Meanwhile the real whitepaper was published on the official website.
LOL, what do you mean "real whitepaper"? You mean the second, non-plagiarized whitepaper? Just ask yourself this: if a project can't be bothered to summarize the idea of their coin with their own words from the get-go, how much effort do you truly believe they are going to be putting into anything else? When caught, they used the same excuse that every other scam project that got caught with a plagiarized whitepaper uses: "Oh, we outsourced it to a 3rd party and had no idea..."  Obvious scam is obvious. Sure, it will pump, and then it will dump, and then it will turn to dust. Just like every other crypto project McAfee has ever put his name behind. Apparently people still have faith that a 74 year-old con man will somehow develop something original out of a forked project, and that this time is going to be different. Oy vey. |
|
|
|
I read through the Gavin Andresen deposition (well, skimmed through it as there is 400+ pages) and found some highlights to share. You can read them for yourself here ( part 1, part 2) if you want. I suggest looking for his bulkier responses as some of it does contain insights into the history of the development of Bitcoin that perhaps were previously unknown. In all, I was kind of disheartened that he still chooses to believe it is more likely than not that Craig actually signed a message from the famous block which sent a tx to Hal Finney, but at the same time he admits he thinks Craig was dishonest with him when he made his blog post that was supposed to prove to the world that he was Satoshi, by producing a b.s. signature that was quickly debunked as meaningless. I can't reconcile how Gavin can think Craig is untruthful while at the same time clinging to his assertion that he "probably" signed the message using the private key from that block. Most likely he just doesn't want to have to admit he was wrong. We all know how he feels about BTC these days, and its a double-blow to have to admit that one of BTC's (supposed but not really) rivals is led by a fraud. I don't think he has any money in the game or that he is somehow "on the side" of Calvin and Craig -- most likely its simply a matter of protecting his ego. page 25 Q Sitting here today, do you believe you had communications with Satoshi Nakamoto after this email? (ed: regarding Satoshi's last email to Gavin sent in April 2011)
A No. page 26 Q Why did you stop being the lead core developer at Bitcoin?
A Several reasons. The most immediate reason was I believed that, for Bitcoin to grow, there needed to be more than one implementation; there needed -- needed to be more than one software that people were using.
And so I had taken on the role of chief scientist of the Bitcoin Foundation, and I wanted that role to be not working on one particular implementation of Bitcoin, not one particular open-source software project, but to be kind of bigger picture and try to encourage other implementations of the Bitcoin protocol and to think about kind of bigger issues facing Bitcoin. page 46 I have my doubts on -- I have many, many doubts in my head about what parts of -- what things Craig told me are true and what are not true. page 88 ...I did not expect the private proving session to have as much weight as it did. So there were certainly, you know, pos -- there are places in the private proving session where I could have been fooled, where somebody could have switched out the software that was being used or, perhaps, the laptop that was delivered was not a brand-new laptop, and it had been tampered with in some way. I was also jet lagged.
And, again, I was not in the head space of this is going to prove to the world that Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto. I was in the head space of, you know, this will prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto. And my doubts arise because the proof that was presented to me is very different from the pseudo proof that was later presented to the world. page 131 So the blog post that Craig released was not at all what I expected him to release. I expected him to release a very simple, you know, I am Satoshi, here is some -- here is a simple message signed with an early key from an early block.
Instead, he released a very wacky supposed proof that actually wasn't a proof of anything but was incredibly technical and hard to follow, and I was as surprised as anybody to see that. And it -- it took, I don't know, a few hours, a day, for somebody to -- to figure out what all that technical gobbledygook actually meant and to show that it wasn't actually a proof of anything.
Q So he didn't even almost prove he was Satoshi?
A Correct. Anybody could have produced that gobbledygook proof.
Q Why didn't he release a simple signed message?
A I don't know. page 157 Q You said that he -- he led you to believe he wanted one thing from you, and really you thought he really wanted something else.
A I suspect -- yeah, I mean, I guess, you know, I -- I thought that my piece would be part of a larger whole of him proving beyond a reasonable doubt to the world that he was Satoshi Nakamoto. And I thought that that's what he wanted from me. And then he did not complete the rest of the puzzle, and so that makes me wonder, is that really what he wanted from me, or did he have some other ulterior motive for flying me to London and -- and doing this -- the proof session? And I don't know what that other motive would be. What's probably more interesting is Craig's deposition from March 18th released in the same set of documents (on June 19th). Craig is clearly on the defensive here, being very argumentative and rude with the plaintiff's counsel. Here are some of my favorite highlights: page 13 I answered the question. If your comprehension is not adequate to understand it, I apologise. My question has been answered. page 19 Q. Did you and Dave Kleiman work on a number of patents together?
A. Mr. Kleiman has never worked on any patent in his life, to my knowledge. He has not filed a patent, he has not written a patent, he 1 has not been involved in the research that has led to a patent, he has not filed a paper academically leading to a patent. I have filed around -- at the moment I believe it is just over 1,000 patents. In the pipeline we have 1,600 papers and by the end of the current backlog of research we will have around 6,000 patents, placing me at approximately 500% of the total life work of Thomas Edison.
Q. I did not ask you where you placed in the total life work of Tom Edison. I simply asked whether you and Dave Kleiman worked on a number of patents together. That's yes or no question. Please try to answer the question I'm asking you.
...
Q. Dr. Wright did you tell the ATO that you and Dave Kleiman worked on a number of patents together?
...
A. I just answered that question. I do not really care if you like the fact that I didn't use yes or no. I answered the question. If your comprehension of that question is inadequate, too bad. page 32 My understanding is that Mr. Kleiman did not do any work on W&K software. Subsequent to 2013, after his death, which I did not realise at the time, if Mr. Kleiman -- the current Ira -- want to have all out, is that any monies that I had given David Kleiman to basically build software ended up basically going into Silk Road and other sources to supply a drug habit that Mr. Kleiman hid from certain people but not everyone. So zero software was developed in W&K, but if you want to destroy David Kleiman's reputation and drag him through this then that is your choice. page 56 Q. Does nChain have ability to control this litigation with respect to the intellectual property?
...
A. No. nChain is not involved in any way in this litigation. I know that the people funding Mr. Kleiman at the moment, including Tether and Kraken, seek to shut me down because their whole existence in their Ponzi requires that I be seen as a fraud, but quite simply nChain has no, and I mean no -- I will reiterate that no -- involvement in this case whatsoever. No funding, no anything. ------ I only got up to about page 100 on that one but I'll add more later, have to take a break... |
|
|
|
i think you are confusing price with development. Grin price died the day they decided it is a good idea to have a gigantic supply and no cap. that is not news. i said it the day this forum started accepting it as payment. but that has nothing to do with the project being dead or developers leaving. and it is stupidly simply to check. you simply pop over to their GitHub repository and see what they are doing. for starters here is the commit frequency: https://github.com/mimblewimble/grin/graphs/commit-activitylooking at individual commits, they are still pretty active and working on the project. and that is not how a project with "90% of developers left" look like. this is what an abandoned project looks like: https://github.com/dogecoin/dogecoin/graphs/commit-activity and that's a semi-popular coin  I think you are confusing development with GitHub activity. A lot of meaningless commits can be made in order to create the appearance of active development, and not all development surrounding a coin is being made in a single repository. Litecoin's latest commit was actually made before Dogecoin's, and both projects have incredibly active communities. Both coins regularly have 50k active addresses on any given day. They are hardly "abandoned" by any sense of the term. Perhaps they are just relishing the status of not being broken, and as they say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." |
|
|
|
|
Wonder what the holdup is with Topps releasing the second GPK series. I heard it was supposed to happen in the first or second week of this month. There's no way it won't sell out in a matter of hours! What could they be waiting for...
|
|
|
|
From a different thread: Peloso told me I should remove him from my distrust list or else he would distrust me and I would lose my DT 1 rank - funny side note, I didn't even realize I was DT 1 but of course I asked him what he wants to achieve with his pm - well, he sent 2-3 more blackmail pm's and then distrusted me - all I said then was "see, that's exactly why someone like you should not be on my trust list, you proved me right".
I don't understand why people continue to include Peloso in their trust list. It's possible to believe Peloso is trustworthy without including him in your trust list. That's what positive feedback is for. He may very well be trustworthy when it comes to trades and business, but he is clearly bent on misusing DT. My opinion is that those who include Peloso have questionable judgment when it comes trust system use. They are letting this guy drag the whole system down for the sake of having an additional inclusion. Surely they don't actually think he demonstrates good judgment when it comes to forming a trust list. |
|
|
|
LOL bro that's a satire site, kind of like The Onion but a bit more edgy. I hope the Corona situation gets better soon in the US - in general of course, but also for my very selfish reasons. Players from Cowboys and Texans tested positive in recent days and a player from the 49ers tested positive as well now, with more test results from other players to come. Clemson University has 23 positive football players The resumed european soccer seasons seem to go well Corona-wise, but if you have players from NFL teams being tested positive left and right, I don't know how they will be able to start the season (and preparing properly for it). I'm thinking they'll definitely reopen in time for preseason, even if the stands have to be empty. I heard about how they were putting in fake crowd noise and even fake crowds (digitally rendered crowds) into soccer games. While that aspect makes the whole thing sound cheesy, it certainly is better than the stupid "virtual sports" games that have been popping up on the sportsbooks. I tried my hardest to get into esports but its just not happening. I can watch a whole CS:GO match but would rather not have to learn enough about it to competently bet on it. |
|
|
|
Just for fun (well, half boredom and half morbid curiosity), I decided to check in on the BotHive telegram group to see the latest. Would you be surprised if I told you that absolutely nothing had changed, at all? Because that's what happened: nothing changed. Everybody is sitting at a bigger loss than ever before, the bots keep making a bunch of small winning trades followed by a clock-cleaning losing trade, and Gabriel is still boasting about having a 95% win rate while blowing everyone's minds about how awesome the "next" bot is going to be. Some people complain and the most brainwashed of his supporters just laugh off the losses, sure that someday they will somehow recover their losses. Nobody has a profit. This guy's performance chart ends on 5-27:  This one ends on 6-16:  @HCP did you ever pull the plug or did you go down with the ship? |
|
|
|
It seems that I lack knowledge about this, can you explain it more clearly? How can that be? Something called coerce? It is really difficult to force someone to do what the attacker wants, unless they have tricks to cover the user's eyes. Right? It's all explained in great detail here. That's a decent explanation but I prefer this one. You have to listen to at least 40 seconds of it to get its full implication. |
|
|
|
Received and noted. Thanks for your help, it is much appreciated! I'll see you on or before 8/18. |
|
|
|
I don't know what you mean, but if you have a specific problem with something on there it shouldn't be a dealbreaker. Its all approximate. You could look at other ones that have been filled out with people. These individuals are all in the correct vacinity but different people might have subtle disagreements about the exact positioning of where they are. No one should confuse Stalin's position with Chomsky's though.  How would you describe somebody who is full-tilt authoritarian when their party is in power and full-tilt libertarian when they are not? Asking for a friend. |
|
|
|
According to the law. You got it all wrong. His base has been calling for ANTIFA to be labeled a terrorist organization since 2016 at least, because that is what they are. They use violence and intimidation to effect political change. That is the definition of terrorism under federal law. Stop pretending like you cunts are interested in any kind of discussion. That time has long since past and you have been riding on the pretense so long no one believes you any more. Now you see the results. Terrorists hate this one simple trick! What comes next will shock you!
Nobody even bothered to point out that Trump doesn't have any sort of ability to designate Antifa as terrorists. It was just all show, to be swallowed unquestioned by his base. It's been fun to watch your transformation from anti-government to complete authoritarian. You are happy about the labeling of domestic citizens as terrorists so long as they are "enemies of Trump," but God forbid if a future president should place the same label on white nationalist groups, you know, ones who are actually violent and have killed people over the years. Then that would clearly be suppression of liberty and a dangerous overreach of government power. |
|
|
|
The ones in DC at the time weren't rioters. They were peaceful protesters.
You can literally see that in so many videos. It's not like these people were all attempting to break into the WH. Trump had a plan where he wanted to go to the church and take a picture -- but he wouldn't be able to do so because there were protestors in the surrounding areas (where they're allowed to be protesting) Everyone in this country has a right to peacefully protest.
In some areas are people rioting? Yes.
Are the majority of people rioting? No.
Did the authorize the use of force against peaceful protesters to take his picture? Yes.
Like..... OH WELL IN THAT CASE! I guess we can just ignore all of this and pretend it is all perfectly safe and that these "peaceful protestors" weren't throwing projectiles and setting shit on fire among other things because dipshits like you unilaterally declare them "peaceful". There were no "rioters" dispersed from Lafayette Square on the day in question. Zero. They were largely peaceful protestors who weren't "setting shit on fire." You are attempting to conflate them with the rioters who set fire to the church the preceding night. The protesters weren't damaging anything and were cleared specifically so Trump could take a photo op holding a bible. He didn't even stop to pray or anything. Just grabbed a bible, made sure he was holding it right-side up, audibly reminded the press corps that "this is a bible," and went back to the White House. What would have been more powerful is if he went to just go talk to the protestors on a personal level. But because he's a coward who is totally out of touch with what is going on, he needed the police to disperse them with smoke, tear gas and pepper pellets, just so he could take a picture. He's a disgrace, and so are those who willfully disregard reality in order to toady for him with bated breath. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2020/06/08/timeline-trump-church-photo-op |
|
|
|
|
You put up a good fight satoshi, but you've been bested. Take that, guy who hasn't logged in to the forum since 2010.
Funny I didn't even show up until 8/19.
It was also funny to watch DdmrDdmr pull ahead of LoyceV for a few brief moments, and then Loyce was like, nope, and sped ahead like there was no tomorrow.
I remember in 2018 and maybe early 2019 seeing people with a lot more merits than me who never even appeared in this list, thinking, "It will be a big day when I catch up to them."
Really interesting to see a few people close to the top in 2018 that I've never even heard of.
|
|
|
|
I also have supported your flag. Here is a direct link to the flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2024Coinsbit obviously has no shame as they continue to pay for their thread spammers to continue doing such an awful job representing their exchange. They must be paying a fairly low amount to not notice that Cellerex and his spambot farm are actively damaging the exchange's reputation, in addition to what Coinsbit is already doing themselves. I notice they keep mentioning me over and over, saying that I am you and everybody else who criticizes them (I get that a lot), but I can't respond over there or I will bump their thread to the first page of the Altcoin ANN section. |
|
|
|
I'm still unsure what exactly he's being accused of. Wiping his Trust list, using only DefaultTrust, and then making a new Trust list doesn't seem like such a bad thing to me.
I think is the main problem is Timelord and TECSHARE see anyone who excludes them as an assault to democracy. Looking at V8s trust list history, its pretty evident what was going on: he wanted out of DT1, now he wants back in. He's not even in yet and already the scrutiny has begun. |
|
|
|
Removing the rating in exchange for clearing their own and because the enemy of my enemy is my friend type of logic is also abusive. If Nutilduuh thought the rating was valid and was needed to prevent the user from harming others, removing it in exchange to get their own removed is not right either. The contradiction is his, not mine. You all have fun doing your clown dance.
Since my words clearly don't mean anything to you, let's try responding to your post using some of your words. There you go again pretending to Ms. Cleo claiming you can read my mind and intent.
Yes, string together some more assumptions Ms. Cleo. Keep trying until something sticks.
WAAAAA people I don't like get to have a say in the system! ONLY ME AND MY FRIENDS SHOULD HAVE A SAY!
You asserting your assumptions to be factual when it is not, does not make my denial of it a lie.
|
|
|
|
Hatters boto-farm by nutildah: nutildah, bitbottrader, iGO_Tech and other...
If you speak Tagalog (or even pidgin Hawaiian) then the phrase "boto-farm" takes on an unexpected new meaning.  or maybe something more like this  |
|
|
|
(sorry Loyce for cluttering you thread, It's okay, this topic doesn't get much discussion anyway, and it doesn't interfere with my weekly updates. OK well in that case I have one more thing to add. As I said in my post, this user is wanting to become a merit font - which down the track could be used as a means to repay being voted up here and now. In theory at least.
No, it won't. Not even in theory, because people don't "vote" for merit sources. Everyone who endorsed V8s genuinely believes he would be a good merit source and are endorsing him because they think he deserves the position. I don't even understand why you posted here as V8's didn't create or wipe his trust list last week. |
|
|
|
Accepted! Welcome to the Campaign. Thanks Hhampuz! Happy to be here. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
