Did Craig Wright turn out to be Satoshi Nakamoto

[panopotty]

No, it's just a false assumption. There are no reliable facts about the fact that this person is the creator of bitcoin, this is a fraudster.

What there is is LOTS of invested people who do not want wright to be...

Ones who manipluate the truth and lie to hide anything that supports wright.

That is not proof either way, but it means that there are a lot of people with a reason to attack wright....

[1714105030]

1714105030

[1714105030]

1714105030

[1714105030]

1714105030

[AGD]

No, it's just a false assumption. There are no reliable facts about the fact that this person is the creator of bitcoin, this is a fraudster.

What there is is LOTS of invested people who do not want wright to be...

Ones who manipluate the truth and lie to hide anything that supports wright.

That is not proof either way, but it means that there are a lot of people with a reason to attack wright....

He could have easily avoided beeing attacked by simply NOT stating he is Satoshi Nakamoto.

[panopotty]

He could have easily avoided beeing attacked by simply NOT stating he is Satoshi Nakamoto.

He was being attacked well before that.

If you are already being attacked - what better way that to fail publically. As a strategy, it does not mean he is or is not. It just means that nobody will believe anythinhg.

If you have a 300 million USD company... do you want people digging and looking into you?

it is also a good tax strategy. He left Au with zero tax owing... The tax people think it is fakle, write it off... wright wins on all fronts.

[franky1]

seems your account was created purely to reply about wright drama..

anyway
hotwire was about tax refund

demorgan was about "credit" for advanced R&D for certain industries where the industry gets 45% of their research spending.

for instance. the difference is, like UK law
a tax refund is where you pay X tax..  but you can claim certain things off your tax like having to obtain, replace and wash work uniform and get a refund at the end of the year. this is a tax rebate

separately
no matter what tax you pay. or your bills or expenses.. you can get tax "credit" just for having a kid

the hotwire was a rebate - couple million
the demorgan was a credit - 54million

[panopotty]

anyway
hotwire was about tax refund

Seems you did not read.

Hotwire was the gst claim. It was also a deduction that only existed IF wright had BTC. It was also a move of 31000 BTC from Australia into Sg.

demorgan was about "credit" for advanced R&D for certain industries where the industry gets 45% of their research spending.

And here it is a rebate - you only get that money after tax.

I may not like wright, but I worked at the co.s long enough to see what was going on.

Wright also did not file the tax as is claimed, it was a senior partner at KPMG.

I still think the ruse was wright moving it all OS so there is no tax. Wrigth had planned a move BEFORE the raid. The raid was AFTER he left and they were too late. The tax ppl wanted to get him but just misswed when they figured it out

People involved with the tax filing

Andrew Sommer, Partner  
Nicholas Mavrakis, Partner - Clayton Utz  

Van Bergen, Partner
Carl Gunther, Partner - KPMG

Michael Garcia, Partnet - EY


there are others I did not get to see names from

but these are all partner level ppl at top law and accounting firms

wright did not just scam this... wright let it fail so he could move OS with NO Tax... Why is this hard for ppl to see!

a 300 mill USD sale is a big tax bill... Wright has NO tax... Wright did build something and he now gets away not paying a cent!

[franky1]

Wrigth had planned a move BEFORE the raid. The raid was AFTER he left and they were too late. The tax ppl wanted to get him but just misswed when they figured it out

craig recieved legal documents of demands from AU gov about going court/repaying, with deadlines and dates and such.. well well BEFORE the raid
craig then emailed gizmodo to spark the rumours of him being satoshi before the raid because he knew that not dealing with the legal actions would result in a raid

it was not a one day he was not in trouble and then suddenly a unprovoked raid where suddenly the raid was the only contact craig had from aussie government.
craig was in trouble for months before the raid. he knew it

the government dont just snd the cops in without making demands for court/repayment first.
they do a raid when the courts/repayment demands are ignored and the raid is last resort.. not first option

he planned his escape and all the drama of trying to find ways to get out of having to repay aussie gov

[tunctioncloud]

The story turned to be a big fake after Craig Wright failed to show us a verified message from a very early address that could be identified as one belonging to Satoshi. I guess we will never hear of him again, as he know he would be more ashamed as he currently is if he tried the same drama again without that signed message.

[BillyBobZorton]

Not Craig Wright again, can you guys let this meme die already? I would like to move on into more interesting topic, such as, another topic about how to scale bitcoin, we haven't had enough of these lately.

[panopotty]

Wrigth had planned a move BEFORE the raid. The raid was AFTER he left and they were too late. The tax ppl wanted to get him but just misswed when they figured it out

craig recieved legal documents of demands from AU gov about going court/repaying, with deadlines and dates and such.. well well BEFORE the raid
craig then emailed gizmodo to spark the rumours of him being satoshi before the raid because he knew that not dealing with the legal actions would result in a raid

Wright recieved NOTHING.

The companies did...

Guess what. wright and companies are not the same. Wright can walk away from a tax bill - are you that stuck on a meme that is flawed?

Wright STILL owns multiple properties in Aust
If there was something on HIM, he would just sell and get nothing left

Wrigth in the UK and the Aust passport he has means that they COULD get him. There is no fled, they can grab him if they want to - they just cant.,

[Quantus]

The New Yorker mentioned me in a article about Craig Wright  

http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/bizarre-saga-craig-wright-latest-inventor-bitcoin

16th paragraph, they called me vulgar but pithy  

[btvGainer]

Real Satoshi must have thousands of way to prove that he is Satoshi.Not unlike Craig who is dying to prove it but failed miserably.

[panopotty]

Real Satoshi must have thousands of way to prove that he is Satoshi.Not unlike Craig who is dying to prove it but failed miserably.

Again. You fail to see that wright has to pay tax IF he is shown to be -
1. Not a fraud, or
2. Satoshi,
...


He is KNOWN to have been mining in Mar - May 2009. That was in an Aust court case.

Wright, satoshi or not was mining in 2009 and that means he holds a lot of control later and he DOES NOT want to pay tax.

[jonald_fyookball]

The New Yorker mentioned me in a article about Craig Wright  

http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/bizarre-saga-craig-wright-latest-inventor-bitcoin

16th paragraph, they called me vulgar but pithy  

Legend! 

[franky1]

Wrigth in the UK and the Aust passport he has means that they COULD get him. There is no fled, they can grab him if they want to - they just cant.,

lol
finance = CIVIL

the aussie government thing has not yet got to the point of criminal yet, to invoke extradition

[panopotty]

the aussie government thing has not yet got to the point of criminal yet, to invoke extradition

and they are not chasing him so they never will

the case was never wright, they did not like wright and it was all the companies

So, there is noting.

AND Civil means they COULD take propoerties and wright is not selling so it seems...

He stiil owns multiple p[roperties whether he is in Aust or NOT

and wright was before the gaar pannel and he won... so what to thast. He has left and it is not a fraud if he said it and they rejected

and as for deported, they can revoke a passport - they do not need criminal for that

They could bankrupt him if it was him and not a co he owned... so, you say all this and it is all crap

So

[awesome31312]

I didn't even hear about this guy until you made the post. If he was truly "the" Bitcoin guy, I'm sure the community would be well aware of it by now.

[panopotty]

I didn't even hear about this guy until you made the post. If he was truly "the" Bitcoin guy, I'm sure the community would be well aware of it by now.

LOL
you been asleep for a couple years.

As for the tax ppl going after wright
https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/SearchRegisters.jspx?_adf.ctrl-state=8rlesi9jh_4

Wright PAID it all out and moved the assets over seas.

As all look at him as a fraud, there he moves it noce and clean.

https://connectonline.asic.gov.au/RegistrySearch/faces/landing/panelSearch.jspx?searchTab=search&searchText=demorgan&searchType=OrgAndBusNm&_adf.ctrl-state=8rlesi9jh_45

He moved the assets and closed it all.

So, what Tax thing. No tax thing for wright, as you all run around saying wright is a fraud he moved it all!

wright settled hotwire - the tax ppl closed and accepted the agreement. Check the docs from the links. Hotwire was taken out of the dispute CLEANLY by wright
ATO is paid off. So what are they doing. They cannot go after him as they accepted the deal!

And again, you are too sold on him not even being an early miner to see he did this.

Wright was in the courts in 2009 as he claimed Bitcoin as a tax expense and they called it a hobby

by 2012 he won as it had value.

2013 it rises a shitload so he moved it all overseas...

that is the reality

[BrewMaster]

you know what the worst part about argument about "... is or is not Satoshi Nakamoti" is

the worst part is that, this discussion is so dumb and at the same time it has a very simple solution.
step one of proving someone is Satoshi is if that someone signs a message (a cryptography proof). it is very simple that it makes me laugh even thinking about people who are still talking about it.

[panopotty]

you know what the worst part about argument about "... is or is not Satoshi Nakamoti" is

the worst part is that, this discussion is so dumb and at the same time it has a very simple solution.
step one of proving someone is Satoshi is if that someone signs a message (a cryptography proof). it is very simple that it makes me laugh even thinking about people who are still talking about it.

IF the person WANTS to prove - urgh

Prove and pay taxes.

It is not proving, satoshi never wanted to prove - it is getting evoidence on a satoshi that does not want to be that is difficult

[d.kevin29]

I didn't even hear about this guy until you made the post. If he was truly "the" Bitcoin guy, I'm sure the community would be well aware of it by now.

The MSM spoke about this guy quite a lot recently, but I don't think Nakamoto ever wanted his identity to be revealed.

If he's the real creator, he should have some old BTC plans and prove the way he created it or so. He probably only wants to get his 'BTC Creator' status just for the money he wants to earn from it..