Topic: Updates from the COPA v Craig Wright trial - page 11. (Read 3835 times)

I don't think that Charles Sturt University was also a part of the conspiracy to let a guy who can't even code hello world be a lecturer of them on a class about supercomputers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybvQ1YwcF-0&list=PLGB2uErtks4o-fJdoe1ZX3HXl_A69Sbsv

I am not a uncivilised person, so I use word like of those politicians.  I am not a a fan of Craig Wright neither I hate him. I am here in this forum acting as a neutral person to gather information only.  

There are many instance where he lacks technical knowledge though. For example, proving he can code by copy-paste hello world[1]. And in his settlements offer, he even mistook name of full node software as name of crypotcurrency[2].


That's weird. I digged a bit and it's true until recently Meta was part of their platinum member[3]. But i disagree about your speculation since when COPA it's created, it state goal about shared patent for defensive purpose[4].

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20181110091329/https://toshitimes.com/craig-wright-proves-he-can-code-by-copy-pasting-hello-world-program/
[2] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63565854
[3] https://web.archive.org/web/20231111171804/https://www.opencrypto.org/members/
[4] https://www.linux.com/news/getting-to-know-the-cryptocurrency-open-patent-alliance-copa/

@OP i think that you too biased to listen what he says . That's why you and others laughing with what he says . That's the reason most of the community thinks he's an incompetent liar . He might be a liar but he's not incompetent . As i said in an earlier post he is one of the people with the deeper knowledge about bitcoin . But no one wants  to hear what he says . Try to be unbiased and you will understand that he has right in many spots .
As you know his opponents ( AVP , Lopp etc ) were saying that he doesn't even have diplomas . Does he give you that impression ? Do you think he is/was a forensics expert? Do you think he lies about his contribution of CHFI book written in 2007 ? Did the lawyer question his diplomas ? Has he debunk the blacknet project that AVP says is imaginary ?
What i mean is that the guy is not someone incompetent as presented by his enemies . He is a knowledgeable guy in many fields . Is he a liar ? Well , that's what courts are for .

I agree that some times he moves in muddy waters , but that doesn't necessarily means he's lying . My knowledge is limited and that's why i wait for the outcome of the trial . There are some points though that he questions the expertise of the experts . Like how do you explain the part that copa lawyer says that whitepaper was written in open office and calls him a liar when he says it was written in latex while if you do a search for the term "transactions" in the online pdf version the word is highlighted also in pictures ? From what i know you can't do that with an image . That means copa's expert has made a mistake that whitepaper isn't written in latex . And if an expert has made such a serious error doesn't that question his expertise ? If you have any other explanation for this kindly let me know . Maybe i get it wrong .

@LeezHamilton You can send an email to have live access through a unique link , broadcasting isn't allowed , you will find the necessary info here https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/crypto-open-patient-alliance-v-dr-craig-steven-wright-and-dr-wright-v-various/

Another thing i'd like to point is that meta/facebook was a part of copa . Did that sound right for you ? Was zuck/facebook interested for the good of bitcoin ? Jack/ex twitter too ? These two guys are the real form of "big brother" of the internet and suddenly decided to "help" bitcoin , hooray . At least zuck decided to move back 1 year before his platinum membership expires and leave copa . Strange coincidence .

i think the forensics of people that manufactured things like notepad saying that their product was not even available pre 2012 is proof even a judge can understand
other software engineers have said how certain fonts and certain software and cryptography versions were not around in the dates CSW suggests. even a judge can understand this.

the judge doesnt need to know the minutia of cryptography. but can find easy understanding if certain cryptographic versions/features did not exist to be used before they were invented

judges in ALL cases have to base it on the merit of evidence provided. which if shown as fraudulent then get thrown out as evidence
they dont assume emotions or personality or peoples thoughts as things to justify fraudulent documents should be treated as fact

(its why sexual crimes dont get convictions if there is no factual evidence(DNA/video/witness). they cant just base crimes on someones mental state)

previous cases CSW relied on "witnesses" (paid for buddies). but this case seems to want real original documents.. which CSW lacks

I think, if your legal team starts proceedings with explanations of their clients mental conditions, then you should understand the peculiar position that they are in.

Two of his Autism symptoms does make sense, namely taking longer to understand that he is not Satoshi Nakamoto and also thinking and doing the same thing over and over again. ( I know many people who has autism and I understand their struggles... and I see none of that in him)  Do they have medical proof of his diagnosis?

I just hope the Judge understand the technical aspects of the evidence and see right through all his lies.  

UK courts dont like camera/media in court.
also you have not researched CSW you just sound like a fan that has fallen for his BS already..  that wants him to be satoshi rather than realise that he never was
he is not smart. many people have revealed he uses assistants to ghost write his papers and 400 patents and crap he declares as is own work 2015+
he was not even buying bitcoin until 2013. and not involved before it. so try to learn he is a scammer and stop sounding like a fan

your words of "gentle and wise" and "looks too smart" shows you are an idiot fangirl of him. thus you fit into a new category of insane idiot

Well he look like too smart.


Is there a livestream Link of COPA trial  ?

Why some one cannot broadcast ?

What is the news today ?

I don't need hammer, I can pinpoint questions that
he won't be able to answer. well he is playing a good drama.
the news of Bitcoin is reaching to lots of people particularly the
Bankers and Politicians will know few thing about digital currency market.  


Hello franky1,

what do you exactly mean ?

woah.. i need to make a new category just for insane idiots..
just to have somewhere to put people like leezhamilton into

According to the Lord Grabiner statement,

His arguments include that he had a unique set of skills, knowledge and qualification to come up with bitcoin - and his opponents do not propose an alternative candidate for 'Satoshi'.

As the real Satoshi Nakamoto has not come forward to claim his Bitcoin stash and credential or may be a Nobel Prize on economic science, so Craig Wright is a good candidate. Lord Grabiner does not understand that the real Satoshi knows and own his Bitcoin stash. I am confused, why the COPA has not found the real Satoshi Nakamoto and request him to come to the Court to prove that Craig Wright is just a fraud or liar or something else. If the real Satoshi stand up and gives his evidence then the matter could be solved  without further wasting court's time.

The twist is, if whether this Australian man is '' the real Craig Steven Wright ? '' who is gentle and wise, but  I think he is just a look alike of the real Craig Steven Wright the computer hacker, who was spotted by the real Satoshi Nakamoto in IRC Channel back in 7th May 2007. It is the same story to the MT. Gox real CEO, Mark Karpeles,  who went to a Japanese Island back in the year 2013 for a holiday but never returned to Tokyo. So the MT. Gox few officials found a look alike of the real Mark Karpeles and hired him to assumed the CEO position of the MT. Gox. The real Mark Karpeles was a honest geek but the fake Mark Karpeles is dishonest who really mismanaged the MT. Gox fund. Now if the real Craig Wright come forward ad tell the court that man COPA is suing is not the real Craig Wright, who has disappeared after he went for a holiday in Hawaii. Then the case   could be dismissed. Other wise the real Satoshi Nakamoto has to come forward either to debunk CSW claims or bail him out.

But if this whole  case has been setup and orchestrated by Jack Dorsey, COPA team and Craig Wright together mutually just to bank on Satoshi's Stash of Bitcoin then there is another story. Journalists must dig out the truth.  

gotta laugh how CSW is trying to act like bitcoin was some "business" thing from 2007 ("minutes of meeting")
everyman and his dog can see real satoshi was a solo guy patchworking idea's together from the cypherpunks idea's of digital money as a hobby that grew into an invention. and not some business product with employees

the real satoshi putting it into MIT open licence. yet CSW trying to corporate patent/licence it is another bit of comedy

overall i think the just will just say "bitcoin was put under MIT open licence, so CSW can just go F**K himself" (**= uc/or, you choose)
as for the forgeries.. well CSW is digging himself a hole and his sponsors seem to not want to bail him out when he falls this time, literally this could be his latch ditch effort(unless he finds new sponsors to scam money out of)

Day three.

More of the same from the second half of the day, but today was the first time I've seen Craig get visibly flustered. He'd presented a notepad as evidence that pre-dated the release of bitcoin allegedly containing the minutes of a meeting where they discussed the things relating to the creation of bitcoin in 2007. The only issue was the manufacturer of the notepad had confirmed that particular item wasn't even released until 2012  . Craig also irrelevantly boasted about his 4000 patents. Maybe one of them is a time machine he used to collect the notepad from the future and bring it back to 2007. Not only does Craig try - and fail - to forge digital documents but now physical ones are proven as nonsense. COPA's lawyer asked Craig why he seems to be more knowledgeable than someone who actually works for the manufacturer. He waffled on about some nonsense. Caught out again.


See. This is how Coingeek spin the narrative. Craig is sitting there getting called a liar after every piece of info presented to him. He's not winning here; he's getting embarrassed continually.


Well he owes a pretty good explanation for his lies. Pretty much everyone in the crypto community would be instantly silenced by a signing. He tried to do this behind the scenes to hoodwink Gavin so I'm not sure why he can't do it for everyone else. Well, we do know, because he can't do it and his excuse after that was the bonded courier and then that he stamped on the hard drives in a rage. One excuse after the other to cover lies built upon more lies.


Then at least prove possession. If Satoshi came back and signed the genesis block would you not believe that? This is all we require. I would be instantly silenced if Craig could sign anything belonging to Satoshi. What Craig does it pure distraction and misdirection with nonsense analogies. He says things like house keys don't mean you own the house, the deeds do, and then hands you a bad photocopy of a forged deed he's edited to have his name on it and go see, I own your house. People laugh at this nonsense then he says well I'll try to prove it in court and doesn't prove anything just has more forgeries to try claim he does actually own your house in a poor attempt to try fraudulently steal it from you. He doesn't own anything.
 

Well, the documents have already been accepted as forgeries by all parties involved including Craig's own witnesses and the court process is for Craig to provide his excuses/reasoning to try dispute that and he's not doing a good job so far. He hasn't said anything that is a viable excuse.



https://twitter.com/CryptoDevil/status/1755215312851537938


I'm living in the real world. Craig is living in a fantasy land where he thinks he created bitcoin and here's some nonsense documents to prove it. You don't prove you invented bitcoin with forged documents. You know how to prove it, but when you're not Satoshi you're going to have to invent a fantasy world to live in.


Well yeah, everyone would love that, but the he's only sat in court right now because fake documents are the only cards he has in his deck. If Craig could sign he would have done it years ago, but it's literally impossible for him to do so s he has to resort to fakery.

You'd have to be delusional to think that was an "early victory" for the con-man.  I would suggest that you find a new source for your "articles" (in the loosest possible sense of the word), but I suspect your choices are deliberate at this point.  It seems some people are determined to support this crook until the bitter end.

---

I can't personally think of anything more embarrassing than being a self-professed BSV supporter, so I'll find it difficult to top that. 

Anyone can claim , but only one in each case can prove it . That's the point we are now , proving in court . Either he is or he goes to jail for perjury and other things . Isn't that great ?


The laws of mathematics say that when you have 4 aces there are 1 in 165 million chances to lose . But you know , s**ts happen some times .
Being pro bsv doesn't mean i follow craig blindly . In fact i was pro increasing blocksize before craig ( same as Back , Lopp and others ) . So , don't try to find things when there aren't any . Don't embarrass yourself please .

Does he owe something to the community to do it the way community wants if he is satoshi ?


Not ownership , but possession . There is a huge difference in between .
If i steal your keys am i the owner of your coins ? Or am i a thief who illegally posses your coins ? And more importantly , if i steal your keys am i you ?
 
 
Well , from what i see in the court things might not be as how Arthur Van Pelt wants to be . We will see if judge decides these are forged . I guess he will know better than you and me .  
Nonsense , i laughed on that part . Are you living in the real world or at some fantasy island ? That's not how you prove identity .

And a question to the community , if somehow a miracle happens for craig and judge says that he is satoshi , what will be your reaction ?

Edit . I have to mention that i think he should sign from an early block , just do it after proving his identity the legal way and not the other way .

So far so good, the case has had its first hearing and as it is, the case has been adjourned till further notice as new evidences is expected to surface.
I don't see any reason for the case to even hold in the first place, but one fact is that the case would help enthusiast of BTC gain better insight into why and how the come about of BTC idea and the brains behind it.
I don't want to believe that Dr. Wright is Nakamoto Satoshi because it would sure dent the believe of many of us who have come to believe that Satoshi Nakamoto is just a pseudonym for the original founder of the popular and top cryptocurrency, Bitcoin.
 

They've adjourned for lunch now and will be back at 2. Nothing really exciting happened so far. COPA is presenting forgery after forgery and Craig either just disagrees or has some bullshit excuse and they move onto the next one.


The judge made them whittle it down to 25 documents I believe. You would think that it's easy but Craig just disagrees and half of the time either COPA's lawyer moves on or just calls him a liar (but in my lighter terms) and then they move onto the next forgery. Hopefully the judge is seeing through it all as he hasn't really said much so far and rarely gets involved but I would be surprised if he's buying any of it.


He's already been using this line and has said it's not him that publishes his blogs or papers etc but an assistant, college, student, ex wife, employee etc. He claimed today that he has a four year backlog of papers he's yet to publish (or more likely yet to forge haha). He's very cunning and conniving and confidently has at least some sort of excuse for everything no matter how ridiculous it may be.  


Well probably not now but it would be pretty hard to dispute if Craig signed the genesis block, Satoshi's known addresses or his PGP keys. It's moot point though because he can't do that. It's not very likely that someone could cryptographically prove he was Satoshi other than Satoshi himself unless we get to a point in the future where these things can be bruteforced or exploited by a supercomputer somehow.


That's Craig's convenient excuse. Sure, keys can be stolen but signing them at least proves he is in possession of them currently. If he was serious, he would just sign a message whilst also saying this is not proof or something. Satoshi expertly designed bitcoin this way so someone can prove ownership of their keys, but Craig seems to want to conveniently ignore this. If what Craig is saying is true then he would have designed bitcoin differently and maybe put in some sort of backdoor or allowance for court orders etc, but he didn't, because he's not Satoshi so has to merely rely on bullshit.  



The courts shouldn't be deciding. Craig can prove it to the entire crypto community in 5 minutes if he wanted to, but he can't. If he somehow unbelievably manages to hoodwink a court into saying he's Satoshi then that still wouldn't mean anything to me. An idiot could be convinced by the nonsense documents that he provides and that's the case with many BSV-ers. It's entirely possible that the courts will decide that you can't prove a negative even if it's likely that they find the documents are all forgeries and not outright proclaim he is or isn't Satoshi but just that the documents he provided hold no validity and what then? We're still meant to pretend he could quite possibly be Satoshi?  


If I claimed to be Satoshi would you assume I'm innocent unless a court decides? You should assume anyone who claims to be Satoshi is lying unless they can prove otherwise. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We have nothing from Craig other than his mountains of forged documents. If he's satoshi then let him prove it cryptographically, not just go here's a printout of an email alluding to I'm satoshi. It's nonsense.

The laws of mathematics have already proven him a liar.  If you're waiting for the laws of man to play catch-up, then most of us will assume it's because you aren't ready to accept that you were wrong and fell for a scam:


You aren't waiting because it's civilised, you're waiting because you got conned.

he is innocently just craig. and we have to presume innocent that he is just craig..
if he or others want to make claims of other things. well proof is needed.. until then he is just craig

dont think that someone can just make claims they are satoshi, god, jesus, mohamed, moses, superman and that we should innocently just trust and believe it as fact unless proven otherwise. its actually the other way round. if someone makes a claim of difference. they need to prove it.

i know we are in a weird era where a guy can just claim he is a women to perve into womens changing rooms. but thats where they need to declare in law and have proof of their change, rather than just their random unproven say so. (when it comes to declarations that affect others)
you can wear a superman costume, old robes or a dress in your own home. but if your claims affect others. expect others to question your claims to protect themselves

That's exactly the reason identity isn't proven the way community wants satoshi to come forward and introduce himself . Keys can be stolen , public identity can't be altered ( well , that doesn't apply to rainbow people ) .

That's what a large part of the community's opinion , i tend to have mine . If court decides he is not satoshi i will put him in my list of fraudsters . Till then he has the presumption of innocence , which i think is the most reasonable and civilised .

Would anyone who has ever read posts from Satoshi on this forum or private correspondence with any of the developers really think that CW is the real Satoshi even if he signed a message from any BTC address believed to belong to Satoshi? At some point, we have to accept that it may happen that someone will come into possession of the private keys of those addresses, which means that even a signed message cannot mean that someone is the original owner.

According to everything we know about Satoshi and CW, they are two completely different people in every sense. CW is nowhere near intelligent enough to play the role of Satoshi, and he shows that every day with his forged evidence - would someone who invented Bitcoin be so incompetent that he couldn't forge a single document in a way that leaves even the slightest doubt of authenticity?