Genuinely interested to hear this finally play out in court. Do please keep us updated as to its progress.

*Chef's Kiss*

Fantastic suggestion, Ser! Can you even imagine the LOLs!

You know what, fuckit, rent to them and TELL THEM you're gonna make them stars and wire the home up like Big Brother, I'm sure they'd love to be watched 24/7!

*golf clap*

The single most infuriating factor in this criminal scammer's entire fake Satoshi con is the fact that so many supposed professional people, firms and platforms willingly, nay, EAGERLY took money from him and his idiot backer to provide support services of some description resulting in more and more people falling for the con.

Law firms, journalists, media outlets, PR and myriad orgs and individuals (you know who you are!) have a lot to answer for because of their unwillingness to show a little moral backbone.

Dude, we've all tried with this guy. He's just too confidently dumb to understand the basic premise of what is being explained to him and so he's stuck in this position of believing his initial assertion is correct and every time somebody patiently tries to explain it in simple terms to him he only ever seeks to twist what is said into something which allows him to return to his initial premise.

He appears to be incapable of the intellectual honesty needed to reappraise ones own erroneous assumptions when presented with sound evidence and reasoning which conflicts with it.

It's classic cognitive dissonance.

I'll roll the dice on you perhaps having the mental capacity to understand what is being said to you:

Bitcoin has value because it requires time and energy to produce. Work. Back when it cost a miner $50 to create 1 Bitcoin then Bitcoin would generally be sold by miners for more than $50 to ensure they covered their costs. Now it costs tens of thousands to produce 1 Bitcoin so miners won't sell for less than tens of thousands.

You're mistaken in thinking that gold is any different. Just because there are areas of production that can utilise the properties of gold that is not the basis for it's initial market price. Gold has a cost of production, too. Gold miners won't sell for less than it costs them to mine it out of the ground and as those costs increase so does the price of gold. Its use in industry is just an upwards pull factor on the price against the availability of the metal for purchase, the scarecity factor is related to this pricing. The push price, that which is the fundamental basis for it's introduction onto the market in the first place is the cost borne by the miner to produce it out of the ground.

Ok I give up. You're not here to learn anything, you're here to parade your Dunning-Kruger level of ignorance for us all to gawp at.
Congrats, it is impressively confident.

HFSP

Is it perhaps the conditioning children receive to believe that being wrong is a bad thing which is responsible for your inabilty to consider that your understanding of the topic is erroneous?

Let me break it down into the simplest terms I can:

The 'token' we use to represent money is currency. But we absolutely do not need to have a 'thing' at all. We could simply keep a record of debits and credits in a central database, agreed?

Money evolved out of the very first debit and credit ledgers we created and it was simply recorded as a number in a ledger. So if you as the farmer dropped off your grain at the local temple you would be assigned a certain number of credits for it and some of those credits would then be deducted against the debits you had previously run up earlier in the year when needing to buy your farming supplies etc. So you, like every other farmer and producer of goods for the community's economy would all have your debits and credits recorded in thie ledger.

If you were to look at a page of that ledger you would only see numbers being assigned to names as a result of whatever basis they had warranted a credit for. So you'd have no idea whether one unit was for grain, or grapes, or timber, as this wasn't necessary to know.

Do you know why it wasn't necessary to know? Because each unit recorded represented only one thing. The value introduced into the economic system as a result of time and energy expended creating it. Work.


That we then decided to create a token system which would then allow people to hold their own representation of that monetary unit, and then buy goods and services from other people who would accept it in exchange, is what saw the creation of a currency unit representing that monetary unit previously recorded in the ledger.

That is the difference between money and currency. Currency is just the token 'thing' we created to be able to move those written monetary unit records from the central ledger into the hands of the people so they could trade freely without it having to go through the central record for every transaction.

Yeah I'm getting the feeling that you *really* don't understand a word of what is being said to you.

'Money' is a representation of work done. Time and Energy.

An issued unit of Bitcoin is the result of Time and Energy, ergo, it is not 'nothing'.


If you are incapable of grasping this premise then you have no hope at all of understanding the topic of money. Stop confusing it for currency, that is merely its representative token.

Oh I see what the problem is. You're struggling to understand what a unit of work is in an economic sense and you're conflating money with currency.

Your trite 'payment in dust' analogy shows this misunderstanding. The 'dust' as a means of payment would be considered currency in that case because you are declaring it to be 'your money', but it fails as money because there is no scarcity and no value can be ascribed to it because no work is needed to be done to create it.

If I perform some work, say, building a house for you, my time and energy introduces additional value to the communal economy as that house will have value for many years to come. This would warrant the issuing of additional units of money to the community's collective money supply so that it is accounted for (if no new money is issued then the net effect of the value I have added to the economy is deflationary) If I want to pay my utility bills, buy a car, go on holiday, I need to offer the utility company, the car salesman, the travel company, sufficient proof of having done the equivalent value of work that equates to the price of the goods/services I am purchasing. So you need to give me a number of units of something which will maintain the same economic value as every single other unit of currency our communal economy uses (which denotes it as fungible money, one of the essential qualities of what makes something 'money')

Now, if you replace 'dust' with 'fiat currency' in your analogy, you could perhaps be a skilled forger and simply create units of currency in your back room and hand them to me, but in most fiat transactions the person paying has done some work for somebody else who, likewise, did work for others, and you all received various amounts of units of money which represented that. If no new value was added to the economy then the same monetary units all move around between people and there is no inflation or deflation.

Ideally, because I have created new value in the economy, our community central bank would print X number of new units of our money and that would be introduced into the economy, ensuring that additional value is accounted for and no deflation (and no inflation through excessive printing) occurs.

But, say central banks (and forgery) do introduce excessive amounts of new money into our communiity's economic system. Let's imagine they introduce a whole YEAR's worth of additional money into the system. Each unit of that money represents work that will have to be done to produce the equivalent value. Otherwise we're all going to see prices rise as there is more money in the system than there are things of value being created it equates to. Suddenly everything costs more but we still have exactly the same amount of value in the community's economy.

We have debased our money until we are able to balance the scales by producing more things of value into the system.

Each unit of money in an economic system represents a unit of time and energy spent (work), regardless of the token we adopt as its national currency (dollar, yen, pound, euro etc). It is how that money is created and the abuse of that process which results in the mess we see nations in these days.

This is what Bitcoin solves. It can only be produced through work which has been done, not work which is yet to be done.

Do you understand?

That's because it is, James. Like ALL money, each issued unit of Bitcoin represents actual work done.

Fiat currency (another form of money), however, can be issued in advance of the work actually being done, thereby resulting in there being an over-supply of units to the economy, causing inflation and saddling every participant and even future, yet-to-be-born, participant with the debt of needing to do the work it represents as a result.

Does that clarify things for you?

Asides from the argument against block bloat, why would a coin network which allows for your coins to be 'seized' through edict issued by companies and organisations founded by its criminal creator, be considered as 'superior'?

And don't quote the asinine claim that for a currency to be 'legit' it has to conform to 'the law', because Bitcoin is a global network with no central authority and no single jurisdiction 'the law' could even be based on. What would be legal in one country is illegal in another.

BSV's 'coin seizure' function is anathema to EVERYTHING the real Satoshi envisioned and if you don't know that then you clearly don't know anything about Bitcoin's intentional design. This was just Craig's attempt to keep spinning his false narrative to constantly have a product to sell to Calvin 'Soon™' which would result in them stealing the forked Satoshi coins and the '1Feex' etc addresses he never owned and he convinced his ayrehead mark that it would then serve as precedent for yet more court adventures to attempt same on the BTC network for the grand prize.

It was an attempted heist put together by a word-salad spouting confident idiot and his moronic mark. That's the whole purpose of everything Craig did with BSV from the moment he forked Bitcoin.

LOL, really? You think a brief pump in price disproves the facts I posted which show that Craig Wright is a criminal?

He's about to get utterly wrecked in court and then he's going to end up being dragged back to Australia to face justice for his crimes and spend many years in prison as a result.

But sure, you keep partying about how his scamcoin had a brief pump in price for a few few days.

For clarification to any newbies reading posts in this thread, this man has been proven to have committed multi-million-dollar rebate fraud in Australia before he fled to the UK and set up nChain with the man he conned into believing he owned a vast wealth in bitcoin he "just couldn't access right now" AND the guy who helped con him.

Here his former tax lawyer is dropping him as a client for having passed him forged emails that were meant to look like they'd come from the ATO. And before the OP jumps in claiming Craig was being hacked by [insert evil cabal here], this was all long before Craig ever publicly tried to claim he was Satoshi, so this was all down to him having already been under investigation by the authorities for his massive rebate scam where he tried claiming he'd spent millions doing business transactions with bitcoins that were not his or anything to do with him.

Here is Craig having drawn Calvin Ayre in with the classic 'advance fee fraud' where he's claiming to own a vast wealth of bitcoin he just can't access currently but will sell them to Calvin for pennies on the dollar now, on the proviso that he'll pay him with them in 5 years time.

^^^^ This is classic scammer tactics. You first claim that you're already fabulously wealthy so as to show you're clearly not a scammer and that you've just got a 'financial difficulty' you need to overcome WITH THEIR HELP. You then ask them for a comparatively small loan now, but assure them of a massive payout 'later'. You show them the 'paperwork' (bitcoin addresses plucked from the 'richlist' along with fake paper wallets you claim hold the privkey to large amounts of bitcoin) and promise them that your difficulties will easily be able to be overcome once your've just been able to [insert the reason how their 'loan' is going to help quickly resolve your problem here].

This is why Craig has perpetually moved the goalposts as each deadline came and went without him ever moving or spending any of the coins he'd pretended he owned.

This conversation isn't about Bitcoin, it's about BSV and regardless of any allegations you might want to make about how Bitcoin might be being used by nefarious types it is irrelevant to its design and creation.

Satoshi created Bitcoin to be how it is and Craig Wright created BSV on the proviso that he claimed to be Satoshi and you believe him to be a genius.

I've proven to you that Craig Wright is in fact a criminal conman and you are choosing to wave that off and talk about other people and other coins.

It is insanity to continue to insist that Craig Wright being a criminal conman doesn't matter.

BSV is HIS altcoin. HE is a criminal conman.

That is a fact you cannot excuse or explain away.

Again, you're avoiding the question.

How do you explain the fact that I've just shown you IRREFUTABLE PROOF that Craig Wright is both a criminal rebate fraudster AND a lying conman?

How can you excuse this when your entire project has been predicated on Calvin funding it because he thought he was funding Satoshi and it turned out he's been funding a criminal conman this entire time?


Do you believe that people should be expected to trust a coin which was created by a criminal conman?

LOL. Calvin's a fucking moron who was taken for the greedy idiot he is by the criminal conman and fraudster Craig Wright.

Every single piece of evidence Craig used to con Calvin into believing he was Satoshi has been proven to be fake, you do know that, right?

Every single thing.This is evidence Craig submitted to the court himself, including the infamous 'Coffee Stained Whitepaper'

And let's not forget the hand-written 'Meeting Minutes' notepad 'from August 2007' which turned out to be a lie because the notepade design wasn't created by the Chinese manufacturer until 2009!

How do you explain that?

What do you mean "Everyone makes mistakes"?

Craig Wright is a criminal and he is going to be hauled back to Australia to face justice for his litany of criminal acts, no matter how in denial he clearly is about the inevitable outcome of his actions.

What do you even mean by 'mistakes'?

No, I don't remember, because it never happened. Do please point out anywhere I have ever written lovingly about CZ, SBF or any of the other people you're trying to deflect the conversation to be about instead of Craig's proven criminal rebate fraud.

Seriously, how do you think that is even anything close to a reasonable response to the question I asked you?

Again, please explain the evidence which IRREFUTABLY PROVES that Craig Wright committed serious criminal rebate fraud before he fled Australia with the Feds looking for him?

Dude, he literally claimed millions in cash rebates on the basis that he lied and said he'd funded business transactions with bitcoins that have been proven to have been other people's.

You can check for yourself:

1. Here Craig claimed he owned these addresses:




You can check on the bitcoin blockchain itself and verify that these addresses I highlighted for you actually belonged to MtGox

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bitcoin-mtgox-wallet-idUSBREA2K05N20140321/
https://btc.tokenview.io/en/address/1KecDYadohxk8MCDqKF8SBEMhCUNveAsCj

So how do you explain this? It's literally irrefutable evidence of Craig Wright committing criminal rebate fraud by claiming to have funded business transactions with millions of dollars of bitcoin that were not his or anything to do with him.

Go verify it yourself if you don't want to believe me. It's all there for you to see.