Gleb Gamow (OP)
In memoriam
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1145
|
|
May 05, 2016, 09:55:24 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The network tries to produce one block per 10 minutes. It does this by automatically adjusting how difficult it is to produce blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
Jhanzo
|
|
May 05, 2016, 10:00:37 PM |
|
err.. maybe you should start with how you linked that address with craig wright first? can't find anything on google.
|
Trusted an exchange that climbed to the top 3 in just under 2 years with your money? you are fucking stupid.
|
|
|
Gleb Gamow (OP)
In memoriam
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1145
|
|
May 05, 2016, 10:05:28 PM |
|
err.. maybe you should start with how you linked that address with craig wright first? can't find anything on google.
I have the following link at the top of the OP. The pasebin link was from Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hx3q9/according_to_the_mtgox_leaks_from_early_2014_our/https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hx3q9/according_to_the_mtgox_leaks_from_early_2014_our/submitted 8 hours ago * by apoefjmqdsfls
As /u/winlifeat posted here, Craig was user 'e62d5e53-0dbc-44be-9591-725cd55ca9dd' at the Mtgox exchange. With this identifier, it's possible to look up his trades in the 2014 leak. I posted the raw data in this pastebin, you can import it into spreadsheet software like Excel to play with it yourself.
He started trading at 22/04/2013, this is just after the crash of the April 2013 bubble (or the 'Cyprus bubble'). He lost interest pretty quickly, because activity stopped 27/04, only to come back 25/11 around the peak of the last bitcoin bubble. His average price is actually $120 and he bought around 50 bitcoins, but his last buy was 17 bitcoins at around $1200. He ends up with a balance of just under 15 bitcoins when mtgox shuts down, so he probably lost another few bitcoins with trading. (The trade data in the leak stops at November 2013)
This I can't understand. Why would he buy Bitcoins at $1200 if he had like around a million of them? If he was selling that's OK, but why he was buying them? http://pastebin.com/g3ME3Grcf3f476e6-aeee-4588-b4c9-7806799d1396,9ab89b61-b62a-4c6e-9ae6-af0c162b18db,"2013-04-24 03:27:04",withdraw,-1.8 f3f476e6-aeee-4588-b4c9-7806799d1396,732006b1-ee55-425f-9482-1ef41ed2ae88,"2013-04-24 03:32:32",withdraw,-1.8 f3f476e6-aeee-4588-b4c9-7806799d1396,3f7cb5be-f852-4660-9993-ce7bce950f91,"2013-04-24 04:21:02",deposit,0.57 f3f476e6-aeee-4588-b4c9-7806799d1396,7abd5d12-d8a8-42b6-9716-aa8b16d84ae1,"2013-05-03 04:30:23",withdraw,-43.8857 f3f476e6-aeee-4588-b4c9-7806799d1396,fee6e20c-f488-44ae-9309-201cbdab7836,"2013-11-24 22:58:00",deposit,23.461 f3f476e6-aeee-4588-b4c9-7806799d1396,726e2a91-5d5c-431d-a629-ffbf04b8102e,"2014-01-22 08:46:26",withdraw,-3 https://blockchain.info/address/1FedX5gRu5UZbJCZs7J2GEWA5N3BcTAsdFTime for us to do some forensics of our own on the world's topmost forensics dude. HAHAHACSW: Looks like Mt Gox is not to be trusted, ergo time for another deposit to prove them monumental asshole trolls wrong: https://www.walletexplorer.com/txid/f40754ef64b9c977e08f5f63afcd8ec4ad6a4ec241363b275a7879f67d01f836
|
|
|
|
Jhanzo
|
|
May 05, 2016, 10:24:00 PM |
|
|
Trusted an exchange that climbed to the top 3 in just under 2 years with your money? you are fucking stupid.
|
|
|
|
AgentofCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
|
May 05, 2016, 10:28:20 PM Last edit: May 05, 2016, 11:01:53 PM by AgentofCoin |
|
....
Looks like CSW doesn't like paying miner's fees. I think the 1btc transfer was the signal to his sleeper cell agents. When he moved that on April 30th, they knew the time was near. Craig: Chapter 22, Section 28 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh."
|
I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time. Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
|
|
|
AGD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2069
Merit: 1164
Keeper of the Private Key
|
|
May 05, 2016, 10:45:02 PM |
|
By now I only see that Craig moved a Bitcoin. Did I miss the Satoshi part?
|
|
|
|
fenican
|
|
May 05, 2016, 10:59:08 PM |
|
How is 1KzLMV6MaeAxykzFJdqvd1M6i6egaZmNAc associated with Satoshi? Looks like it was funded in 2013.
|
|
|
|
HarryKPeters
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:08:59 PM |
|
I read a new press statement that he was scared to publish more proof of him being Satoshi, which makes things extra interesting. He still could be the one, however with the last article i read i doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Gleb Gamow (OP)
In memoriam
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1145
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:13:25 PM |
|
By now I only see that Craig moved a Bitcoin. Did I miss the Satoshi part?
It's in all the papers - CSW is SN. A Bitcoiner never lies, ergo it's true. In this case Gavin and Jon vouched for his character. I, too, vouch that CSW is a character.
|
|
|
|
daniobg
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 232
Merit: 105
Solarcoin.org
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:19:02 PM |
|
It's in all the papers - CSW is SN. A Bitcoiner never lies, ergo it's true. In this case Gavin and Jon vouched for his character. I, too, vouch that CSW is a character.
Dude what are you on? Shrooms or smth? Seriously tell me, because I need to try that shit ASAP!!!
|
|
|
|
Gleb Gamow (OP)
In memoriam
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1145
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:24:33 PM |
|
It's in all the papers - CSW is SN. A Bitcoiner never lies, ergo it's true. In this case Gavin and Jon vouched for his character. I, too, vouch that CSW is a character.
Dude what are you on? Shrooms or smth? Seriously tell me, because I need to try that shit ASAP!!! Meanwhile... https://blockchain.info/address/1aiTubGdDYjVSR5zhtj5LozqtsGd1hcFvLeave it to Craig Steven Wright-cum-Satoshi Nakamoto to break the blockchain.
|
|
|
|
mixan
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 966
Merit: 1000
TRUMP IS DOING THE BEST! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:27:23 PM |
|
He gone and broke the chain. All this revealing himself was just a smoke screen to fill his real purpose on his upcoming book deal I AM SATOSHI!
|
The parasite hates three things: free markets, free will, and free men.
|
|
|
Quartx
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:33:16 PM |
|
Here we go again.. Another retard with no actual proof just trying to bullshit his way out. Unless he moves coins from the early blocks, nope, you can just believe in it yourself.
|
|
|
|
daniobg
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 232
Merit: 105
Solarcoin.org
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:41:00 PM |
|
Gleb I don't know if you are joking or serious right now??? If by any chance you are serious let me tell you 1 more time - we don't see the connection between that address and Satoshi. Yes it is all over the papers, Yes Craig claims to be Satoshi, OK you found some address that may be Craigs from 2013 ok good. So 1 more time now - THAT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING and I don't know how you connect it to Satoshi... Anyway I will assume that you are drunk, or joking or high whatever, because otherwise you don't make any sence...
|
|
|
|
NoBit
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:41:23 PM |
|
How is this possible? What do these equations mean? Maybe he is trying to tell us something and it was in front of our eyes the whole time!?
|
Bitrated user: nobit.
|
|
|
Gleb Gamow (OP)
In memoriam
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1145
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:42:56 PM |
|
Gleb I don't know if you are joking or serious right now??? If by any chance you are serious let me tell you 1 more time - we don't see the connection between that address and Satoshi. Yes it is all over the papers, Yes Craig claims to be Satoshi, OK you found some address that may be Craigs from 2013 ok good. So 1 more time now - THAT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING and I don't know how you connect it to Satoshi... Anyway I will assume that you are drunk, or joking or high whatever, because otherwise you don't make any sence...
Here we go again.. Another retard with no actual proof just trying to bullshit his way out. Unless he moves coins from the early blocks, nope, you can just believe in it yourself.
This thread is based on CSW claiming to be SN, something I DON'T believe. Three Satoshis walk into a bar: Bartender: Not this again! John Matonis: Gavin, you wanna buy them gents a drink? Gavin Andresen: I bought the last round. Joseph VaughnPerling: I'll pick up the tab. Let 'em drink. Bartender: Facepalms on the house. <hey, I just coined a new drink - [the] Facepalm>
|
|
|
|
vodaljepa
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:47:36 PM |
|
Gleb smoking that good kush kush
|
|
|
|
daniobg
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 232
Merit: 105
Solarcoin.org
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:55:25 PM |
|
This thread is based on CSW claiming to be SN, something I DON'T believe.
Well it looked like you are serious at the beginning, don't get mad because no one understood the "satire" behing it. Anyway we have too much threads about that clown already I don't know why you opened another one...
|
|
|
|
Gleb Gamow (OP)
In memoriam
VIP
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1145
|
|
May 05, 2016, 11:59:35 PM |
|
This thread is based on CSW claiming to be SN, something I DON'T believe.
Well it looked like you are serious at the beginning, don't get mad because no one understood the "satire" behing it. Anyway we have too much threads about that clown already I don't know why you opened another one... To conduct forensics on CSW's bitcoin wallet addresses is basically the theme of this thread. To date, some interesting things have already been gleaned.
|
|
|
|
fenican
|
|
May 06, 2016, 12:35:49 AM |
|
It would be funny if CSW was Satoshi and the private key is hidden in that ridiculous equation
|
|
|
|
|
NoBit
|
|
May 06, 2016, 01:19:14 AM |
|
It would be funny if CSW was Satoshi and the private key is hidden in that ridiculous equation
yes very
|
Bitrated user: nobit.
|
|
|
pooya87
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3444
Merit: 10549
|
|
May 06, 2016, 02:19:44 AM |
|
i am sorry but what are you guys trying to say in this whole topic i don't quite understand it? can anybody fill me in, especially on what do you want to conclude from the negative time?
|
. .BLACKJACK ♠ FUN. | | | ███▄██████ ██████████████▀ ████████████ █████████████████ ████████████████▄▄ ░█████████████▀░▀▀ ██████████████████ ░██████████████ █████████████████▄ ░██████████████▀ ████████████ ███████████████░██ ██████████ | | CRYPTO CASINO & SPORTS BETTING | | │ | | │ | ▄▄███████▄▄ ▄███████████████▄ ███████████████████ █████████████████████ ███████████████████████ █████████████████████████ █████████████████████████ █████████████████████████ ███████████████████████ █████████████████████ ███████████████████ ▀███████████████▀ ███████████████████ | | .
|
|
|
|
AgentofCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
|
May 06, 2016, 02:32:59 AM |
|
i am sorry but what are you guys trying to say in this whole topic i don't quite understand it? can anybody fill me in, especially on what do you want to conclude from the negative time?
I'm not going to speak for Gleb, but if you look at what I posted above, which is basically following CSW withdrawal from MTGOX (which Gleb pointed out), there comes a point where the txs get very messed up. If you look at mine above, according to the info, address 1g45rAM6Ci1gKSVabr7Eua5dsyNvd77y8 has a withdrawal from the address before it actually has a deposit. That is not possible so there must be an issue somewhere. You can not get a output before you have an input. There have been problems with blockchain.info's block explorer reporting false info, but I just checked blockexporer.com and they report the same basic thing. So there is a weird bug here. Probably related to timestamping. So simply, the time it took from relay to confirmation in a block was negative 56 minutes, meaning that that txs was placed into a block 56 minutes before the network mempool even detected its existence and circulate that pending tx.
|
I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time. Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
|
|
|
valkir
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1004
|
|
May 06, 2016, 02:42:29 AM |
|
i am sorry but what are you guys trying to say in this whole topic i don't quite understand it? can anybody fill me in, especially on what do you want to conclude from the negative time?
I'm not going to speak for Gleb, but if you look at what I posted above, which is basically following CSW withdrawal from MTGOC (which Gleb pointed out), there comes a point where the txs get very messed up. If you look at mine above, according to the info, address 1g45rAM6Ci1gKSVabr7Eua5dsyNvd77y8 has a withdrawal from the address before it actually has a deposit. That is not possible so there must be an issue somewhere. You can not get a output before you have an input. There have been problems with blockchain.info's block explorer reporting false info, but I just checked blockexporer.com and they report the same basic thing. So there is a weird bug here. Probably related to timestamping. So simply, the time it took from relay to confirmation in a block was negative 56 minutes, meaning that that txs was placed into a block 56 minutes before the network mempool even detected its existence and circulate that pending tx. Hum how can this be possible curious to have a expert answer on that.
|
██ Please support sidehack with his new miner project Send to :
1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
|
|
|
pooya87
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3444
Merit: 10549
|
|
May 06, 2016, 02:58:18 AM |
|
well, i am not an expert but as far as i know (with the help of AgentofCoin explanation and google) every transaction has a time attribute inside of it which you can set it manually like this even into the future (don't panic when seeing 2035 ) and when the tx is included in a block then there will be another time (the block mined time) which then the explorer will calculate that time difference this way and in this case i think the -54 min difference is just the daylight saving time difference between the sender and the miner (6 minutes to get included in the block)
|
. .BLACKJACK ♠ FUN. | | | ███▄██████ ██████████████▀ ████████████ █████████████████ ████████████████▄▄ ░█████████████▀░▀▀ ██████████████████ ░██████████████ █████████████████▄ ░██████████████▀ ████████████ ███████████████░██ ██████████ | | CRYPTO CASINO & SPORTS BETTING | | │ | | │ | ▄▄███████▄▄ ▄███████████████▄ ███████████████████ █████████████████████ ███████████████████████ █████████████████████████ █████████████████████████ █████████████████████████ ███████████████████████ █████████████████████ ███████████████████ ▀███████████████▀ ███████████████████ | | .
|
|
|
|
AgentofCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
|
May 06, 2016, 03:14:19 AM |
|
well, i am not an expert but as far as i know (with the help of AgentofCoin explanation and google) every transaction has a time attribute inside of it which you can set it manually like this even into the future (don't panic when seeing 2035 ) and when the tx is included in a block then there will be another time (the block mined time) which then the explorer will calculate that time difference this way and in this case i think the -54 min difference is just the daylight saving time difference between the sender and the miner (6 minutes to get included in the block) No, the time that is displayed is how long blockchain.info thinks it took for that individual tx to get 1 confirmation. In your example of https://blockchain.info/tx/d2c39af85861f8cc1ee236919335f30f190ab2a9fcccf7bcaa9597432d7aa616, blockchain.info is reporting that the tx took 22 years before it was placed into a block. Lol. Which of course is impossible. I am not aware that tx data contains timestamping of when it was transmitted, and thus can be manipulated. My understanding is the timestamping comes from the first node that detected it and then the block found timestamping. Maybe someone with their own purposefully backdated/timed node pushed their own tx to a blockchain.info node, so that blockchain.info thought the tx was pending for 22 years. But really I have no idea, I'm not an expert either.
|
I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time. Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
|
|
|
pooya87
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3444
Merit: 10549
|
|
May 06, 2016, 03:34:51 AM |
|
well, i am not an expert but as far as i know (with the help of AgentofCoin explanation and google) every transaction has a time attribute inside of it which you can set it manually like this even into the future (don't panic when seeing 2035 ) and when the tx is included in a block then there will be another time (the block mined time) which then the explorer will calculate that time difference this way and in this case i think the -54 min difference is just the daylight saving time difference between the sender and the miner (6 minutes to get included in the block) No, the time that is displayed is how long blockchain.info thinks it took for that individual tx to get 1 confirmation. In your example of https://blockchain.info/tx/d2c39af85861f8cc1ee236919335f30f190ab2a9fcccf7bcaa9597432d7aa616, blockchain.info is reporting that the tx took 22 years before it was placed into a block. Lol. Which of course is impossible. I am not aware that tx data contains timestamping of when it was transmitted, and thus can be manipulated. My understanding is the timestamping comes from the first node that detected it and then the block found timestamping. Maybe someone with their own purposefully backdated/timed node pushed their own tx to a blockchain.info node, so that blockchain.info thought the tx was pending for 22 years. But really I have no idea, I'm not an expert either. well, again i am not an expert so maybe someone like CIYAM should come along and explain it much better. but again there is a timestamp in each transaction that you can change in case of the said transaction it has a timestamp of 2063836859 in UNIX format which is Sun, 27 May 2035 00:00:59 GMT ( http://www.onlineconversion.com/unix_time.htm) https://blockchain.info/tx/d2c39af85861f8cc1ee236919335f30f190ab2a9fcccf7bcaa9597432d7aa616?format=jsonrelevant: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1164293.0
|
. .BLACKJACK ♠ FUN. | | | ███▄██████ ██████████████▀ ████████████ █████████████████ ████████████████▄▄ ░█████████████▀░▀▀ ██████████████████ ░██████████████ █████████████████▄ ░██████████████▀ ████████████ ███████████████░██ ██████████ | | CRYPTO CASINO & SPORTS BETTING | | │ | | │ | ▄▄███████▄▄ ▄███████████████▄ ███████████████████ █████████████████████ ███████████████████████ █████████████████████████ █████████████████████████ █████████████████████████ ███████████████████████ █████████████████████ ███████████████████ ▀███████████████▀ ███████████████████ | | .
|
|
|
|
AgentofCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
|
May 06, 2016, 04:00:50 AM |
|
I see what you are saying now. You are mostly correct except that the part of the json, where it says "time":2063836859," I believe is not part of the tx information and is just internal blockchain.info data. Blockchain.info is claiming they received the tx in 2035, even though they clearly show it being placed into a block in 2013 ("block_height":237173,"). I think the senders node is sending the "time":2063836859,", it is not in the tx.
|
I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time. Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
|
|
|
|
AgentofCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
|
May 06, 2016, 05:02:58 AM |
|
Yes, when it is included in the block is all the really matters, but what I don't know for sure is the timestamping reported by blockchain.info. Is that faulty date/time from the first node that relayed the tx and blockchain.info sees and just grabs that bad info and runs with it? Or does it come from somewhere else?
|
I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time. Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
|
|
|
|
Kakmakr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3444
Merit: 1957
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
|
|
May 06, 2016, 05:46:04 AM |
|
So what OP is saying is.. If Craig is Satoshi <As it's being claimed> and he owns a Bitcoin Address linked to MtGox, and coins on that address moved, he must be Satoshi. I think I will rather wait for a message on the Genesis block, than accepting this logic.
I think this is more meant as a tongue in the cheek statement than anything else. Gleb has a good sense of humor.
|
..Stake.com.. | | | ▄████████████████████████████████████▄ ██ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██ ▄████▄ ██ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██████████ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██ ██████████ ██ ▀██▀ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ██ █████ ███ ██████ ██ ████▄ ██ ██ █████ ███ ████ ████ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ████ ████ ██████████ ████ ████ ████▀ ██ ██████████ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██████████ ██ ██ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██ ▀█████████▀ ▄████████████▄ ▀█████████▀ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███ ██ ██ ███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██████████████████████████████████████████ | | | | | | ▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄ █ ▄▀▄ █▀▀█▀▄▄ █ █▀█ █ ▐ ▐▌ █ ▄██▄ █ ▌ █ █ ▄██████▄ █ ▌ ▐▌ █ ██████████ █ ▐ █ █ ▐██████████▌ █ ▐ ▐▌ █ ▀▀██████▀▀ █ ▌ █ █ ▄▄▄██▄▄▄ █ ▌▐▌ █ █▐ █ █ █▐▐▌ █ █▐█ ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀█ | | | | | | ▄▄█████████▄▄ ▄██▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀██▄ ▄█▀ ▐█▌ ▀█▄ ██ ▐█▌ ██ ████▄ ▄█████▄ ▄████ ████████▄███████████▄████████ ███▀ █████████████ ▀███ ██ ███████████ ██ ▀█▄ █████████ ▄█▀ ▀█▄ ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄ ▄▄▄█▀ ▀███████ ███████▀ ▀█████▄ ▄█████▀ ▀▀▀███▄▄▄███▀▀▀ | | | ..PLAY NOW.. |
|
|
|
Enotche
|
|
May 06, 2016, 05:49:33 AM |
|
The journalist was asked to send a certain number of btc on the purse specified in the very first transaction. And then Craig would send funds back to the journalist, proving that he was indeed the same Satoshi. It would be the first transaction with the specified Bitcoin address since 2009. This was done, the journalist sent 0.017BTC. John Matonis and Gavin Andresen do likewise. And then the three of them waited. And wait. Then the phone rang, and the team of Craig said that the operation is paused, without giving any reason. 18 hours later, a reverse payment has not arrived. And later Craig deleted my site, saying goodbye to everyone. Why he did it, and why did not carry out the promised transaction? The question is rhetorical. https://blockchain.info/address/12cbQLTFMXRnSzktFkuoG3eHoMeFtpTu3S
|
|
|
|
AGD
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2069
Merit: 1164
Keeper of the Private Key
|
|
May 06, 2016, 06:43:16 AM |
|
OK Bruno. Stop it already. Everything makes sense when you are Satoshi Nakamoto. I have found out that, the letters of Gleb Gamow are NOT leading to Satoshi Nakamoto, which is the ultimate proof: The real Satoshi would always use a nickname that couldn't be associated with his Satoshi nick. /thread Donations go here, thanks:
1Ez69SnzzmePmZX3WpEzMKTrcBF2gpNQ55
|
|
|
|
Luviasst
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
|
|
May 06, 2016, 06:55:52 AM |
|
He has give up to prove him, so end the case.
|
|
|
|
MisO69
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1005
My mule don't like people laughing
|
|
May 06, 2016, 05:33:07 PM |
|
The journalist was asked to send a certain number of btc on the purse specified in the very first transaction. And then Craig would send funds back to the journalist, proving that he was indeed the same Satoshi. It would be the first transaction with the specified Bitcoin address since 2009. This was done, the journalist sent 0.017BTC. John Matonis and Gavin Andresen do likewise. And then the three of them waited. And wait. Then the phone rang, and the team of Craig said that the operation is paused, without giving any reason. 18 hours later, a reverse payment has not arrived. And later Craig deleted my site, saying goodbye to everyone. Why he did it, and why did not carry out the promised transaction? The question is rhetorical. https://blockchain.info/address/12cbQLTFMXRnSzktFkuoG3eHoMeFtpTu3SI read somewhere that the Australian authorities had searched Craig's house and questioned Craig regarding taxes owed. One possibility is that Craig was told by his attorney to drop this whole i'm satoshi thing, thus preventing any sort of legal action against him for tax evasion. here is the article. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/09/bitcoin-founder-craig-wrights-home-raided-by-australian-policeAfter all, he did say that he wants to be left alone, he doesn't want money and he just wants to work.
|
|
|
|
noormcs5
|
|
May 06, 2016, 06:12:37 PM |
|
I see what you are saying now. You are mostly correct except that the part of the json, where it says "time":2063836859," I believe is not part of the tx information and is just internal blockchain.info data. Blockchain.info is claiming they received the tx in 2035, even though they clearly show it being placed into a block in 2013 ("block_height":237173,"). I think the senders node is sending the "time":2063836859,", it is not in the tx. Its pretty strange on the part of Block Chain . Blockchain.info is claiming they received the tx in 2035. Unbelievable
|
..Stake.com.. | | | ▄████████████████████████████████████▄ ██ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██ ▄████▄ ██ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██████████ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██ ██████████ ██ ▀██▀ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ██ █████ ███ ██████ ██ ████▄ ██ ██ █████ ███ ████ ████ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ████ ████ ██████████ ████ ████ ████▀ ██ ██████████ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██████████ ██ ██ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██ ▀█████████▀ ▄████████████▄ ▀█████████▀ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███ ██ ██ ███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██████████████████████████████████████████ | | | | | | ▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄ █ ▄▀▄ █▀▀█▀▄▄ █ █▀█ █ ▐ ▐▌ █ ▄██▄ █ ▌ █ █ ▄██████▄ █ ▌ ▐▌ █ ██████████ █ ▐ █ █ ▐██████████▌ █ ▐ ▐▌ █ ▀▀██████▀▀ █ ▌ █ █ ▄▄▄██▄▄▄ █ ▌▐▌ █ █▐ █ █ █▐▐▌ █ █▐█ ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀█ | | | | | | ▄▄█████████▄▄ ▄██▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀██▄ ▄█▀ ▐█▌ ▀█▄ ██ ▐█▌ ██ ████▄ ▄█████▄ ▄████ ████████▄███████████▄████████ ███▀ █████████████ ▀███ ██ ███████████ ██ ▀█▄ █████████ ▄█▀ ▀█▄ ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄ ▄▄▄█▀ ▀███████ ███████▀ ▀█████▄ ▄█████▀ ▀▀▀███▄▄▄███▀▀▀ | | | ..PLAY NOW.. |
|
|
|
|