1. the C.O dont investigate, it requires a opposing human to make a counter claim, and to take the counter claim to court to argue that craig is a scammer.
2. "if craig tries to take any action he would simply lose".. what if the game is not to take people to court and spend millions on lawyers for craig to win, but for craig to just send out dodgy C&D letters threatening court action and then making the recipient waste money. by which most C&D recipients just pay up the settlement fee just to make it go away
(standard patent troll scam..)
its like the encrypted harddrive viruses. 'pay up in 72 hours or else'
C&D: dont do X or we will take you to court, pay me $x now and you can continue
That means that only people with big pocket can challenge him in court, if not he will get away with the filing which is really odd and what if he charges every transaction at a later date and the mess we get into will be far greater, will block stream who is supporting the project will challenge them in court ?. It might not be a major issue now but with the way Craig does things he might take a swing at every project if he is to get the claim. Not sure how these drama will unfold. It only costs $55 to challenge it but it is a crime to make a false claim. |
|
|
|
|
A screenshot does not prove anything. Visa/Mastercard must keep payment records for 25 years and present in court if needed, not float about on net.
Same tax records for that payment is available to court.
Fact is someone paid for the Bitcoin.org domain in 2008 it is not something to make up (fabricate).
|
|
|
|
Putting the pieces together it appears team Satoshi as: - Craig, having the idea, wrote the white paper, registers and paid for the Bitcoin.org domain in 2008 (has tax records of it)
- Dave, proof reading and helping with complex math issues.
- "Unknow", implementing the code of the white paper (writing it) and communicating on the forum.
Ira, Dave's brother has absolutely nothing to do with Bitcoin and at first even voluntary forfeiting Dave's inheritance. (Dave died a miserable death) Dave Kleiman needed money badly—his house was under foreclosure and he spent nearly three years in a VA hospital before he died. Ira only later he became hyper greedy. We may find out how much he will get within weeks. It is rumored that Dave had a similar amount on his hard drive, but if that walled can ever be accessed is another matter. |
|
|
|
I ask what will happen to Bitcoin.com and if Roger will lose it. The chances of it happening are high, unlikely in weeks.
It is fair to say there is great confusion at current time of what is "Bitcoin". Bitcoin is what is described in the white paper, the building plan.
We all can agree (feel free to disagree) Craig did not create SegWit and there is no mention of it in the white paper.
If someone has a building plan of a bridge and he builds a house, he will have a hard time convincing someone with brains that he build according plan.
What I say or anyone else on the net is irrelevant, everyone has his own brain to use.
OK, I'm glad you are at least acknowledging that Roger Ver will not surrender Bitcoin.com in "weeks" anymore. These types of details matter. Anyway, I searched the net for the original post by CSW threatening to unload one million BTC on the market, and all I found was some troll forums posting it. Also, bear in mind, he is currently embroiled in a lawsuit in Florida over these bitcoins. If he were to sell, assuming he has them, there could be serious legal and perhaps criminal implications for him. While I doubt he's Satoshi, there is a remote possibility he has access to a substantial amount of bitcoins. The original post was on twitter https://twitter.com/ProfFaustus/status/1090075307439058944 but as twitter closed his account it's no longer available. Its impossible to sell 1100111 BTC in one go (the tulip trust which becomes available on January 1, 2020) the market could not even handle a tenth of it on a single sell order. Exhibit 17 of the court case email to daves father he claims there is three key people* in the creation of bitcoin. https://www.scribd.com/document/372445146/Exhibit-17As he has the bitcoin copyright he can go to US Court and ask to issue an order for BCH and BTC to REMOVE the Bitcoin white paper from their network, their documents, their sale materials, and web sites such as Bitcoin.com, Bitcoin.org Legal / criminal implications for selling his coins, how so? it the whole point of an advance notice if someone intents to get "cheap" coins they can get organized. Did anyone have any implication selling any of the forks coins when the got them. *The third person maybe him, a guess.  |
|
|
|
|
I ask what will happen to Bitcoin.com and if Roger will lose it. The chances of it happening are high, unlikely in weeks.
It is fair to say there is great confusion at current time of what is "Bitcoin". Bitcoin is what is described in the white paper, the building plan.
We all can agree (feel free to disagree) Craig did not create SegWit and there is no mention of it in the white paper.
If someone has a building plan of a bridge and he builds a house, he will have a hard time convincing someone with brains that he build according plan.
What I say or anyone else on the net is irrelevant, everyone has his own brain to use.
|
|
|
|
Not disclosing large sales of an assets is a crime, this is long term warning ⚠️, anyone is free to make of it what they what. |
|
|
|
This 2018 post will be entertaining when it happens.  Capital C for capitalism. BitCoin. I cannot trust this guy and I wonder why we give him attention anymore. If he had the chance to do that, he will do it without posting it. He just want to scare bitcoin holders and spread them or attract them to their project. ...And one more point, if he was the real Satoshi, why would he ever to that to Bitcoin? Legally he must inform in advance if he indents to sell large amounts. What someone does with the information is entirely up to each individual. If someone is of the opinion it is fud, so be it. He did not create segwit and got airdroped over 1 million BTC, so its only natural to dispose of it over the years, starting in earnest sometime next year. His only interested is BitCoin. |
|
|
|
they already did this, if i recall correctly this FUD was spread before they forked BSV and caused the panic in bitcoin which led to crash from $6k to $3k. in fact the main reason for that crash was: 1. the market was still undecided and the fear was present, 2. the whales took the opportunity to manipulate the market and crash the price.
as you can see CSW's only achievement was a short term drama that succeeded only because it was timed correctly and the market was in the same direction. this won't be repeated for at least another 2 years because we have entered the bull market and FUD like that can not change this direction anymoer.
It does not say which reward halving, but at the time of the BTC airdrop no halving took place.  |
|
|
|
Ripple will Die Wrong, as so many things in this junkyard of crypto. Ripple has contingency plan (become software company) if XRP fails, which it will. |
|
|
|
This 2018 post will be entertaining when it happens. Capital C for capitalism. BitCoin. |
|
|
|
|
BSV has got the:
TECH : Satoshi, Protocol set in stone, Massive scaling, SPV, High profile miners security, double hash features, professional developers ...
FRICTIONLESS : government neutral/friendly, law abiding, ...
COMMERCIAL ADVANTAGES : patents (A LOT and platform agnostic), partnership (both public and private entities)
SATOSHI : Thanos snaps his fingers and the universe implode, Satoshi snaps his private key and the “competitors” disappear
COMPETENCE: Understanding of sound development methodologies -> efficiency
GOVERNANCE: Commitment to Nakamoto Consensus (no risk of hijack) -> stability
RESOURCES/BACKING: Hundreds of millions of $ fully committed and growing -> safety
VISION: Breadth and depth of understanding of Bitcoin potential unique in crypto (as contributed by Dr Craig Wright and a few others) -> durability
Great and serious leaders with skin in the game
|
|
|
|
|
Cryptotourist
bitcoinPsycho
nutildah
are a funny bunch
its like the cant stand some botanists talk about plants, and then go and visit the Botanical garden as much as possible to hear what is discussed.
Any rational sane person would enjoy life and go places of interrest to them
|
|
|
|
It's funny to watch this soap opera all over news media, courts, social media when it is so easy for Dr. Craig Wright to prove all of us that he is Satoshi. He just needs to move the coins from Satoshi wallets. Why doesn't he?
Signing/moving does not proof anything except showing access at the moment of signing, aka Troll prove. Possession of a key is not evidence of ownership. It was never the intent of Bitcoin. It is the intent of people like Greg Maxwell, James Donald, and others who seek a system that acts outside the law. If you have a stolen asset, possession doesn’t make it yours. It applies to Bitcoin equally. If bitcoin is stolen through stolen keys, they do not give the receiver ownership. They do not act as proof. In monetary law, money is fungible and transferable only when it is exchanged without knowledge of fraud or malpractice and for good consideration. It is critical. To be money, Bitcoin does not rely on the mere possession of keys, which is the aim and desire of those seeking a new version of Liberty Reserve coin or e-gold. There are some who will tell you that the mere possession of a key is definitive evidence. They are avoiding the rules of evidence and courts, and seek to alter their nature. They seek a precedent and to change the narrative to one that favours a more anarchist approach.
I will sign after I have definitively proven I created Bitcoin. Not before. The problem with the so-called “experts” is that they have no expertise. They seek to create a narrative and change reality such that it aligns with their beliefs, and believe that doing so will make them experts. Bitcoin is not bit gold, and it never will be.
‘Doing anything you want’ is not a system that is free. Freedom comes within society, and it comes with rules. https://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/shades-of-black/ |
|
|
|
All he had to do was sign the early private keys and he failed to. Of course there is speculation that Dave had those keys and they are lost. CSW was definitely around those early bitcoin guys but if he really had a role in the creation remains to be seen. I'll admit that I do sometimes watch his Youtube videos though.
Signing does not do anything except showing access at the moment of signing, aka Troll prove. Possession of a key is not evidence of ownership. It was never the intent of Bitcoin. It is the intent of people like Greg Maxwell, James Donald, and others who seek a system that acts outside the law. If you have a stolen asset, possession doesn’t make it yours. It applies to Bitcoin equally. If bitcoin is stolen through stolen keys, they do not give the receiver ownership. They do not act as proof. In monetary law, money is fungible and transferable only when it is exchanged without knowledge of fraud or malpractice and for good consideration. It is critical. To be money, Bitcoin does not rely on the mere possession of keys, which is the aim and desire of those seeking a new version of Liberty Reserve coin or e-gold. There are some who will tell you that the mere possession of a key is definitive evidence. They are avoiding the rules of evidence and courts, and seek to alter their nature. They seek a precedent and to change the narrative to one that favours a more anarchist approach.
I will sign after I have definitively proven I created Bitcoin. Not before. The problem with the so-called “experts” is that they have no expertise. They seek to create a narrative and change reality such that it aligns with their beliefs, and believe that doing so will make them experts. Bitcoin is not bit gold, and it never will be.
‘Doing anything you want’ is not a system that is free. Freedom comes within society, and it comes with rules. https://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/shades-of-black/ |
|
|
|
First gigabyte+ blocks mined in STN stress test
On May 21st 2019 the Bitcoin SV Scaling Test Network (STN) saw its maximum mined block size record broken eight times in rapid succession. In the latest release of Bitcoin SV Node (0.2.0) one of the standout changes was lifting the hard cap block size limit from 128MB to 10GB. The reason for setting the cap so far in excess of mainnet is the stated intention of STN, which is to push the limits of Bitcoin SV software to breaking point so we can identify those breaking points well in advance. The STN capacity is always intended to be several months ahead of mainnet.
Well done, top technology. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
