About as many wacky coincidences as appear in a numerological reading of the Bible (which, by the way, is also made up). |
|
|
|
I advise everyone to sell bitcoin now, because all are expecting moon after halving. They will be doomed instead.
This guy gets it This guy has habitually not been getting it. I do expect a halving dump in July though. |
|
|
|
It doesn't matter to the code, but it matters who has access to the coins and when. Maybe he doesn't give a shit if we believe him. Maybe he was using Gavin to confirm him for his Tulip Trustee. Idk.
There are approximately seven billion candidates who could be Satoshi based on "not giving a shit". So when I hear this argument, especially regarding a man who has gone to some lengths to convince us, I picture a very leaky bucket indeed. I think the most sensible theory going is that Kleiman was the voice of Satoshi on this forum; the times during which our Satoshi posted seems to suggest he was doing it from the states. I think Wright probably wrote the white paper and had Kleiman edit it? And it was probably Wright communicating with Gavin by email.
Or not. But it has to have been someone, and a bunch of this stuff fits. Even if CSW happens to be some kind of nut. Let's face it...
I think the least sensible theories are those based on associations made from a single, unattested, unreliable source. |
|
|
|
I understand that thinking Google, Facebook or Amazon will adopt the Ethereum platform is just not very realistic. If it is then just holding one ETH will make you an instant millionaire really, these companies are worth and used by billions. I'm assuming that's hyperbole, as it would give Ethereum a market cap approximately equal to world GDP  |
|
|
|
I don't know how others feel, but this been some of the best entertainment for me since Gox blew up.  |
|
|
|
Hey guys - those documents say Wheeler is the Solder of the Year for Army Missile Command. Not for the whole Army. So was there a top award for the overall Army? Or maybe different branches of the Army each had their own Soldier of the Year? Those are details a journalist could easily get screwed up. So don't stop digging.
Looks like there is one in each command and one overall winner. https://www.army.mil/article/156980/Yes, it seems like there are multiple recipients of the award specific to each command. Prior to 2002 the Best Warrior competition didn't exist, so it isn't clear if there was an overall Soldier of the Year. I certainly haven't found any reference to one. |
|
|
|
If he'd said Web I'd have said Tim Berners-Lee. It's amazing how many people confuse the 2.
I find it pretty shocking that people wouldn't know it was Tim Berners-Lee who invented the web. Maybe I'm growing old...  The 'tulip trust' game is an indication that Craig Wright most probably was a part of the 'Satoshi' group but not among the decision makers.
This would be the Tulip Trust that doesn't exist and is another fabrication by Craig, right? |
|
|
|
I think that CSW stumbled upon Bitcoin circa 2013 (late 2012 at the earliest) and started concocting a narrative to fit his long con. Stumbling upon the death of David Kleiman, a person who CSW co-wrote with, Craig saw that the pieces of Dave's life fit nicely in what's known about Satoshi. It was just a matter of creating docs to make it look like he and Dave were partners of sorts which I've demonstrated he's done. Agreed. Beyond co-authoring a couple of works, there is no independent source linking these men as being close. Kleiman's colleagues had no idea who Craig was when he phoned - and why did he leave it 10 months after Dave's death to contact them about 1 million Bitcoin? It's all part of his web of lies to deceive. I'm still taken aback on how David Kleiman was awarded soldier of the year in 1987 after ONLY one year of service while being a Huey tech in Germany, beating out a million-plus candidates, some of which were perhaps more deserving. Also, he claimed to be a war veteran when he didn't serve in a war zone because ... wait for it ... the US wasn't involved in any conflicts during his stint in the US Army.
Did he though? I wouldn't trust a local news outlet to get the facts straight. Apparently, to become Soldier of the Year you have to engage in the Best Warrior competition. Problem is, it only began in 2002. |
|
|
|
*sigh*
Is there anything in that wikipedia page that supports your side of things?
Not sure how revealing TOR node IPs would do much harm, and to say it's easy to abuse is to say that the entire Bitcoin community is technologically illiterate. Any abuse would be very easy to spot. The best argument against this feature is that it could easily be circumvented and/or that TOR is sacred. But that's no fun. You can't string people up for that.
Edit: From your link above: "In computing, a blacklist is an access control system that denies entry to a specific list (or a defined range) of users, programs, or network addresses."
The definition of blacklist is to discriminate against people or a group, which is what that list does. The list doesn't have to block to be a blacklist, but if it causes you such great dejection that you have to get all huffy, then I will graciously call it a fuckerlist instead. Colourful enough? Those of us with technological literacy choose not to filter connections based on authority from a central point of failure, choose not to deanonymise a client's IP and choose not to undermine TOR for no gain. |
|
|
|
To give lower priority in a ddos. Not blacklist.
The blacklist thing was because you can't have a brainwave in BTC without everyone shouting "Slippery Slope!!!".
A blacklist is not a blocklist. A list marking nodes for deprioritization is the former. Besides revealing a client's IP, it's not difficult to see how this system could be abused. |
|
|
|
That's simply not true. I know what you're thinking of, but if you have to add that much colour to make your point it's probably not a good one anyway.
What isn't true? Besides Hearn, he was the main proponent and developer of XT. The code requested to download a list of IP addresses from a server for a blacklist. |
|
|
|
No. Gavin either got conned pretty badly, or has signed that NDA that was also offered to Antonopoulos. Either way, he's a risk; it is time for both him and Matonis to depart.
Aaaaahhhhhh..... The Purge continues. Sure good you're all freedom loving anarcaps and libertarians. To be fair, the guy is a liability. I don't know why anyone would want someone so credulous on their team. This is the same guy who wanted to introduce a centralised node blacklist downloaded from the net... great idea, no problems there. |
|
|
|
If he publicly and verifiably signs a message from the genesis block, I'll give your newbie butt 1 shiny bitcoin. Quote it.
 Guess I'll be keeping it then |
|
|
|
It really shouldn't, else this will open up potential problems (e.g. groups attacking specific moderator for the deletion of their posts).
There should be accountability. If someone gets the banhammer on Poloniex, for example, you know which mod gave it. Do groups attack mods because of it? No, and they would know better than to do so without warrant, unless they all wish to get banned. |
|
|
|
I am right knackered of ponces wanging on like some sodding MI6 bonnets. Barmy spanners! I'll just indent this paragraph and totally throw you off 
Great bitcoin video; if lazy, start here: https://youtu.be/DJklHwoYgBQ?t=297The master of disguise speaks. |
|
|
|
Thanks for those clips, yefi.
In my humble bumble opinion, those kinds of appearances would not rule out Kleiman from being Satoshi. Kleinman was characterized as both a recluse and also someone who kept people out of some of his personal matters. Appearing on TV is not inconsistent with being a recluse, especially when the commentary was subject matter specific (and not about Kleinman himself).
I don't find either of those appearances nor his previous employment as a law enforcement person to be inconsistent with a person like satoshi who likely spent a considerable amount of time considering cryptography and ways to make a digital currency from such.
He strikes me as being exactly what's on the tin, a computer forensic expert. No more, no less. As I know well, looks can be deceiving however. Anyway, I see he gave a webinar. Looking at the slides, he used American spelling, e.g., organizing, which you can compare with Satoshi's. There were a couple of punctuation errors as well, including the use of a quotation mark for an apostrophe. Notice the single spacing after full stops as well. |
|
|
|
I would be very surprised if he's not Satoshi after all these very respectable sources (journalists, police investigations, etc) aimed at him being Bitcoin's creator. Not sure why he would claim such title after all these years unless the police and tax collectors are after him. It's very clear (to me at least) he's doing this because he is forced to come clean after a deal he made with the authorities.
If they are so eminently respectable, why did they use his software, his computer and his message to sign the blocks 1 and 9? Do you know that the authors of Electrum have said that no .asc was downloaded from a British IP on the date Craig was meant to have proven his identity? But rest safe, because you have Rory Cellen-Jones from the Beeb to allay all doubt. And who could not trust in Gavin, who seems to think he knows Satoshi's personality, despite never meeting him in person and despite Satoshi never once revealing any personal detail about himself. Yes, rest safe indeed. |
|
|
|
People will definitely pull out antminer S5s that are underclocked and ESPECIALLY if it is also for heat. If the big boys stop mining they will sell that hardware and for cheap, supply and demand.
If they aren't running them now, then they aren't going to be running them tomorrow unless price increases. Whatever advantage you gain by a decrease in difficulty is always countered by a drop in price. This turns the screw on efficiency, and knocks out the inefficient players. Anyway, I'm probably veering off-topic now. Back to that scoundrel Wright. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
Think we can lay that one to rest now. 
