"clock base structure" ?

bitcoin is not a clock

like employment
when people do work. the boss does not look at the clock on the wall to do the accounting of wages and workload performed.. he looks at the sign-in log sheet of employees that turned up to work.

bitcoin is not the clock on the wall, its the employee timesheet on the table which includes the work they performed that day

lets get real. and understand the risks..
not for Fud or horror or scare tactics but about thinking of the weaknesses to be better prepared

the 2017 saga did not prove "bitcoin strong" it proved the opposite.

the cartel of the DCG did implement a upgrade without high true consensus.. yep they mandated an activation using a couple tactics of a NY agreement of economic nodes(exchanges/main merchants) and code(UAHF(yes it was H not S)

governments can use regulation on bitcoin businesses to push a NY agreement style on the merchants/exchanges to do a UAHF (H pretending to be S) on a mandated date and get github to only keep the bitcoin repo account online if it obides to only code a PoS upgrade. whereby the main devs of core who are employees of 3 DCG child companies, brinks, chaincodelabs and blockstream are then pushed to code it.

yep the exact tactic of the mandated activation of segwit can be used again to mandate a PoS. where all the merchant services and exchanges would only be(via regulation) allowed to accept and service customers of btc if the chain is PoS (regulators already tell exchanges not to service monero/liquid/ln)

so it is a possible risk. and we need to be aware.. not stroked to sleep to pretend people dont have to do anything and everything will be fine.. much like told to do nothing in 2017 because the mandate would be fine

Ex-lead maintainer of core (Wlad) left recently. and he is right.. bitcoin needs to become less centralised. because there are central points of failure as 2017 proved

options

power companies made to limit a industries power usage to X% of local power plants power capacity (if it has excess), per business location

meaning farms are not exahash size asic farms, but X petahash size asic farms per location. this can help decentralise bitcoin mining.
instead of having "mega" asic farms it has more distributed mini asic farms where they are separately managed in lots of locations per state, thus distributing the electrical demand over different towns grid circuits instead of some mega asic farm location syphoning alot of power to one location


locations that are in are in area's that support high percentage green energy.
when new renewable power plants start. they have not built just enough production for todays demands. they have built capacity in consideration to future demands. whereby usually they are producing more power but not able to have enough residents/businesses to pay for the electric produced.
this excess can be sold to new industry entering the location. thus giving more income to power companies to then upgrade/expand new renewable plants in other locations sooner by paying off the build costs of the first plants earlier


by asic farms re-locating away from fossil powered locations. where demand on fossil is decreased. less fossil is used and thus if the demand declines below the state/counties renewable capacity they can switch off the fossil plant

knowing CSW tactics if CSW wins.
hodlonaut has to pay amounts of the UK case claim plus whatever else is added in the norweigen claim. and refrain from future social drama attacks on CSW reputation.

CSW can then make new disputes later about (false) non payments or use future social drama attacks(by others) as a trigger to re-sue hodlonaut by saying that X new attacker is hodlonaut using alt-accounts (CSW has hinted to this option already in the case) where hodlonaut then has to fight proving he is not alt-acount, (CSW can fake/photoshop, conversations between people (that never happened) to trigger more frivolous suits)

as for punishing CSW
the civil court (dispute resolution) punishment is just who wins..
there is no perjury crime if caught lying. its just the win goes to the side that didnt lie.

firstly about CSW choice to fght..
there is no choice for him, because he has no option. its either play the court or become a meaningless no-body.
(((CSW (reality) had no coin pre2013, only had 48btc in 2013 then had debt/finance problems since which were then funded by silly people he conned there after)))

after reading old notes and links to other people investigations over the years, CSW first "touch" of bitcoin was in april 2013 ( as proven by the mtgox accounts leak after the crash/liquidation, Aus gov records, US gov records) he has no 2009-2012 stash/collateral/keys/coins. linkage or mention of bitcoin prior to this. his scams previous to 2013 were trying to scam R&D grants from government and private business to create consultancy businesses and software businesses about IT security

.. as for the courts
they are not there to investigate the truth outside the dispute. in civil court they are just the mediator of a dispute and of the weigh of averages which side is more credible based on whats presented in their statements and deserves a win. its upto the 2 sides involved to do the investigating and display and explain the technical details of the dispute. not for the judge to be fully versed in all aspects of every detail of a subject matter outside the court/pre-court
(that said the judge is not stupid and has personally done some research over the last 5 days just to have a personal better understanding. as seen by becoming more confident in asking about crypto stuff)

but its not her job to demand evidence. if the opposition to CSW is not contesting what CSW is saying(hodlonauts team need to demand CSW show something.  then and only then can the judge make it a formal order, if it relates to settling the dispute.)

EG the W&k brand ownerships.
though real world knows there is no collateral.. because both sides (ira&csw) agreed/did not dispute collateral amount. the court did not need to request proof of collateral, it was just dispute resolution about % ownership rights to the brand W&K

if you imagine civil court as dispute resolution and not real world out of court truth seeking. you see the limitations of court can only deal with what has been mentioned/claimed/accused inside the room about statements said by the parties and their witnesses even if both are right, both are wrong or one has it wrong. its just about which side deserves to have the dispute won in their favour

this is what CSW is hoping for. bring in enough witnesses to seem credible
..
its upto hodlonaut's team to pick at CSW's lies, to explain the lies and to prove they are lies. not for the court to investigate things outside the court or question everything.

i would have loved to have seen more objections and entering of more facts into evidence to counter CSW's statements from hodlonauts team

but this dispute is about did hodlonaut knowingly know CSW was some mystery man pseudonym and then attack and discredit that reputation. or did hodlonaut have an opinion based on what he seen, know from the community of a pre-existing doubt about CSW story. which is then fair play for hodlonaut to say how he feels.

(like how flat earthers can say they think earth is flat)

in short. he didnt like being called a sociopath so needed some other fake diagnoses to cling onto to explain his lack or morals. something that he "felt" others would sympathise to.. and use as a medical defence if ever caught doing immoral things


as for all the forgeries..

well based on investigated info from everywhere apart from CSW (mtgox leaked accounts, ATO filings, company registration docs,)


back in 2011 CSW met with dave kleimen for the first time to discuss cyber forensics. CSW had no bitcoin and nor did dave.
they set up a cyber forensics company in 2011(W&K) to try and get some R&D money from US homeland security budget(CSW inspired idea suggested to dave to help dave cover medical costs) to start some cyber security software for the US defense department.. 4 applications failed. and both CSW and dave parted ways.. didnt talk..  (dave was put in hospital for 800+ days due to medical reasons . and was released from hospital to pass away at home within a month (april 2013.)
CSw didnt know at this point as they had not really talked in a couple years

around this time CSW got reintroduced to bitcoin by someone else after the 2012 price jump from $2 to over $100

craig bought his first bitcoin using the last of his free life savings
he bought 48btc for ~$5k in april 2013(yep not a rich guy)

where CSw started to reach out to Dave again to hear what he has to say.. but

CSW learned about daves death a week after the death
and thats also when CSW started getting wild idea's about starting lots of bitcoin related businesses and passing them off as related to his recently departed old "friend"

and thats when CSW started back peddling the defunct W&K brand to become bitcoin related with all the forgeries..
(even Ira seen many of the 'dave document signatures' as being suspect. backdated and signed in a females signature handwriting style(not daves))

in short CSW had no bitcoin until 2013 and dave had nothing to do with bitcoin.

CSW started his bitcoin games as of april 2013 ..
but kept failing
he even trued to use the W&K brand to get R&D money from the autralian tax office for some IT vetures he had in mind(but never flourished as usual)
and got into real debt by early 2014 where the australian tax office started really sniffing into CSW multiple failed companies

 the rest is just drama..
of debt and forgeries to try evading debt repayments by going deeper down the scammer rabbit hole inventing new companies to shift fake collateral between, that he never had, suggesting to people that he owed money that he was good for it because (well yes he pretended he invented bitcoin and had loads of coins)

.. very short..
anything bitcoin related and CSW related pre april 2013.. dont beleive

to explain the social drama history.. of the supposed keys

7 years ago CSW conned people about some signed document that (supposedly) dave klieman signed that he seen $m's of dollars of value. which was apparently according to certain things revealed years ago just a txt file of public keys that (supposedly/doubtful (after death back dated)) kliemen signed as proof of collateral for tulip which then gave W&K some perceived value for investors..(in short no one seen a file of private keys or signed proofs of transactions or signed messages )

.. this then changed story(circa 2016-7) to how the actual private keys were on another printed document with some courier who meant to turn up in 2020.... hindsight now..  who didnt turn up in 2020(no shock)

then it was that the keys were in a trust where the guys were multisig(we know 2009-2013 keys were p2pk/p2pkh.. not p2sh(multisig)
thus that story didnt last long

then he said the p2pk keys were spliced.. where each guys numerics were split into parts using an algo where he kept the algo but the trust had divisions/splits of the keys

then it became how the algo needed some key to work with the splices where he has the key(hmac)

and most recently story that from the genesis.. all keys are derivatives(child) of a parent master key

yea. his story changes depending on who he talks to and what season of the year it is..

businesses mostly see a degree as this:
* a person that has agreed to work(study) for X years without getting paid
*seeing someone get out of bed and do work without instant reward
*someone that is willing to put effort into bettering their life
*someone that has had years of working(classroom)  with others
*someone that take orders(teachers assignments)

this shows more about personality than skill. and yes business  decide on personality as well as skill

businesses do see the benefit of someone that done a degree in anything more then a "lacky" that has done nothing.

but with that said having a degree does not promise you a job because most state universities of 40,000 students+ per uni have dozens of thousands of people every year all getting degree's
yep if you are in a degree with 50 other students .. that is you having the same qualification as them and them competing for the job you want. so you only have a 2% chance of getting the job your classmates are also applying for.

and with that said. someone with natural talent that finishes highschool and just starts up their own business or 'learns on the job' from the bottom. could just as easily compete.. with the right motivations(personality)

. there are alot of crypto people that become successful in coding and running businesses now about bitcoin..  that never went to university to learn business or IT. they learned by just giving it a go and learning at their own pace privately at home. and showing off their skill by releasing their projects or having a portfolio of demonstrable work they can do.

poor people CAN compete with rich people that went to university. its just that poor people dont always get the free time after their 60 hour minimum wage job(to pay the bills) to then have time to learn/invest in their own future of learning from home. because they are just tired at the end of the night or dont see the point because others have told them they wont be able to compete with "college educated guys"

its not so much a buddy system
its even the basics of money management/confidence

image they only have $50 spare cash a month
poor people are not thinking/looking for opportunities
they are mitigating potential future homelife surprises(risks)
(need to save this incase boiler breaks)
(dang kids need school shoes for next semester. must keep it for that)

where as rich people with spare $50 would try to turn $50 into $72 into $103. and then spend the original $50 on homelife surprises keeping 53 spare to grow more


if you gave $10 to a poor kid and a rich kid each.. heres how things play out

poor kids parents would tell kid to save it because christmas is coming and he can buy his sister a nice toy for christmas that costs $10

rich kids parents would tell kid. to buy $10 of ingredients to make lemonade for 20 glasses. and sell 20 glasses of lemonade for $1 each($20)

yes the poor kid could also sell lemonade.. nothing physically is stopping him. but thats not how he was taught to see money as opportunity, even when opportunity is just around the corner at the corner store that sells ingredients

its like the word
"appreciate"
poor: enjoy and respect money(spend it on things)
rich: accumulate and multiple(invest it)

same word different meanings

when luna crashed it affected bitcoin because in the escape most went through binance which couldnt escape with proper withdrawals meaning they funneled people through binance chain to coinbase as coinbase was the custodian of most of the locked/pegged sidechain coin which on receipt coinbase could unlock/unpeg to then use coin for withdrawals.. that mess was a double slam on bitcoin

but with ethereum people are not reliant on sidechains of bitcoin. ethereum can just cash out to fiat. because ethereum has its own fiat market order books on the main exchanges of price discovery

so less reliance of a bitcoin path out of exchanges
...
infact those that dont want to take their etherem exit fiat back to the bank may end up buying bitcoin while its cheap as a better store of value.

bitcoins efficient PoW cost is ~$15k where price is 33% more (0.3x)
compared to ethereums 'cost' ~$31 where price is 4700% above (47x)

if i couldnt be bothered to passive mine an asset and thought screw it lets just buy it and have it now, no fuss,, id much rather buy something that only has a 33% premuim than a 4700% premium added on

atleast i know im getting my moneys worth

snowshow now admits


so he admits he has not learned about bitcoin. or learned if it works as intended..

his whole premiss is about an article..

if he read bitcoin code he will learn soo much, real quick and realise how much he didnt know before

so imagine if instead of say gold mining which costs about $900/ounce of labour, diesel, sluice machines, loader tricks and diggers..
where market rates are about 1.5x speculative bubble factor of underlying cost(value)
where gold have only ever reached a 2x factor in the last couple decades


imagine if gold could be mined in someones back yard for just $1 an ounce.. using a spoon and coffee filter paper

do you think gold would remain at a market rate of speculation of $1700

well
Ethereum just changed its mining underlying costs


from over $940 to under $35

i will let you discuss how much of a X multiple 'speculation bubble factor'. the market should remain at

enjoy the thoughts..

oh slight hint.. expect ethereum price to continue to decline until it corrects to a good value new low

do you accept that your story of late 2008-2009 does not fit the actual events of bitcoin. (actual events that are proven by code and blockdata)

yes or no

do you accept that you requested information about the first site able to let users log-in to then trade bitcoin for fiat.. and we told you straight by many people showing links and proof. did not occur until march 2010

yes or no

if no to any..
dont just reply to say
"im not trying any scams. im honest ill give proof but only to X and only at some time in unspecified date in the future"
instead
take some time to research actual history. figure out where your story is wrong. and then explain things as you see them after reviewing actual history of bitcoin

OR
take my advice. realise your scam is up. your not getting anything out of it. and instead think of something new. something productive that is of benefit to the community. if it is in regards to wanting to follow CSW gameplan. then try to research his games better. and then out HIM as the scammer and make a story you can sell about how he is a scammer (EG turn whitehat)

this is not meant as FUD or to scare, but its deeper thinking about the plays which governments can do..

firstly bitcoin as an asset currency, is protected by property law..  whereby there are limitations on regulators telling businesses and users what they can do with their/our property.. because yes businesses and users can sue government if regulations cause adverse business/personal loss..

however if there is a switch to where bitcoin is regulated as a "commodity" under the premiss that bitcoin is a raw material used to make other products (tokenisation of sidechain units of measure)

then regulators can push further, limiting how much produce can be made by 'farms'. how much energy and materials farm can use. and a heck of alot of other things
(agriculture is very much under the thumb of commodity quota's, regulations and environmental limits)

however current drafts are not suggesting to go to extremes right now..
governments are not requesting a PoS change direct/now/soon. they are going to do a few things first and if each fails then go extreme

first ask asic miners to shift their power supplier/bill provider to one that are more 'green'

next request the larger asic farms to move to regions that are green and accepting of new large usage demand

next restrict businesses that use excessive energy to only have a quota amount of electric to contract to limiting over-use,

and if not, .. if all those have not helped ease the minds of government..
if bitcoin was to use more then a fair share of green and/or doesnt stop facilitating the continuation of fossil usage..
.. then possibly they will do PoS push
using tactics already done in crypto..
EG a (NY agreement+UAHF(yes H not S occured) ploy) using regulations with the bitcoin businesses. to mandate a new upgrade which exchanges, merchants and corporate development teams have to push and accept a PoS fork as BTC and the pow native version as an altcoin

where the upgrade would follow the ethereum tactic
..
lets discuss that last extreme.. of a POS push scenario
again this is not meant as FUD or scare tactics. its about risk awareness of extreme possibilities. and yes it is a small. but real possibility. to be aware of to then think of ways to mitigate and limits its ability to occur

and yes regulators can push all the businesses of crypto to comply.
- regulators can push employees of:
    brink, chaincode labs, blockstream, github to comply or have penalties
    (a dev push to mandate code change can be pushed)
    (as did DCG(blockstream) in 2017)

- regulators can push MSB's:
    exchanges, merchants, custodial wallets to comply or have penalties
    (to only service/fullnode/archive  certain network)
    (as US regulators did to exchanges not service monero, liquid, LN)
    (much like DCG(NY agreement) pushed in 2017)

to implement the code.. well thats like what ETH did
they first need to mandate 2 upgrades

an upgrade that simply sets a future date when PoW difficulty formulae changes to just exponentially get harder no matter the speed of block solves.. . where it makes PoW unsustainable to maintain after programmed trigger date

then during that delay period. mandate another upgrade to fork to PoS on said trigger date. where merchants/exchanges, and corporate dev teams only accept, view and maintain the PoS chains protocol and call the PoS protocol btc

obviously users will just follow suite. after all no point holding onto a blockchain that does not solve blocks fast and is not seen by exchanges/merchants. meaning people cant make transactions or spend value on said forgotten chain

so though the chances of such a thing happening may be minimal. if politicians see positive "greening" of crypto. we still need to be risk aware
due to the actual central points of failure that can be used against us. these being:

35% of mining in america
reliance on licenced and regulated exchanges
most prominent exchanges are american licenced/regulated
everyone follows one reference client sourced from one service(github) and maintained by mostly employees of 3 corporations who are child companies of a DCG portfolio

we really need to start thinking about mitigating these central points of failure to not make it that easy to cause regulators to push to extremes(if they should choose to)

seems you are bored and just trying to entertain yourself with trolly games to see who will believe your fantasy/lies (like the flat earthers do)

if you are that bored and want to just repeat CSW games for entertainment and possible income..

..here is an idea for you

how about truly look at all the CSW scams. and write them out into a book about how CSW scammed crypto.

then you might have a best seller.. even i would buy it(though i doubt you care to have the energy to even bother researching/doing work)
..

you wont get anywhere from repeating CSW scams. but you might get somewhere reporting on CSW scams

he is just a troll.. bored of life bored of reality but not ready to learn how things really work.. and he does not understand bitcoin..nor wants to know

. best to not argue about his misunderstanding and instead just use his misunderstanding against him

and so

by snowshow not being sure if the whitepaper writer created bitcoin.(by saying allegedly) then in snowshow mind the white paper has less relevance to bitcoin.

thus snowshow should stop reading the white paper and instead actually learn bitcoin

and there is it.. its funny how i predicted it. you are revealing more and more of your scam that i said you would be pulling..
pretending you knew satoshi and have secret info on him

so as a reminder

let me guess.. your next evolutions/phases of your scam are going to be:
you will wish that people interested in your story will come together and invest in your plan to "investigate" (in your words)bitcoin founders. whereby you promise them a % cut of any coins you get that you feel you are owed by them by your relationship with them/him. or they get a return from selling stories to the press. or from some court case you wish to file later

where by you wish to display a long list of publicly available addresses anyone can copy and display and pretend they belong to you/owed to you.

wait.. im feeling de ja vu.. why am i describing CSW's 2015 tactics(before his 'i am satoshi' scam)

..
heck ill save the audience time
next will be that you somehow gave what you call(in your words) the bitcoin founders an idea that grew bitcoin and that you actually were satoshi

we have told you many times
the real world factual events of bitcoin
there was no site which you could log into to then trade bitcoins for money until march 2010
(previous to this(oct 2009) was a open display webpage of prices, which used email order request and payment method conversation system for a couple trades)

we have told you many times
the real world factual events of bitcoin
there was no bitcoin code in late 2008 for any "coin" to even exist

no one was talking about using and/or trading bitcoin in late 2008-early 2009

..
as for your tactics to try to create some social drama of inventing history to create some narrative that you are owed something.

try to actually learn about bitcoin. learn the real events. and give up your scam

you seem to wish to ignore facts/data/history. and instead be stubbornly ignorant and arrogant in pushing some fantasy made up creation of your mind.

true honest people that could have actually lost coins due to some of the early exchanges. would be trying to investigate and learn about the true history and actual exchanges that existed.. not try making them up and waste days repeating their fantasy story.

learn about bitcoin.

realise that you scheme is not going to work. give up the con. and instead become a normal member of society trying to better your life using bitcoin, not fantasy

yes bitcoin is code. blockchain data and ASIC devices that use electric.. not whitepapers

and the good thing about the code is that it is open-source so you can read it.

yep.. bitcoin is not paper
you are trying to describe what you see in a "whitepaper" dated and released 2008

 .. you are not trying to describe the blockchain, its data or the devices it uses or the code that enforces the rules. that only began in january 2009

if you cannot tell the difference between the 2 different things. then spend some time to learn the difference between bitcoin "blockchain together with open-source software and protocols" vs whitepaper/articles

try to check the code, look at the blockchain data and touch an asic.
then you may begin to learn how things actually work


for instance bitcoins mining process uses ASICS not CPU's. ASICS are not mentioned in the white paper.

learning about bitcoin by only looking at "a article" or "whitepaper" as you suggest, shows you are not learning much about bitcoin.
especially when you only take snippets of a sentence of a white paper you are not fully understanding. where you have not read the entire context, content

the only truthful thing i read today.. from the guys of CSW "witnesses"
how matthews says he CSW and ayres all met up in 2015 to start to actually do something related to bitcoin..
..
all the crap about the "drafts" white papers they "might" remember. "alleged" to have seen was the lies

none of them seen him do coding, mining, trading or anything in 2008-2014 related to bitcoin

(the 2015 is where CSW started his crypto scam of seeking investors to pay off his ATO debt, and first starts telling people he was involved in bitcoin. )