I agree. Kleiman is an order of magnitude more plausible Satoshi than Craig Wright ever was or could be
It is indeed surprising that this angle has not been explore more than it has
Topic: Why so little talk of Dave Kleiman? - page 10. (Read 16530 times)
Apologies for the double posting and now the reposting of the following from the main CSW thread:
you're right! nothing.
http://www.jewishjournal.com/obituaries/article/obituaries13
so what does it mean? he is still alive?
EDIT: is there a official register of persons in the US which passed away?
Bruno, your help is much appreciated.
Thanks, bud. Yes, there is no David/Dave Kleiman who died fitting his description, for I've looked and looked.
David Kleiman owned W&K INFO DEFENSE RESEARCH LLC in 2011: http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=WKINFODEFENSERESEARCH%20L110000199040&aggregateId=flal-l11000019904-dce79b55-176a-4442-93a7-3c8896316aa2&searchTerm=w%26k%20info&listNameOrder=WKINFODEFENSERESEARCH%20L110000199040
Craig Steven Wright via T Uyen T Nguyen takes over (perhaps nefariously) W&K INFO DEFENSE RESEARCH LLC on 3/28/2014, three weeks later becoming Coin-exch Pty. Ltd.'s director as seen here: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08248988/filing-history
http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ConvertTiffToPDF?storagePath=COR%5C2014%5C0331%5C58356362.tif&documentNumber=L11000019904
Thanks, it seems a legit account.
Not even in the following page, where it seems are listed people passed away on 26 April.
EDIT: but I cannot find David Kleiman's name on the page 
www.jewishjournal.com/obituaries/article/obituaries12
www.jewishjournal.com/obituaries/article/obituaries12
Not even in the following page, where it seems are listed people passed away on 26 April.
you're right! nothing.
http://www.jewishjournal.com/obituaries/article/obituaries13
so what does it mean? he is still alive?
EDIT: is there a official register of persons in the US which passed away?
Bruno, your help is much appreciated.
Thanks, bud. Yes, there is no David/Dave Kleiman who died fitting his description, for I've looked and looked.
David Kleiman owned W&K INFO DEFENSE RESEARCH LLC in 2011: http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=WKINFODEFENSERESEARCH%20L110000199040&aggregateId=flal-l11000019904-dce79b55-176a-4442-93a7-3c8896316aa2&searchTerm=w%26k%20info&listNameOrder=WKINFODEFENSERESEARCH%20L110000199040
Craig Steven Wright via T Uyen T Nguyen takes over (perhaps nefariously) W&K INFO DEFENSE RESEARCH LLC on 3/28/2014, three weeks later becoming Coin-exch Pty. Ltd.'s director as seen here: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08248988/filing-history
http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ConvertTiffToPDF?storagePath=COR%5C2014%5C0331%5C58356362.tif&documentNumber=L11000019904
Shit, I've been working (again; in 12/15 first) on Dave for the past few hours not aware that this thread existed, so I'll repost the following here:
Now, something special for you conspiracy buffs: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Kimon&dir=prev&limit=500&target=Kimon
On May 25, 2006, Kimon, a coat-of-arms buff, deletes his profile profile page. 23 minutes later he creates the Dave Kleiman Wikipedia page. On May 1, 2013, Kimon updates Dave's page depicting his death on [April 26,] 2013: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dave_Kleiman&oldid=553053599
Kimon's site: http://web.archive.org/web/20090401193442/http://www.idtg.org/about/
http://www.amazon.com/Windows-System-Administration-Command-Scripts/dp/1597491055
Can it be verified, somehow, if this FB account is real?
I mean, this man is supposed to be 91-92 years old when that message was posted.
my source is this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w3ije/interesting_facts_about_david_kleimans_life/
Just now seen this after I did my own research: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w3ije/interesting_facts_about_david_kleimans_life/
The year of Dave's birth is incorrect. ALL sources depict 1967, thus making him 20 when you got soldier of the year.
I'll now read the beginning of this thread forward to see what I missed or may be able to add.
Now, something special for you conspiracy buffs: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Kimon&dir=prev&limit=500&target=Kimon
On May 25, 2006, Kimon, a coat-of-arms buff, deletes his profile profile page. 23 minutes later he creates the Dave Kleiman Wikipedia page. On May 1, 2013, Kimon updates Dave's page depicting his death on [April 26,] 2013: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dave_Kleiman&oldid=553053599
Kimon's site: http://web.archive.org/web/20090401193442/http://www.idtg.org/about/
http://www.amazon.com/Windows-System-Administration-Command-Scripts/dp/1597491055
Can it be verified, somehow, if this FB account is real?
I mean, this man is supposed to be 91-92 years old when that message was posted.
my source is this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w3ije/interesting_facts_about_david_kleimans_life/
Just now seen this after I did my own research: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w3ije/interesting_facts_about_david_kleimans_life/
The year of Dave's birth is incorrect. ALL sources depict 1967, thus making him 20 when you got soldier of the year.
Quote
Born in 1965 and adopted by Jewish parents: Louis and Regina Kleiman
Grew up in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
Served as an Army helicopter technician from 1986 to 1989 (age 21-24)
Named soldier of the year in 1987 by the secretary of the Army (age 22)
Served as a Palm Beach County Sheriff’s deputy and detective until rendered paraplegic by a 1995 off-duty motorcycle crash (age 30)
After rehab from the crash, using a wheelchair, worked in computer forensics.
Married and divorced twice but had no children
In his final years, complications from his injuries required that he have five or six additional surgeries and spend nearly three years in the hospital battling an MRSA bacterial infection
Came home physically weak, but refused living assistance
Died weeks later on April 26, 2013 (age 46) of a heart attack caused by the MRSA infection
Grew up in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
Served as an Army helicopter technician from 1986 to 1989 (age 21-24)
Named soldier of the year in 1987 by the secretary of the Army (age 22)
Served as a Palm Beach County Sheriff’s deputy and detective until rendered paraplegic by a 1995 off-duty motorcycle crash (age 30)
After rehab from the crash, using a wheelchair, worked in computer forensics.
Married and divorced twice but had no children
In his final years, complications from his injuries required that he have five or six additional surgeries and spend nearly three years in the hospital battling an MRSA bacterial infection
Came home physically weak, but refused living assistance
Died weeks later on April 26, 2013 (age 46) of a heart attack caused by the MRSA infection
I'll now read the beginning of this thread forward to see what I missed or may be able to add.
where does this 1.1 million figure come from other than Mr wright's imagination? plenty of people have stated they were mining away when others still think it was only satoshi.
ya but it could be satoshi managed to mine 1million coins before mining got out of hand.the contract is most likely a fake.
but where does it come from?
where does this 1.1 million figure come from other than Mr wright's imagination? plenty of people have stated they were mining away when others still think it was only satoshi.
ya but it could be satoshi managed to mine 1million coins before mining got out of hand.the contract is most likely a fake.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2644014-Tulip-Trust-Redacted.html
this document implies Craig Wright is Satoshi when it says
this document implies Craig Wright is Satoshi when it says
Quote
I acknowledge:
Dave Kleiman have received 1,100,111 Bitcoin from Craig Wright (of?Bagnoo,
NSW Australia).
Dave Kleiman have received 1,100,111 Bitcoin from Craig Wright (of?Bagnoo,
NSW Australia).
is this even legit?
when was this writen?
did they put the hash of this document on the blockchain somewhere?
it seems really fishy, why would Craig Wright give his bitcoin to a trust? what's the point?
where does this 1.1 million figure come from other than Mr wright's imagination? plenty of people have stated they were mining away when others still think it was only satoshi.
ya but it could be satoshi managed to mine 1million coins before mining got out of hand. 
where does this 1.1 million figure come from other than Mr wright's imagination? plenty of people have stated they were mining away when others still think it was only satoshi.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2644014-Tulip-Trust-Redacted.html
this document implies Craig Wright is Satoshi when it says
this document implies Craig Wright is Satoshi when it says
Quote
I acknowledge:
Dave Kleiman have received 1,100,111 Bitcoin from Craig Wright (of?Bagnoo,
NSW Australia).
Dave Kleiman have received 1,100,111 Bitcoin from Craig Wright (of?Bagnoo,
NSW Australia).
One theory that is being floated on Reddit runs like this:
Kleiman is Satoshi, and had the keys to the ~1 million bitcoins. He dies, and his USB stick/computer/whatever went to a relative, who doesn't realize what he is holding. Wright knew Kleiman and knew he was Satoshi. So he invents this crazy story about being Satoshi, but that he can't spend the coins because they are all in a trust that was held by Kleiman.
So now Wright comes public claiming to be Satoshi - and sets himself up to launch a lawsuit against Kleiman's relative to get "his" bitcoins back. If Wright pulls this off, he gains the fabled treasure of 1 million bitcoins off Kleiman's estate.
Thoughts pro and con?
Sounds interesting but has many loopholes.For one it is impossible for someone having 1 million bitcoin in USB stick/computer/whatever and doesn't know how valuable they are.Second if wright claims to be Satoshi,what justification will he give of his keys possess by kleiman relative? Kleiman is Satoshi, and had the keys to the ~1 million bitcoins. He dies, and his USB stick/computer/whatever went to a relative, who doesn't realize what he is holding. Wright knew Kleiman and knew he was Satoshi. So he invents this crazy story about being Satoshi, but that he can't spend the coins because they are all in a trust that was held by Kleiman.
So now Wright comes public claiming to be Satoshi - and sets himself up to launch a lawsuit against Kleiman's relative to get "his" bitcoins back. If Wright pulls this off, he gains the fabled treasure of 1 million bitcoins off Kleiman's estate.
Thoughts pro and con?
The idea here is that the relative (Ira) who inherited the USB stick/whatever from Dave Kleiman was not informed of the contents of the hardware they inherited - that they don't know they are holding Satoshi's keys, and may not even know what bitcoin is.
his health wasn't good you'd think he would have made the right preparations to make sure the coins would go to someone he trusted could handle them.
in anycase, if that is the case. I dont care he can proof that he is Satoshi, if he doesn't have the keys he's not getting the coins. if he thinks he can sway the public on his " give Satoshi his coins back " campaign he's got another thing coming.
One theory that is being floated on Reddit runs like this:
Kleiman is Satoshi, and had the keys to the ~1 million bitcoins. He dies, and his USB stick/computer/whatever went to a relative, who doesn't realize what he is holding. Wright knew Kleiman and knew he was Satoshi. So he invents this crazy story about being Satoshi, but that he can't spend the coins because they are all in a trust that was held by Kleiman.
So now Wright comes public claiming to be Satoshi - and sets himself up to launch a lawsuit against Kleiman's relative to get "his" bitcoins back. If Wright pulls this off, he gains the fabled treasure of 1 million bitcoins off Kleiman's estate.
Thoughts pro and con?
Sounds interesting but has many loopholes.For one it is impossible for someone having 1 million bitcoin in USB stick/computer/whatever and doesn't know how valuable they are.Second if wright claims to be Satoshi,what justification will he give of his keys possess by kleiman relative? Kleiman is Satoshi, and had the keys to the ~1 million bitcoins. He dies, and his USB stick/computer/whatever went to a relative, who doesn't realize what he is holding. Wright knew Kleiman and knew he was Satoshi. So he invents this crazy story about being Satoshi, but that he can't spend the coins because they are all in a trust that was held by Kleiman.
So now Wright comes public claiming to be Satoshi - and sets himself up to launch a lawsuit against Kleiman's relative to get "his" bitcoins back. If Wright pulls this off, he gains the fabled treasure of 1 million bitcoins off Kleiman's estate.
Thoughts pro and con?
The idea here is that the relative (Ira) who inherited the USB stick/whatever from Dave Kleiman was not informed of the contents of the hardware they inherited - that they don't know they are holding Satoshi's keys, and may not even know what bitcoin is.
Located links to the following SourceForge from an archived C.V. of Sundhar R.S., Shayaam (which I'm not going to link here).
- https://sourceforge.net/projects/cspn/ - "Brought to you by: snaos" ?!? - http://sourceforge.net/users/snaos
So, if CSW does turn out to have SN 'keys', then we might also speculate as to who actually helped with writing most of the code ?!?
- https://sourceforge.net/projects/cspn/ - "Brought to you by: snaos" ?!? - http://sourceforge.net/users/snaos
So, if CSW does turn out to have SN 'keys', then we might also speculate as to who actually helped with writing most of the code ?!?
How very sad indeed - http://gizmodo.com/the-strange-life-and-death-of-dave-kleiman-a-computer-1747092460
...
I posted in another thread regarding a research paper I located online, after trying to find anyone who had worked with both Craig Wright and Dave Kleiman, circa 2008-2009.
- https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Steven_Wright - References: 25. ^ Wright, Craig; Kleiman, Dave; Sundhar R.S., Shayaam (2008). "Overwriting Hard Drive Data: The Great Wiping Controversy". In Sekar, R. Information Systems Security: 4th International Conference, ICISS 2008, Hyderabad, India, December 16–20, 2008, Proceedings. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 243.
- http://www.vidarholen.net/~vidar/overwriting_hard_drive_data.pdf
Lots of academic 'research' papers are presented in similar formats, however it might be said that this paper has some uncanny similarities to the Bitcoin white paper ?
It would certainly be interesting to know the thoughts of Sundhar R.S., Shayaam in regards to the recent claims made by CSW.
- linkedin.com/in/intrusion
~ There's three sides to every story ? Your side, my side and the truth ? Although, perhaps this individual knows no more than the work surrounding the research paper ?
Anyhow, I have personally found the above to be more fitting than the currently inconclusive 'proof'-of-Satoshi provided by CSW, thus far...
...
I posted in another thread regarding a research paper I located online, after trying to find anyone who had worked with both Craig Wright and Dave Kleiman, circa 2008-2009.
- https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Steven_Wright - References: 25. ^ Wright, Craig; Kleiman, Dave; Sundhar R.S., Shayaam (2008). "Overwriting Hard Drive Data: The Great Wiping Controversy". In Sekar, R. Information Systems Security: 4th International Conference, ICISS 2008, Hyderabad, India, December 16–20, 2008, Proceedings. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 243.
- http://www.vidarholen.net/~vidar/overwriting_hard_drive_data.pdf
Lots of academic 'research' papers are presented in similar formats, however it might be said that this paper has some uncanny similarities to the Bitcoin white paper ?
It would certainly be interesting to know the thoughts of Sundhar R.S., Shayaam in regards to the recent claims made by CSW.
- linkedin.com/in/intrusion
~ There's three sides to every story ? Your side, my side and the truth ? Although, perhaps this individual knows no more than the work surrounding the research paper ?
Anyhow, I have personally found the above to be more fitting than the currently inconclusive 'proof'-of-Satoshi provided by CSW, thus far...
I doubt it but it's a better theory than 99% of garbage being posted on this topic over the last couple of days. It's increasingly obvious that despite not being able to present actual cryptographic proof Wright is putting a lot of effort into obfuscation and trying to sway the public opinion, whether it's for his business interests or something else.
Totally agree... I think Satoshi will just do very simple things with big impact... Craig is creating public attention but refuse to do just the simplest thing of signing the key or move any of those coins... I am sure he is not the real Satoshi. Even if he does move the coins later on, there is a high chance that those were Dave's....
Reading this, quite interesting:
http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692
http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692
Just read it. Seems really strange that all these emails would "leak" and Craig would be emailing people with the Satoshi email.
I know we have developed the "myth of Satoshi" and Craig seems to shatter that, but it is not based on nothing. Satoshi seemed to be a very private person and very good at covering his tracks. I doubt he would be emailing his lawyer and others with an email that can link him to his pseudonym...just seems sloppy.
The reason a person like Nick Szabo makes more sense as Satoshi is that he acts the way we would expect Satoshi to act.
I don't know. I always pictured Satoshi a bit like this:
He died broke and in squalor, after suffering from infected bedsores. His body was found decomposing and surrounded by empty alcohol bottles and a loaded handgun. Bloody feces was tracked along the floor, and a bullet hole was found in his mattress, though no spent shell casings were found on the scene.
The Strange Life and Death of Dave Kleiman, A Computer Genius Linked to Bitcoin's Origins:
https://twitter.com/cryptkeeperbtt/status/727458563757580288
https://twitter.com/cryptkeeperbtt/status/727458563757580288
One theory that is being floated on Reddit runs like this:
Kleiman is Satoshi, and had the keys to the ~1 million bitcoins. He dies, and his USB stick/computer/whatever went to a relative, who doesn't realize what he is holding. Wright knew Kleiman and knew he was Satoshi. So he invents this crazy story about being Satoshi, but that he can't spend the coins because they are all in a trust that was held by Kleiman.
So now Wright comes public claiming to be Satoshi - and sets himself up to launch a lawsuit against Kleiman's relative to get "his" bitcoins back. If Wright pulls this off, he gains the fabled treasure of 1 million bitcoins off Kleiman's estate.
Thoughts pro and con?
Sounds interesting but has many loopholes.For one it is impossible for someone having 1 million bitcoin in USB stick/computer/whatever and doesn't know how valuable they are.Second if wright claims to be Satoshi,what justification will he give of his keys possess by kleiman relative? Kleiman is Satoshi, and had the keys to the ~1 million bitcoins. He dies, and his USB stick/computer/whatever went to a relative, who doesn't realize what he is holding. Wright knew Kleiman and knew he was Satoshi. So he invents this crazy story about being Satoshi, but that he can't spend the coins because they are all in a trust that was held by Kleiman.
So now Wright comes public claiming to be Satoshi - and sets himself up to launch a lawsuit against Kleiman's relative to get "his" bitcoins back. If Wright pulls this off, he gains the fabled treasure of 1 million bitcoins off Kleiman's estate.
Thoughts pro and con?
Reading this, quite interesting:
http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692
http://gizmodo.com/this-australian-says-he-and-his-dead-friend-invented-bi-1746958692
Just read it. Seems really strange that all these emails would "leak" and Craig would be emailing people with the Satoshi email.
I know we have developed the "myth of Satoshi" and Craig seems to shatter that, but it is not based on nothing. Satoshi seemed to be a very private person and very good at covering his tracks. I doubt he would be emailing his lawyer and others with an email that can link him to his pseudonym...just seems sloppy.
The reason a person like Nick Szabo makes more sense as Satoshi is that he acts the way we would expect Satoshi to act.
I have the same doubts too.
Overall, it seems like a well orchestrated plan to make at least a part of the bitcoin crowd believe he is Satoshi.
Edit: One thing I didn't pay attention untill I read some comments is that the article is referring to the last December.
(I think I've somehow skipped the first lines of the article and focused on the header/subtitle where is a misleading "Yesterday 8:10am")
Jump to: