.0.pdf

I'm still waiting for your knowledgeable reply.

gentlemand

legendary

Activity: 2590

Merit: 3015

Welt Am Draht

I find the people mindlessly defending him no matter what is screaming in their face extremely strange.

You can easily believe in bigger blocks and at the same time believe Craigy is a lying asshole. Larger block fans are either silent on this or convinced he's The One.

Why is that?

cryptodevil

legendary

Activity: 2240

Merit: 1254

Thread-puller extraordinaire

Quote from: hv_ on August 30, 2019, 09:46:28 AM

There is no 'evidence' even if anyone signs with such old keys (it just proves, one was just able to sign - nothing else)

If you have a key it serves to show you at least might be its original owner but, more importantly, it results in the burden of proof being transferred to others to prove that you are not.

Without having a key you are no different to anybody else who does not have a key, meaning the burden of proof is on you to show you were its original owner.

Craig Wright is a proven liar who has repeatedly perjured himself and presented multiple forgeries as supposed proofs which have been exposed as such. That you still want to believe his word in the face of the facts showing him to be a liar and a fraud, is beyond absurd.

Phinnaeus Gage

legendary

Activity: 1918

Merit: 1570

Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending

Quote from: hv_ on August 30, 2019, 09:46:28 AM

Quote from: cryptodevil on August 30, 2019, 06:18:21 AM

Quote from: hv_ on August 30, 2019, 05:52:04 AM

You would'nt ask such Thing from Satoshi, would you?

I think you'll find that is exactly what this community would, and does, ask of anyone asserting themselves to be Satoshi, that they sign a message with one of his keys. While that doesn't necessarily prove without doubt that such a person is Satoshi it would transfer the burden of proof to us to then show that they are not the original owner of the key they signed with.

So, seeing as Craig has not provided such cryptographic proof, what evidence do you have which would even serve to show he was aware of Bitcoin prior to 2013?

I'll answer that for you. You have zero evidence because there is no evidence. You are merely choosing to believe what you want to believe and that is solely derived from Craig, himself, making claims without proof.

Believing in claims that lack any evidence whatsoever is otherwise known as 'blind faith' and is not a healthy or reliable way to define the world around you.

There is no 'evidence' even if anyone signs with such old keys (it just proves, one was just able to sign - nothing else) - also not any proof for the 'community' where it appears that there are very different ones with different views and backgrounds & understandings to CONCLUDE who might be Satoshi and who not - guess we cannot fix that.

"The keys may be old but they still work."

hv_

legendary

Activity: 2534

Merit: 1055

Clean Code and Scale

Quote from: cryptodevil on August 30, 2019, 06:18:21 AM

Quote from: hv_ on August 30, 2019, 05:52:04 AM

You would'nt ask such Thing from Satoshi, would you?

I think you'll find that is exactly what this community would, and does, ask of anyone asserting themselves to be Satoshi, that they sign a message with one of his keys. While that doesn't necessarily prove without doubt that such a person is Satoshi it would transfer the burden of proof to us to then show that they are not the original owner of the key they signed with.

So, seeing as Craig has not provided such cryptographic proof, what evidence do you have which would even serve to show he was aware of Bitcoin prior to 2013?

I'll answer that for you. You have zero evidence because there is no evidence. You are merely choosing to believe what you want to believe and that is solely derived from Craig, himself, making claims without proof.

Believing in claims that lack any evidence whatsoever is otherwise known as 'blind faith' and is not a healthy or reliable way to define the world around you.

There is no 'evidence' even if anyone signs with such old keys (it just proves, one was just able to sign - nothing else) - also not any proof for the 'community' where it appears that there are very different ones with different views and backgrounds & understandings to CONCLUDE who might be Satoshi and who not - guess we cannot fix that.

cryptodevil

legendary

Activity: 2240

Merit: 1254

Thread-puller extraordinaire

Quote from: hv_ on August 30, 2019, 05:52:04 AM

You would'nt ask such Thing from Satoshi, would you?

I think you'll find that is exactly what this community would, and does, ask of anyone asserting themselves to be Satoshi, that they sign a message with one of his keys. While that doesn't necessarily prove without doubt that such a person is Satoshi it would transfer the burden of proof to us to then show that they are not the original owner of the key they signed with.

So, seeing as Craig has not provided such cryptographic proof, what evidence do you have which would even serve to show he was aware of Bitcoin prior to 2013?

I'll answer that for you. You have zero evidence because there is no evidence. You are merely choosing to believe what you want to believe and that is solely derived from Craig, himself, making claims without proof.

Believing in claims that lack any evidence whatsoever is otherwise known as 'blind faith' and is not a healthy or reliable way to define the world around you.

hv_

legendary

Activity: 2534

Merit: 1055

Clean Code and Scale

Quote from: cryptodevil on August 30, 2019, 04:50:09 AM

Quote from: cryptodevil on August 29, 2019, 08:58:40 AM

Quote from: hv_ on August 29, 2019, 08:53:59 AM

and what only CSW is able to Report from the beginnings

I've not seen any evidence that CSW was even aware of Bitcoin prior to 2013. Do you have any that wasn't supplied (or 'leaked') by CSW himself?

I take it that's a no, hv_?

CSW has a history of 'assignment' of value to bitcoins he claims to own which are then proven to be other people's addresses. He has used this 'assignment of value' to claim rebates for cash from the ATO and, as seen in the Kleiman case, to pretend he owns addresses which are known to belong to Satoshi, none of which he has ever proven beyond his own assertion.

So I ask you again, what evidence do you have that CSW even held bitcoin prior to 2013, let alone was its creator?

You would'nt ask such Thing from Satoshi, would you?

So - nobody really knows that, except a few or only one guy.

I just look who acts / says / writes what and how(!). That's all a decent guy (with a big blocker brain

) could do here out in the eFields.

Come up with some proper proof another guy fits better, and no - its neither Hal nor Nick...

cryptodevil

legendary

Activity: 2240

Merit: 1254

Thread-puller extraordinaire

Quote from: cryptodevil on August 29, 2019, 08:58:40 AM

Quote from: hv_ on August 29, 2019, 08:53:59 AM

and what only CSW is able to Report from the beginnings

I've not seen any evidence that CSW was even aware of Bitcoin prior to 2013. Do you have any that wasn't supplied (or 'leaked') by CSW himself?

I take it that's a no, hv_?

CSW has a history of 'assignment' of value to bitcoins he claims to own which are then proven to be other people's addresses. He has used this 'assignment of value' to claim rebates for cash from the ATO and, as seen in the Kleiman case, to pretend he owns addresses which are known to belong to Satoshi, none of which he has ever proven beyond his own assertion.

So I ask you again, what evidence do you have that CSW even held bitcoin prior to 2013, let alone was its creator?

hv_

legendary

Activity: 2534

Merit: 1055

Clean Code and Scale

Quote from: Iamtutut on August 30, 2019, 02:28:41 AM

Rats are leaving the sinking BSV boat.

Announcement from Kevin Pham (https://twitter.com/_Kevin_Pham/status/1167234860198445056)

"I have announcement:

I'm officially retiring from being a Bitcoin Civil War general.

I've been fighting, arguing, & trolling for almost three years now and I'm tired.

I just want to be a normal person again.

I'm going to return to my phamily & till my crops.

I bid you adieu."

Then precises

"I'm not going anywhere, I just retired from trolling and fighting.

My focus now is on using BSV technology to build products that help people."

After the Florida Barbecue Party, he can't shill and promote Bitcoin Shit Version anymore.

Wow - what a victory. Or did you get it as one ?

Lol

Iamtutut

full member

Activity: 1120

Merit: 131

Rats are leaving the sinking BSV boat.

Announcement from Kevin Pham (https://twitter.com/_Kevin_Pham/status/1167234860198445056)

"I have announcement:

I'm officially retiring from being a Bitcoin Civil War general.

I've been fighting, arguing, & trolling for almost three years now and I'm tired.

I just want to be a normal person again.

I'm going to return to my phamily & till my crops.

I bid you adieu."

Then precises

"I'm not going anywhere, I just retired from trolling and fighting.

My focus now is on using BSV technology to build products that help people."

After the Florida Barbecue Party, he can't shill and promote Bitcoin Shit Version anymore.

Iamtutut

full member

Activity: 1120

Merit: 131

I post this also here (sorry for double posting) because BSV shills are keeping on lying about the august 27th ruling in the Kleiman vs Wright case.

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: hv_ on August 29, 2019, 02:18:21 PM

If some of the little baby trolls herein would have some balls, they could come up with their pricky faces
And try to talk their "facts" in same manner as these decent ppl are capable of.

So show us ur counter facts (lol) pls

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoincashSV/comments/cx0vmh/kleiman_vs_craig_wright_getting_the_facts/

Usual lies from a BSV shill.

The Court ordered Wright to reveal his holdings, he refused to. Civil contempt of Court, Judge decides to use article 37B for proceeding.

Kleiman Estate Entitled to 500K coins of any Bitcoin fork, includes BCH and BSV.

Judge did not recommend, it is an ORDER
-> "WHEREFORE, it is ordered that:1.The Motion to Compel [DE 210] is GRANTED..."
-> "Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(i), the Court deems the following facts to be established for purposes of this action:"
-> "DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers this 27thday of August, 2019, at West Palm Beach in the Southern District of Florida."

BSV shills can't read.

I'm still waiting for BSV shills arguments, I'm in my ROLFCopter.

Anyone can read the decision here: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536.277.0.pdf

Phinnaeus Gage

legendary

Activity: 1918

Merit: 1570

Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending

Quote from: TheNewAnon135246 on August 29, 2019, 11:30:33 AM

Quote from: alevlaslo on August 29, 2019, 11:11:28 AM

is there a million bitcoins at Wright - is unknown, but the fact that they were with he - 100%

he either lost his keys or came up with the illusion of Fund to protect himself from burglars

Show me irrefutable evidence that Craig owned 1,000,000 BTC at some point in time and I'll pay you $10,000.

Let's up the ante, eh? From the desk of What's Wright is Wright, I'm officially pulling a [Matthew Neal] Wright (reference below the fold), namely I'll pay anyone ... wait for it ... $1,000,000 ($1M) if you show me irrefutable evidence that Craig Steven Wright owned ~1M BTC at some point in time. If proven and I don't pay up, theymos has my permission to ban me and my multiple sock pockets from this BBS, whereupon I'll be forever chastised from the crypto community.

Ref.: I made a huge bet with money I would never have had to give away if I lost to intentionally prove a point about people's insane amount of trust to strangers (no escrow? millions of dollars?), that Pirate was not a scammer (which he is) and continued to increase that amount for the pure comedy of it. What started as a horrible prank soon ended up a sad display of people's greed and desperation. I have since realized that almost any prank is acceptable, except ones that involve people's money. Despite the numerous individuals pleading for me not to pay those who would not have paid if they lost, I had decided to settle with all of the betters anyway and as of writing this have settled with almost all of them, the rest being paid slowly as I am able to.

Related link: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/matthew-neal-wright-you-have-been-reported-to-the-sec-and-korean-authorities-107543.

Iamtutut

full member

Activity: 1120

Merit: 131

Quote from: nutildah on August 29, 2019, 01:10:23 PM

Quote

I could have tanked the market anytime in the last 10 years and ran away laughing. I didn’t.

Just like he write to Roger Ver that he would sink BCH (make it trade to zero for months) during their hash war.

Pahtological liar.

TheNewAnon135246

legendary

Activity: 2198

Merit: 1989

฿uy ฿itcoin

Really looking forward to seeing how this will unfold. Calvin is trying to do some damage control on Twitter and he's miserably failing.

nutildah

legendary

Activity: 3010

Merit: 8114

Quote from: TheNewAnon135246 on August 29, 2019, 12:37:56 PM

Craig cucked himself by contradicting his testimony in an interview, after the last hearing ended: https://twitter.com/Mike__V_/status/1166970261020848128

When I read the Modern Consensus story, I thought, oh this is just Craig being Craig, saying anything and sticking to the lie in full force. But at a second glance, yes it appears he is completely contradicting what he said in court about not being able to touch the bitcoin.

Craig in court:

Quote

Q So the key to billions of dollars-worth of Bitcoin, you have no idea where the key to that exists?
A No, I have ideas of where it exists.

Craig in interview after court:

Quote

I could have tanked the market anytime in the last 10 years and ran away laughing. I didn’t.

TheNewAnon135246

legendary

Activity: 2198

Merit: 1989

฿uy ฿itcoin

Craig cucked himself by contradicting his testimony in an interview, after the last hearing ended: https://twitter.com/Mike__V_/status/1166970261020848128

cryptodevil

legendary

Activity: 2240

Merit: 1254

Thread-puller extraordinaire

Quote from: alevlaslo on August 29, 2019, 11:11:28 AM

is there a million bitcoins at Wright - is unknown, but the fact that they were with he - 100%

he either lost his keys or came up with the illusion of Fund to protect himself from burglars

LOL, sure, he owns a million bitcoins but decides to buy 17 for over twenty grand at its peak during the MtGox 'Willy Bot Bubble' of November 2013

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hx3q9/according_to_the_mtgox_leaks_from_early_2014_our/

Quote

submitted 8 hours ago * by apoefjmqdsfls

As /u/winlifeat posted here, Craig was user 'e62d5e53-0dbc-44be-9591-725cd55ca9dd' at the Mtgox exchange. With this identifier, it's possible to look up his trades in the 2014 leak. I posted the raw data in this pastebin, you can import it into spreadsheet software like Excel to play with it yourself.

He started trading at 22/04/2013, this is just after the crash of the April 2013 bubble (or the 'Cyprus bubble'). He lost interest pretty quickly, because activity stopped 27/04, only to come back 25/11 around the peak of the last bitcoin bubble. His average price is actually $120 and he bought around 50 bitcoins, but his last buy was 17 bitcoins at around $1200. He ends up with a balance of just under 15 bitcoins when mtgox shuts down, so he probably lost another few bitcoins with trading. (The trade data in the leak stops at November 2013)

TheNewAnon135246

legendary

Activity: 2198

Merit: 1989

฿uy ฿itcoin

Quote from: alevlaslo on August 29, 2019, 11:11:28 AM

is there a million bitcoins at Wright - is unknown, but the fact that they were with he - 100%

he either lost his keys or came up with the illusion of Fund to protect himself from burglars

Show me irrefutable evidence that Craig owned 1,000,000 BTC at some point in time and I'll pay you $10,000.

Topic: SCAM: Bitcoin SV (BSV) - fake team member and plagiarized white paper - page 53. (Read 25829 times)