[ANN] [BSV] [Bitcoin SV] Original Satoshi Vision

[sirsplashalot]

https://youtu.be/ATapuAYgEeI

Craig Wright ltimeline livestream

[1713946515]

1713946515

[1713946515]

1713946515

[1713946515]

1713946515

[Woolles890]

There are still a lot of sentiments with BSV, this is the game that has happened, BSV has a fluctuating value of ups and downs. Being able to shift the position of old coins at CMC, capitalization is also quite good and getting into the top 10 coins, good performance, can it last for the long term?

[honolulumark]

check check

[sirsplashalot]

https://youtu.be/ATapuAYgEeI

Craig Wright ltimeline livestream

This one is a good long read on the subject in question ...

The Satoshi Affair
Andrew O’Hagan on the many lives of Satoshi Nakamoto
- http://www.ywesee.com/uploads/Ywesee/Andrew_O_Hagan_The_Satoshi_Affair_LRB_30_June_2016.pdf

Page 13
"... The originating block in the
blockchain – the file that provably records every transaction ever made – is called the
Genesis block. ‘There were actually a few versions of the Genesis block,’ Wright told
me. ‘It fucked up a few times and we reviewed it a few times. The Genesis block is the
one that didn’t crash.’ There from the beginning was Hal Finney, who would receive the
first bitcoin transaction, on block 9. This was a key moment for the new cryptocurrency:
block 9 for ever shows that Satoshi sent Finney ten bitcoin on 12 January 2009 – it is
the first outgoing transaction we know to have come from Satoshi. Satoshi also sent
four other transactions on the same day. I asked Wright who the recipients were – who
the four addresses belonged to. ‘Hal, Dave, myself,’ he replied. ‘And another I cannot
name as I have no right to do so.’ Wright told me that around this time he was in
correspondence with Wei Dai, with Gavin Andresen, who would go on to lead the
development of bitcoin, and Mike Hearn, a Google engineer who had ideas about the
direction bitcoin should take. Yet when I asked for copies of the emails between Satoshi
and these men he said they had been wiped when he was running from the ATO. It
seemed odd, and still does, that some emails were lost while others were not. I think he
believed it would be more interesting to play hide and seek than to be a man with a
knowable past ..."

Page 14
"... I came to feel that there were secrets between Wright and Kleiman that might never be
revealed. Wright usually clammed up when asked about Kleiman and money. One day,
in a fit of high spirits, he showed me a piece of software he said that US Homeland
Security had ripped off from him and Kleiman. He smiled when I asked if they’d done
government security work. The first thing most people ask about when you mention
Satoshi is his alleged hoard of bitcoin: he invented the thing, and created the Genesis
block, and mined bitcoin from the start, so where was Wright’s money and where was
Kleiman’s? The emails, when I got them, seemed to clear this up slightly, but, during
many dozens of hours of conversation with Wright, he never properly told me how
many bitcoin he mined. I was aware – and he knew I was aware, because I told him
several times – that he wasn’t giving me a full account of everything that had occurred
between him and Kleiman. He said it was complicated ... "

Pages 22 - 23
"... ‘The Genesis block was hardcoded on 3 January 2009,’ Wright said to me, ‘and
that was the first run. There was no previous block.’ (Under the heading ‘Previous
Block’, there is a line of 74 zeros.) ‘Then the code was reworked,’ he continued, ‘and
fired up and the first address that was ever created from the hardcoded Genesis block –
the first mined address – is the one I’m sending you a message from.’ He was about to
use the original cryptographic key to sign a message to me and it was as if he was
dropping a sugar lump into my tea. He typed the words, ‘Here I am, Andrew,’ and rested
his fingers. ‘This gives us that little block there,’ he said, before verifying the signature.
He looked sheepish and resigned in his blue checked shirt. ‘Welcome to the bit I was
hoping to bury,’ he said. He leaned back and I noticed a samurai sword by the desk.
I shook his hand. Then I stared at the screen and considered how strange it would be to
live with a secret for seven years and then feel no relief when it finally came out.
Perhaps it never felt like a professional secret; it felt like a part of his being, and now he
was giving it up. ‘I want it in layman’s terms,’ I said. ‘Explain what you just did.’
‘I just digitally signed a message using the first ever mined address on bitcoin.’
If he had done what he appeared to have done, and what he said he’d done, then his
claim to be Satoshi was strong. For a moment, the amassed unlikelihoods and
dissemblings seemed circumstantial, and the case against him suddenly much more
fanciful than the idea of him being the famously secret man who invented this protocol.
An alternative Satoshi would have had to share his entire password hoard with him, and
synchronised his ‘real world’ timeline in order to be placed where Wright was placed
and align with his email existence and his expertise. It wasn’t merely that Wright had
been in the right place at the right time: he had been in the only place at the only time,
and that time was stamped not only into the blockchain but into his correspondence and
the experiences of those around him. He sat back in his large black chair and asked me
if I wanted more tea. ‘I could have been working with Satoshi, I guess,’ he said, ‘who told
me he was going to fire it up at this time and I had all my machines ready and just took
over from him. But that would make me Satoshi anyway.’ He stared into the bank of
screens and seemed nostalgic for a more ghostly self, and I asked him if it felt
overwhelming.

‘I don’t care – whatever,’ he said. But of course he did care – care is what he did most.
He was agitated through the whole process, mainly, I guessed, from an old cypherpunk
embarrassment at having to bend to authority. He wasn’t satisfied when he sat back in
his chair, he was annoyed and already making his detractors’ arguments for them.
‘They’ll say I killed Satoshi and stole the keys. Having them doesn’t prove I created
them. Maybe it was a collaboration between me, Dave, Hal and some random person.
Maybe I compromised Hal’s machine and stole everything and his family didn’t know.
Maybe, maybe, fucking maybe. All that bullshit. Those people don’t believe in Occam’s
razor. I’ve seen Reddit. They want the most convoluted explanation. But they can say
what they want; I’ve got nothing more to prove.’ ..."

Pages 30 to 31
"... I thought he was lying. He had lied before, but to lie so transparently and so publicly
made me think he had lost his mind. There was no way to square such actions with his
wish to have no publicity. He had faked his own proof, and now he was being ripped
apart on the internet. I briefly wondered if he might be enjoying the cries of execration,
but how could he do that to Andresen and Matonis? Suddenly his opponents seemed
wiser and greater in number. It took me a few days to see that Wright’s action might be
consistent with something deeper in his character. He never wanted to come out and
when it came to it he flunked his own paternity test. But I had a feeling that that he was
too close to the invention to be a simple hoaxer.
‘I will explain why I think he’s probably not Satoshi,’ said Vitalik Buterin, a big wheel in
the cryptocurrency scene, speaking at Consensus, a bitcoin conference in New York that
day. A friend of mine was there. He said that men had started the day high-fiving and
shouting ‘Satoshi, baby’, but that as the long day closed, his name became the punchline
of every joke. Core developers and others were calling for him to sign something new
and in public right away, using the Genesis block, which is unquestionably Nakamoto’s.

One of them, Peter Todd, was quoted by Forbes: ‘All Wright needs to do, says Todd, is
to provide a signature on the message “Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto” signed by a
key known to be Satoshi’s. “This is really easy to do ... if you’re actually Satoshi. Also,
you’ll know sufficient proof has been provided when it actually happens, because
cryptographers will be convinced.”’
That was the strangest element of all: Wright must have known, having been a
cryptographer all his adult life, that his fraud would be spotted immediately. But when I
asked him about it he said it wasn’t a fraud, it was a mistake. ‘I cut and pasted something
just for the time being but knew I would change it later,’ he said. ‘But then it went up.’
That rang hollow to me, the words of a falling man. He intentionally faked it. I believed
at that point that he had misled his colleagues and tried to get out of being Satoshi,
which isn’t necessarily the same thing as not being him. ‘I can’t think of a more
convoluted way to go about claiming one is Satoshi than what Craig Wright has done so
far,’ Jerry Brito, the executive director of Coin Center, told the Daily Beast. ‘He’s
provided no cryptographic evidence verifiable by the public, and many of his answers
sound plain fishy.’ Emin Gün Sirer, a Cornell professor who had criticised Wright
before, referred to Wright’s ‘meta-modernist play’..."

...


Dr. Craig Wright Blog
Analysis
Jean-Paul Sartre, Signing and Significance
May 2, 2016
- https://archive.is/sV9vv

...

- http://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001593.html

...

*NSFW*
- https://youtu.be/75K6MckXsok  

PG 25.

When he put ‘CSW’ at the end of his message to Gavin it said: ‘Verified’. Wright had demonstrated, on a brand- new laptop, that he held Satoshi’s private key. They stood up and shook hands and Gavin thanked him for all he had done. There were tears in Wright’s eyes. ‘His voice was breaking,’ MacGregor told me. ‘Gavin could see he was going though something.’ Both MacGregor and Matthews later said that Wright was turned inside out by the session. ‘I didn’t want to just put him in a taxi,’ MacGregor said. Andresen was wiped out, so he went to get some fish and chips, and then headed to bed. ‘Craig broke down,’ MacGregor told me. ‘He said he thought he’d never have to do this. He said he never knew how to trust people in his life.’ Wright and Matthews and MacGregor went off to find a bottle of wine. ‘He was semi-apologising for being a pain in the ass,’ MacGregor told me, ‘but I understood more than ever, at that point, how hard the whole thing was for him.’

[sirsplashalot]

you can’t quote jimmy ‘always wrong brokeback meathead’ song as a reliable source over Gavin Anderson, that destroys your ability to interpret valid from invalid facts.

[sirsplashalot]

Hmm seems CSW was caught plagiarizing an academic paper:

https://twitter.com/PeterRizun/status/983752297363660800

He changed the names of a few variables and the context is applied to mining rather than gambling, but it would appear he more or less lifted equations from pre-existing articles without properly accrediting them.

Peter Rizun also said mining 64mb blocks was impossible.

[sirsplashalot]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/apc9c1/craig_wright_caught_lying_again/
https://archive.is/D6P7n
tldr;
On 10 february Craig Wright tried to convince people that he is Satoshi Nakamoto by releasing an abstract of a research paper called "Black Net" that he supposedly wrote for the Australian government in 2001. The abstract is almost identical to the official Bitcoin whitepaper of October 2008. However, Satoshi had a draft in August 2008 of the Bitcoin whitepaper and when we compare the draft with the official Bitcoin whitepaper, we can see that the corrections made between August and October 2008 are also found in the Craig's paper from "2001". This proves again that he is a liar.

https://twitter.com/justicemate/status/1094942637553901568?s=21

[hv_]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/apc9c1/craig_wright_caught_lying_again/
https://archive.is/D6P7n
tldr;
On 10 february Craig Wright tried to convince people that he is Satoshi Nakamoto by releasing an abstract of a research paper called "Black Net" that he supposedly wrote for the Australian government in 2001. The abstract is almost identical to the official Bitcoin whitepaper of October 2008. However, Satoshi had a draft in August 2008 of the Bitcoin whitepaper and when we compare the draft with the official Bitcoin whitepaper, we can see that the corrections made between August and October 2008 are also found in the Craig's paper from "2001". This proves again that he is a liar.

So many 'proofs'.. you must have taken deep logic lessons hero.

[sirsplashalot]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/apc9c1/craig_wright_caught_lying_again/
https://archive.is/D6P7n
tldr;
On 10 february Craig Wright tried to convince people that he is Satoshi Nakamoto by releasing an abstract of a research paper called "Black Net" that he supposedly wrote for the Australian government in 2001. The abstract is almost identical to the official Bitcoin whitepaper of October 2008. However, Satoshi had a draft in August 2008 of the Bitcoin whitepaper and when we compare the draft with the official Bitcoin whitepaper, we can see that the corrections made between August and October 2008 are also found in the Craig's paper from "2001". This proves again that he is a liar.

So many 'proofs'.. you must have taken deep logic lessons hero.

Why make snarky comments about me? I didn't comment on what I quoted.
Disprove the man's proofs why not.

Also malwarebytes doesn't like this thing you're spamming

what is that?

Okay, what is your opinion Gavin being convinced beyond reasonable doubt? You’re saying Craig fooled Gavin or are you saying that Craig and Gavin are both liars?

[hv_]

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/apc9c1/craig_wright_caught_lying_again/
https://archive.is/D6P7n
tldr;
On 10 february Craig Wright tried to convince people that he is Satoshi Nakamoto by releasing an abstract of a research paper called "Black Net" that he supposedly wrote for the Australian government in 2001. The abstract is almost identical to the official Bitcoin whitepaper of October 2008. However, Satoshi had a draft in August 2008 of the Bitcoin whitepaper and when we compare the draft with the official Bitcoin whitepaper, we can see that the corrections made between August and October 2008 are also found in the Craig's paper from "2001". This proves again that he is a liar.

So many 'proofs'.. you must have taken deep logic lessons hero.

Why make snarky comments about me? I didn't comment on what I quoted.
Disprove the man's proofs why not.

Also malwarebytes doesn't like this thing you're spamming

what is that?

Why d u care anyway? Things are all about proof of work.

Read

Think

Work it out.

Nobody will do that work for u.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/apc9c1/craig_wright_caught_lying_again/
https://archive.is/D6P7n
tldr;
On 10 february Craig Wright tried to convince people that he is Satoshi Nakamoto by releasing an abstract of a research paper called "Black Net" that he supposedly wrote for the Australian government in 2001. The abstract is almost identical to the official Bitcoin whitepaper of October 2008. However, Satoshi had a draft in August 2008 of the Bitcoin whitepaper and when we compare the draft with the official Bitcoin whitepaper, we can see that the corrections made between August and October 2008 are also found in the Craig's paper from "2001". This proves again that he is a liar.

So many 'proofs'.. you must have taken deep logic lessons hero.

Why make snarky comments about me? I didn't comment on what I quoted.
Disprove the man's proofs why not.

Also malwarebytes doesn't like this thing you're spamming

what is that?

Why d u care anyway? Things are all about proof of work.

Read

Think

Work it out.

Nobody will do that work for u.

One start of many https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3065857

[sirsplashalot]

nutildah handing out merit poop points left right and center for shitposts.

[sirsplashalot]

https://medium.com/@jonmatonis/how-i-met-satoshi-96e85727dc5a

Bitcoin is $60

[sirsplashalot]

nutildah handing out merit poop points left right and center for shitposts.

It was a good post. It was more informative and useful than your combined entirety of postings.

You, on the other hand, should probably be given a red trust for furthering the b.s. of a proven con artist.

You know CSW is a liar, yet you're going to continue to shill for his coin... why? Because you are also dishonest.

This is the Bitcoin SV thread.

[hv_]

To learn and structure information to be useful needs PoW all the time

https://youtu.be/S6rd1KbF7sc


Hodl just dont


Malleability is a feature.

[jooj2]

May i ask how can we be sure that the bitcoin sv is an original Satoshi Vision of Bitcoin?

I will appreciate anyone who proves through reliable sources to confirm this information.

[hv_]

May i ask how can we be sure that the bitcoin sv is an original Satoshi Vision of Bitcoin?

I will appreciate anyone who proves through reliable sources to confirm this information.

Code diffs might help u. But if u hold bitcoin from 2009 on u can still use those on bsv wallets like CashPay or handcash on BSV. 

[sirsplashalot]

May i ask how can we be sure that the bitcoin sv is an original Satoshi Vision of Bitcoin?

I will appreciate anyone who proves through reliable sources to confirm this information.

Great question.

For myself, what constitutes Bitcoin is the Whitepaper NOT the BTC ticker.

This is because the last 2 sentences in the Bitcoin Whitepaper introduction correlate ONLY to the economic model associated with BSV. Off chain lightning trsactions have no relevance to hash power and therefore POW. Miners become irrelevant with lightning as they are not incentivized to work.

BTC and BSV are two completely different experiments, but BTC has zero correlation to the economic model of Bitcoin. For this reason, some believe BSV is Bitcoin.

Hope that helps!

https://twitter.com/bigredmurphy/status/1096109140865437696?s=21

[sirsplashalot]

May i ask how can we be sure that the bitcoin sv is an original Satoshi Vision of Bitcoin?

I will appreciate anyone who proves through reliable sources to confirm this information.

Great question.

For myself, what constitutes Bitcoin is the Whitepaper NOT the BTC ticker.

This is because the 2 sentences in the Bitcoin Whitepaper introduction correlate ONLY to the economic model associated with BSV. Off chain lightning trsactions have no relevance to hash power and therefore POW. Miners become irrelevant with lightning as they are not incentivized to work.

BTC and BSV are two completely different expierents, but BTC has zero correlation to the economic model of Bitcoin. For this reason, some believe BSV is Bitcoin.

Hope that helps!

You didn't prove anything through reliable sources. You stated your shill case to promote a coin developed by a fraud, which I have to say contains an impressive amount of misinformation. Pretty much everything you just said is incorrect. I could dissect your claims point by point, but they are irrelevant because you're not a reliable source.

I really do believe the bitcoin white paper is a reliable source.

[sirsplashalot]

I bet you could 

[hv_]

The proof is in the pudding not all willing to get or even eat.

https://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/ViewComment.aspx?id=61969&SearchText=