Project Anastasia: Bitcoiners Against Identity Theft [re: Craig Wright scam]

[owlcatz]

@owlcatz Umm Cuz you don't feed the trolls? That's why Satoshi didn't bother responding? Just like @chaoscoinz said many people have claimed to be Satoshi but none have been outed by Satoshi himself. Does that mean they are all Satoshi by that logic? 

What the fuck does that mean? What trolls? You tell me?

I asked a simple question. I wasn't trolling, so I don't understand your logic there unless you are just shit-posting a certain amount of words for your sig camp earnings...

[1715349968]

1715349968

[1715349968]

1715349968

[1715349968]

1715349968

[Thekool1s]

@owlcatz Trolls as in identity thieves... smdh...

Let me make my self clear if I wasn't. Dorian never claimed to be Satoshi while all the rest have. Just like it has been suggested before this only helps satoshi to hide his real identity. What I meant by you don't feed the trolls is that Satoshi never bothered responding to these identity thieves but when an innocent person was being labelled as Satoshi in the media, Satoshi came to Dorain's rescue. Saved him from all the harassment...

Nowhere in my post, I suggested that you were a troll, you just assumed that stuff and since you assumed ^{( or were trying to suggest )} i was padding my signature posts, Well why not you go through my merit history for the month of January

[USBitcoinServices.Com]

I agree on uniting and calling out liars, but such characters as Craig Wright don't even deserve the attention. Nobody in his right mind would believe this lune. esp after hearing his arguments. He lied to the judge, that's when he should really get punished for his claims

So far I am not paying attention to this person Craig Wright, regardless if he is right or not, that is just a personal thing, but as a whole community, it is important to join efforts and avoid things like this if it is false claiming. Perhaps that person needs to be under strict surveillance until all his lies are detected or if he is right true will be revealed with plenty of proof. 

[nullius]

Announcement:  Project Anastasia has been translated to Биткoинepы пpoтив кpaжи личнocти [re: Craig Wright Scam].  Cпacибo, taikuri13!

I agree on uniting and calling out liars, but such characters as Craig Wright don't even deserve the attention. Nobody in his right mind would believe this lune. esp after hearing his arguments. He lied to the judge, that's when he should really get punished for his claims

@owlcatz Umm Cuz you don't feed the trolls?

This is an important point.  For years, I ignored Craig Wright!  I saw him not only as a despicable scammer, but also as a clown and a dumb troll who should be starved of the attention he so craves.  Anyway, I had better things to do.

Then, I saw this post by Greg Maxwell, which I will hereby quote fully (with my addition of boldface and bracketed material) because it is so important:

On one hand I agree that threads related to him [Craig Wright] tend heavily to off-topic.

On the other hand, a big part of the reason that he's caused so much disruption (and he truly has)-- is because so many bitcoiners took one look at him, saw how transparently fake he was, and decided it was best to ignore him.  The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.  And that is what has happened here--

It's easy for him to spin the people who do speak out against his fraud as somehow being involved with some kind of personal play against him because as a community we haven't stood united against his fraud.  Instead, far too many have just responded like "Good thing I'm not ignorant enough to fall for that, better stay away so I don't get targeted with drama too."

In the future we're going to see more crap like him threatening any business that accepts Bitcoin with patent litigation, to which the common response will be "damn, this bitcoin stuff isn't worth the trouble" from most parties who's business isn't primarily about Bitcoin.  How could you expect otherwise when your response to wright is "damn, this wright stuff isn't worth the trouble"?

Because his lies are so prolific and layered in every one of these threads there are some newer bitcoiners that end up being corrected and put on a more sensible path.  It isn't always a question of people believing him outright, often its falling for one of his lesser lies like the claim that he's an "og bitcoin investor" or that kleiman had something to do with Bitcoin's creation.

The Wright threads also make it really easy to identify many idiots and shills.  I think we're all made better off by having access to such a quick classifier of the character of our fellow posters.

If someone broke into your house and was stealing stuff-- you wouldn't just say 'that thief doesn't deserve our attention' and ignore them.  We shouldn't hesitate to defend Bitcoin and the community surrounding it.

People do, for the most part, ignore people that caused trouble in the past but aren't anymore. You hear about wright because his scams are ongoing and still growing.

Now-- if you want to argue that various threads aren't very effective and that the community could do better?  I couldn't agree more.

For opening my eyes to how my own inaction was passively permitting attacks on Bitcoin, I gave +20 for that post (whereas I need to earn that—I am not a merit source).  Then, I took the advice that “the community could do better”:  A community is made of people, I am a person—so I decided to lead by example, starting with two topics showing the types of discussion that I hope others will join me in carrying forward, far, and wide into many languages and many venues of discussion:

• Bitcoin: The Social Phenomenon, a positive essay to explain why my motto is, “There is only one Bitcoin”, and invite community discussion thereupon.  This was an essay that I had in mind for a long time, and just never took the time to write.  I list it first, although it was actually posted after Anastasia, because I think it is important to keep this principle:  Always say what you are, before you say what you are against.  A positive message for the good must then be protected by a negative message against the bad; whereas a negative message is nothing, in itself.  (Russian translation by taikuri13; more languages coming soon!)
• Project Anastasia, to label Craig Wright properly with a term that exactly describes his fraud, and immediately tells the average person exactly what he is doing:  Identity theft!  (Anastasia in Russian; more languages coming soon!)

In the long term, these two will only be the beginning of a series of pro-Bitcoin essays that engage the community in a renewed focus on what makes Bitcoin great, whilst also striking down the lies and scams of those who attack Bitcoin (and thus, attack your money).

I always work slowly, but I am a patient man; and I have started my Bitcoin advocacy with the intent of growing it to have a long-term large effect, not of making a drama splash and then getting bored.  Bitcoin is worth love, it is worth working for—and it is worth fighting for.

[owlcatz]

@owlcatz Trolls as in identity thieves... smdh...

Let me make my self clear if I wasn't. Dorian never claimed to be Satoshi while all the rest have. Just like it has been suggested before this only helps satoshi to hide his real identity. What I meant by you don't feed the trolls is that Satoshi never bothered responding to these identity thieves but when an innocent person was being labelled as Satoshi in the media, Satoshi came to Dorain's rescue. Saved him from all of the harassment...

Nowhere in my post, I suggested that you were a troll, you just assumed that stuff and since you assumed ^{( or were trying to suggest )} i was padding my signature posts, Well why not you go through my merit history for the month of January

No worries mate, I obviously took all that the wrong way and wasn't exactly in a good mood when I read that about me. Sorry man, I get it, I really do. I was just asking if anything like that had happened, that's all, sorry to get involved here, I guess I'm not up to speed or something. And sorry about bitching about your sig campaign, trust me I have much better things to do than go through your post history.

cheers bud.

@Nullius - Please delete this stuff if you like, sorry for the clutter.

[bomj]

I do not understand what is new we have learned in this article.
You could just call it: Craig Wright is a liar.
But then no one will read this article.
What's new here? We already heard that......
And the name of Anastasia and her photographs in this article are designed to cause tears and violent emotions in readers.
This whole article is cheap PR and a game with the name of Anastasia.
Maybe I'm wrong.
But I don’t like it when someone uses other people's emotions.

[nullius]

And the name of Anastasia and her photographs in this article are designed to cause tears and violent emotions in readers.
This whole article is cheap PR and a game with the name of Anastasia.
Maybe I'm wrong.
But I don’t like it when someone uses other people's emotions.

This is like bringing a sword to a gunfight—whilst claiming that swords are “honourable” weapons, and you refuse to weapons requiring less strength and skill for a duel.

Yes, my argument is emotionally evocative—intentionally so, for the good reasons explained below.  Whereas foremost here, I must address my own motives and thought process.

I am a dispassionate thinker, and a passionate writer.  I think through my arguments with cold objectivity, then open a blank page to express how I feel about the conclusions which sound reason has already commanded.  And far from being “cheap PR and a game with the name of Anastasia” as you allege, my essay is a Bitcoiner’s offering of a little homage to Anastasia’s memory.  For the history of Anastasia is an issue that I actually care about—both as an issue in itself, and insofar as I regard Anastasia as symbolic of the many millions of innocent victims of Communist mass-murder.  I did not simply pick her name out of a hat, or cast about for some convenient source of emotional impact.

I hereby have sincerely expressed my high respect for each of Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna Romanova, whom I am proud to memorialize by her proper title in OP, and Satoshi Nakamoto, the ingenious founder of Bitcoin.  I have also imposed on this thread a moderation rule requiring that replies must “be kind to Anastasia, and honest toward Satoshi”.  That is what I call a “win-win”, insofar as it is the intersection of the stories of two famous historical personages whom I remember for different reasons.

People must remember what happened to Anastasia, remember why it happened, remember how the injustice of her murder was compounded by the insult of identity theft intended to steal her memory and swindle her surviving relatives—and must stop the analogous identity theft of a famous person in the case of Satoshi.

Of course, the respective circumstances of these two persons are very different and not comparable.  However, Anastasia was royalty; and I do not think she would have objected to the wisdom of applying her own story to teach lessons for the greater good, as the names of the most famous royalty have always been spun into fables long after their deaths.  Yes, I thought through all of this before writing my essay; and I asked myself, would a Grand Duchess want other than to let her name be a banner of justice to stop criminals from scamming for money, stealing power, and attacking a noble cause?  My biographical reading on the Romanov daughters’ graceful personalities leaves me no doubt.  Although I can have no definite answer from one who has been dead for over a century, I wrote my essay with not only a clear conscience, but even a positive conviction that Anastasia would be pleased.

I do not understand what is new we have learned in this article.

Then, you missed the point.  After having rethought the matter from first principles, I introduced in OP my own original thinking on how best to describe the Faketoshi scam.  I have never before seen anybody call it identity theft—whereas that is what it is, by definition!  Thus have I developed a new way to instantly explain the central issue to the average person, in terms familiar to the public consciousness.  Everybody knows what identity theft is, and everybody knows it’s bad.

Now, why has nobody else seen this as identity theft?  Perhaps that is because the term is usually applied only to much smaller cases.  A mundane, garden-variety identity thief steals an identity to open and drain new credit cards in your name, or to commit a similar crime orders of magnitude smaller than the Faketoshi scam.

As a new symbolic archetype for grand-scale identity theft, I chose the famous case of Grand Duchess Anastasia.  I thereupon applied this symbol to communicate what the Wright scam really does to Satoshi.

When Craig Wright is properly labelled in the public consciousness as a perpetrator of grand-scale identity theft, please remember properly to credit nullius for the idea.

You could just call it: Craig Wright is a liar.
But then no one will read this article.

Exactly:  But then no one will read this article.

If you insist on making arguments that only use facts and logic, then I suggest that you should join one of the many online discussions wherein hardcore Bitcoiners refute Wright’s lies point by point.  But please, do not tell others to use that form of argument for communications with the general public!

Self-defeating principles are ipso facto wrong principles.  If your principles make you assist your own defeat at the hands of those whom you say are “wrong”, then you are wrong, too:  You are passively fighting for the “wrong” which you condemn.  If you bring a sword to a gunfight, then your “honour” and all your principles will die with you.  If you insist on defending Bitcoin with only facts and logic, then you will confine Bitcoin advocacy to a few obscure forums inhabited mostly by crypto-coders and technology enthusiasts with robot-logic.  Thus will you surrender Bitcoin to those whose weapons are only emotional and psychological manipulation—unavoidably, to such swindlers as Craig Wright.  Observe that with no facts on his side, and with no logic on his side, he successfully persuades many people who do not think through facts and logic.

I assure you that the emotional impact of my Anastasia essay was fully, consciously intended—and moreover, intended to be exemplary:  This is how it’s done, folks!  If you want to defeat the psychological support on which Craig Wright builds his hollow lies, then find ways to wrap true facts and sound logic in an emotionally evocative form of argument, delivered with a rhetorical eloquence measured according to the audience.  (On that last point, observe that OP was authored with much simpler language than this explanation, kept short, and bracketed by pictures.)  Then, you will have the winning combination that Faketoshi lacks:  The facts and logic that he lacks, plus a potent weapon against his manipulation of people who neither verify facts, nor coldly reason from premises to conclusions.  Under the weight of your logical iron core wrapped in passions, Faketoshi will implode as an empty shell.

Wherefore I encourage others to spread the Anastasia Bitcoin message to other venues of discussion, and also to create similar forms of argument upon the principles that I have hereby set forth.

[JayJuanGee]

Now, why has nobody else seen this as identity theft?  Perhaps that is because the term is usually applied only to much smaller cases.  A mundane, garden-variety identity thief steals an identity to open and drain new credit cards in your name, or to commit a similar crime orders of magnitude smaller than the Faketoshi scam.

Sure I do understand and accept the identity theft angle, and don't get me wrong, since I have little to no sympathy for that fucktwat, craig wright.

I would NOT proclaim that the identity theft angle is any kind of slam dunk, because surely there can be nuances with any framework and any argument that is made about the persona, Satoshi.. and the fact that he really is NOT known. Furthermore, there can be some implied permission to attempt to steal the name and to copy whatever the fuck you like because the whole project is open source, including the name Satoshi Nakamoto...

Craig Wright takes this open source to another level, just like several of the bcash forks or the various crypto projects that try to deceive and/or mislead the public into believing that they are the real bitcoin or they are better than bitcoin, implying or outright asserting various supposed bitcoin deficiencies.  Furthermore, they will sometimes go so far as to describe features as if they were bugs.. when they were intentionally made.. for example, bitcoin was designed in a way to be somewhat difficult to change, but several of the scamming fucktwat forks or imitation products try to assert themselves as better because they easily fork or they easily upgrade, and have even marketed themselves as being nimble.

What can be so offensive about CSW is that he describes bitcoin in various ways that are actually quite the opposite of what it is in terms of intending to be regulated by governments and governing and even engages in conduct that is quite the opposite of open source project such as his variety of his patent applications... or even copyrighting the whitepaper... while sucking off the open source nature of bitcoin.

I guess that my point is that identify theft serves as just one angle to consider what is going on with craig as compared to some of the other projects in the space, and sure you framed your identity theft arguments in interesting and even persuasive ways, nullius, there still seems to be something that is off about trying to fit too much or too many arguments into that one framework.. because even satoshi acknowledged that there was not really going to be any way to get rid of the various imitations and snake oils and in some sense leaving some burdens upon members of the public to figure it out... and we know that there are a lot of dumb and gullible people out there and it could take generations to really get bitcoin rolling in a solid way, including the ever present question about what is the meaning of global reserve status... including a likely outcome that there are always going to be some alternative and more inferior ways to spend money or even people who engage in conduct that deceives other people in snake oil salesmen kind of ways..., kind of part of human nature, and we should not aspire to be robots, I would conjecture.

.........emotional and psychological manipulation—unavoidably, to such swindlers as Craig Wright.  Observe that with no facts on his side, and with no logic on his side, he successfully persuades many people who do not think through facts and logic.

That's for sure.  It's like they want to be scammed, even though if you ask any person, they say that they do not want to be scammed.  Funny how that works in practice.

[Thekool1s]

@owlcatz, No worries I understand, we are all humans at the end of the day and I respect you for offering an Apology. Many people think it's the end of the world if they were to accept their mistake but it's not. I myself have been in your shoes, sometimes what appears to be a shitpost actually does make sense but we are just being ignorant of the premise. Yesterday I created a thread to request Spoiler tags for the forum and I went ahead and reported @Kuffy's post for not adding any value to the thread. Looking today at it, I realized it is somewhat of genuine thought and wasn't worth the report. All in all, we are good!

Edit: Coming to nullius point, Accidently clicked post...

@nullius I do agree with you that there is always a difference between what the public can relate to and what the academic is all about. Some times ideas have to be dumbed down so that average joe can get a grasp of what is happening at the academic level. An example would be Darwin's theory of Evolution, to the general public it might be a theory which suggests that we evolved from monkeys but at the academic level its viewed as something else, It's about random mutations, adaptation and so much more. So I do agree with you there.

As for Satoshi not outing these thieves is understandable to me at least but that shouldn't stop us from outing these scammers. I do agree with what Gmaxwell said "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing". I have been thinking to make an avatar campaign which would say "We are all Satoshi, except for CSW". I don't know about the funding part but it can be sort of a solidarity campaign where whoever wants to participate can wear the avatar.

[Dabs]

I could bring a sword (or a knife) to a gunfight, and I could still win, but damn is it hard, especially if the other guy puts some distance that I have to close.

Heck, unarmed, still possible, but even more difficult. Crazy even. Close range gunfighting is where it's at.

[gmaxwell]

I heard Wright replied he complying with the latest requests from the court because aliens impregnated him with his <s>courtier's</s>courier's goat-baby.  ... or something like that?

Anyone have any details?

[nullius]

I heard Wright replied he complying with the latest requests from the court because aliens impregnated him with his <s>courtier's</s>courier's goat-baby.  ... or something like that?

Anyone have any details?

A few days ago, I started preparing for this thread an analysis of some of Wright’s earlier public arguments*—including a string of illogical twists by which he claimed, in effect, that people who demanded a Satoshi signature from him were somehow violating his financial privacy (!).

You may understand why I am sincerely confused about whether you are only being sarcastic, or I should really check the news.


(* To avoid the usual strategic mistake of point-by-point debunking of Wright’s claims beyond the unmet threshold question, I intend to narrow my analysis to (1) Wright’s nonsensical excuses for not meeting that threshold, and (2) Wright’s overt motive of turning Bitcoin into an instrument of financial mass-surveillance.)


I have intend a detailed reply to some of the earlier posts, including to JayJuanGee re “open source”.  TL;DW version of a longer essay, intersecting with another subject that I have always sought an appropriate moment to write about:

Copyright vs. Plagiarism vs. the Theft of an Author’s Identity

I would NOT proclaim that the identity theft angle is any kind of slam dunk... there can be some implied permission to attempt to steal the name and to copy whatever the fuck you like because the whole project is open source, including the name Satoshi Nakamoto...

Craig Wright takes this open source to another level...

“Open source” is only a copyright issue.  Whereas the confusion of plagiarism and copyright violation is a pet peeve of mine, one which I believe is deliberately promulgated by the copyright lobby.  Even the Cypherpunks Public License embodies this confusion, for which reason I have always disliked it.

For an extreme illustration of the difference in concepts:  The complete works of William Shakespeare are in the public domain.  You can legally copy them as much as you want, under any existing copyright law in the world.  But if you claim Shakespeare’s work as your own, under the byline of your name, then you can and will be expelled from university, have your university degrees retroactively revoked, and/or be fired from any type of intellectual job.  —And if you claim to be Shakespeare—not even the psychic reincarnation of Shakespeare, but William Shakespeare in the flesh!—then you should be committed to an asylum for the insane.

To extend that confusion from authorship credit to the theft of an author’s identity does no one any good.  Satoshi’s identity is a question of fact, not a legal question amenable to arguments over the licensing of copyrighted works.  Wright’s theft of Satoshi’s identity is factually false, and legally fraudulent (easily hitting all five traditional elements of common-law fraud, and any reasonable statutory definition of fraud that I can imagine).  The copyright status and licensing of Bitcoin’s source code is totally irrelevant—except insofar as Wright’s attempt to claim some IP rights over Bitcoin is predicated on his identity theft.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Anyone have any details?

The TL;DR too stupid; didn't read is that he has now claimed that the bonded courier who is delivering the private keys to Satoshi's addresses is an attorney, and so all communication from said courier is "privileged", and therefore he does not have to submit it to the court. He is also claiming thousands of documents from a bunch of bankrupt or liquidated companies he was involved in are also "privileged", and so can effectively ignore the court order for these documents.

You can read the plaintiff's response as to why this is complete nonsense here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/389/kleiman-v-wright/. My favorite quote from it is below:

An  adversary  who  submits  false  declarations,  offers  contradictory  perjurious testimony  under  oath,  and  submits  false  documents  that  even  his  own  counsel  are  forced  to disavow,  severely  hinders  the  ability  to  seek  the  truth.

This quote sums up CSW's behavior perfectly. If he is Satoshi, why is he going to such extraordinarily extreme lengths to avoid having to sign a message or move some coins? Why is he trying so hard to hide the truth? Maybe, just maybe, because he is a pathological liar?

[JayJuanGee]

Anyone have any details?

The TL;DR too stupid; didn't read is that he has now claimed that the bonded courier who is delivering the private keys to Satoshi's addresses is an attorney, and so all communication from said courier is "privileged", and therefore he does not have to submit it to the court. He is also claiming thousands of documents from a bunch of bankrupt or liquidated companies he was involved in are also "privileged", and so can effectively ignore the court order for these documents.

You can read the plaintiff's response as to why this is complete nonsense here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/389/kleiman-v-wright/. My favorite quote from it is below:

An  adversary  who  submits  false  declarations,  offers  contradictory  perjurious testimony  under  oath,  and  submits  false  documents  that  even  his  own  counsel  are  forced  to disavow,  severely  hinders  the  ability  to  seek  the  truth.

This quote sums up CSW's behavior perfectly. If he is Satoshi, why is he going to such extraordinarily extreme lengths to avoid having to sign a message or move some coins? Why is he trying so hard to hide the truth? Maybe, just maybe, because he is a pathological liar?

He is so steep into the lie that he does not know how to extract himself except to keep doubling down, which logically seems like it should not have a good ending.. yet he keeps playing in that direction, and I wonder whether he has any escape route that will not leave him behind bars.  People are able to disappear, but will he be ready, willing and able to (before he ends up behind bars)?

[o_e_l_e_o]

In general BSV news - they forked again yesterday. Only 100 nodes (of their tiny number of 300 total nodes) didn't upgrade, still haven't upgraded, and are still on the old chain: https://mobile.twitter.com/alistairmilne/status/1224582671323598848

Further to that, Calvin Ayre now controls 75% of their hashrate: https://mobile.twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1224768472791560194

It's difficult to make sense of their incoherent ramblings, but it also seems as if CSW and Ayre are gearing up for some kind of legal claim against the entire blockchain "database"...? They seem to be suggesting that while Bitcoin is under MIT licence, the ledger isn't and so therefore is a "breach of contractual rights": https://mobile.twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1224753981206990853

This whole thing just gets more and more stupid as time goes on. Honestly, who still believes this nonsense?

[gmaxwell]

This whole thing just gets more and more stupid as time goes on. Honestly, who still believes this nonsense?

The doubling down is polarizing.  If you thought wright wasn't satoshi it makes you more sure of it, if you thought he was it also makes you more sure of it.

For a scammer this is a great move:  The people who are eligible victims become more vulnerable from their increased belief and the non-victims get further away and less likely to disrupt the scam.


He's made enough false claims of patent infringement, copyright infringement, etc.  (not to mention general defamation like claiming specific people fund terrorism or support child porn) that he's really set himself up to be targeted with a lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgement against his random legal threats... only missing component is that the few people with the time and money to bother consider him much of a real threat-- or even a real irritation.  But it'll could take take one more case of him harassing or threatening the wrong party before attitudes on that change.

God knows when justice will come for this fraudster but if/when it does I expect it'll ramp up quickly-- he's basically built his entire life in a fleet of oily-rag filled dumpsters.  I'll only take one match.

[o_e_l_e_o]

-snip-

Agree with everything you've said, but there is a difference with this latest development, at least in my view. The majority of his lies regarding the private keys before were that he couldn't sign a message because he didn't have access to the keys - they are in a trust, a courier has them, I don't have the password, they will definitely be delivered on this date, no this date, no wait this date, they've been delivered but it was only the public keys, et cetera ad absurdum. Him now claiming that the bonded courier who is supposedly delivering the private keys is an attorney and therefore he doesn't have to hand them over to the court is now essentially him saying "Nuh-uh, I don't want to".

His argument has gone from "I can't prove I'm Satoshi because I don't have the keys", while although provably false, at least could be believed, to "I just don't want to prove it", which is downright moronic for someone caught in the middle of a multi-billion dollar lawsuit. If he did have the keys, then the only sensible option for him is to prove it to the court and pay up half the bitcoin, since he is otherwise potentially facing jail time for perjuring the court.

Honestly, I'm surprised the judge is giving him so much leeway to continue to his ever more ridiculous lies to the court. Just set a final date for the keys to be handed over, and if it is not met, charge him with perjury.

[nullius]

Announcement:  Project Anastasia now brings us from Romania the correct identification that “Craig Wright este un hoț de identitate”.  Mulțumesc, GazetaBitcoin, for your defence of “Bitcoin: Fenomenul social” against Craig Wright’s lies!

English, Russian, and now Romanian...  Soon enough, the whole world shall know that Craig Wright is committing grand-scale identity theft.

This whole thing just gets more and more stupid as time goes on. Honestly, who still believes this nonsense?

The doubling down is polarizing.  If you thought wright wasn't satoshi it makes you more sure of it, if you thought he was it also makes you more sure of it.

For a scammer this is a great move:  The people who are eligible victims become more vulnerable from their increased belief and the non-victims get further away and less likely to disrupt the scam.

Indeed:  And this only yet again underscores the error that I and many others made by ignoring Wright for years, trying to starve him of attention.  The bolded portion is the reaction of “Too Stupid, Didn’t Respond” (with apologies to o_e_l_e_o, who is not making that mistake here).

The answer is a tightly focused counterattack that rises from a positive desire to make the world a better place, cuts the spew of lies off at the threshold, and focuses on one simple point that everybody can understand:  Identity theft.  That is the real issue here; and we must not let Wright perpetually reframe and divert the public presentation with antics that do exactly what you say.

People should neither ignore Wright, nor wildly lash out at him:  Keep focus, keep the high ground, and keep hitting the key points, repeatedly, in every single discussion so that he cannot get away with these cheap psychological ploys.

The TL;DR too stupid; didn't read is that he has now claimed that the bonded courier who is delivering the private keys to Satoshi's addresses is an attorney, and so all communication from said courier is "privileged", and therefore he does not have to submit it to the court. He is also claiming thousands of documents from a bunch of bankrupt or liquidated companies he was involved in are also "privileged", and so can effectively ignore the court order for these documents.

You can read the plaintiff's response as to why this is complete nonsense here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6309656/389/kleiman-v-wright/.

Although I am not an attorney, much less an American attorney admitted to Federal practice in S.D. Florida, I know of nothing in F.R.E. or the law that would allow an attorney to argue something tantamount to letting a client claim unlimited privilege on discoverable evidence, simply by the artifice of hiding it in an “attorney-client communication”.  Of course, such things have been litigated in the past.  Does anyone with West/Lexis access care to take a glance at the annotations on privilege and its limits?

I ask, for reason that I have seen cases in which attorneys were sanctioned for advancing much less-frivolous arguments.  We know that Wright is a liar.  Why are his attorneys failing their duties as officers of the court, bound to represent their clients’ interests zealously but in a manner not inconsistent with their ethical duties?  N.b. that the claim of privilege is a legal argument, not only a question of factual falsehood by Wright—that is an important distinction in this context.

(And by the way, re “bunch of bankrupt or liquidated companies”, where are the pertinent court-appointed U.S. Bankruptcy Trustee(s)?)

In general BSV news - they forked again yesterday. Only 100 nodes (of their tiny number of 300 total nodes) didn't upgrade, still haven't upgraded, and are still on the old chain: https://mobile.twitter.com/alistairmilne/status/1224582671323598848

Further to that, Calvin Ayre now controls 75% of their hashrate: https://mobile.twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1224768472791560194

LOL, yes:  Meanwhile, they are abysmally failing to even keep their fraudulently misnamed altcoin running on a technical level.  Not that technical incompetence will much bother a project that anyway exists only to swinde:  They only need to keep a coin sort-of almost approximately running, as a stage prop for a scam based primarily on psychological manipulation.

This quote sums up CSW's behavior perfectly. If he is Satoshi, why is he going to such extraordinarily extreme lengths to avoid having to sign a message or move some coins? Why is he trying so hard to hide the truth? Maybe, just maybe, because he is a pathological liar?

...a string of illogical twists by which he [Wright] claimed, in effect, that people who demanded a Satoshi signature from him were somehow violating his financial privacy (!).

Vide:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190228100312/https://medium.com/@craig_10243/careful-what-you-wish-for-c7c2f19e6c4f

There is a real problem with such a call from Core for me to sign. There are a number of downsides I will not discuss and a couple I will. You ask to see my keys; well, you are in effect asking to see my bank statement. Doing so is the opposite of what Bitcoin is about. I really do not care if you like that you cannot tell what I have or do not have. It is a form of information asymmetry that I desire to preserve.

So, Craig Wright conflates signatures, public keys, and (by implication) private keys (!).  Whereupon he, who in the same essay openly states his agenda to preserve the totally public nature of Bitcoin’s global ledger (which effectually puts everybody’s “bank statements” on the blockchain), argues that signing with a key associated with an already-public Satoshi UTXO would be tantamount to showing his bank statement (!!).

This tangle of concepts is so nonsensical that it cannot but be presented for one purpose:  If you can’t convince ’em, confuse ’em!  “Dr.” Wright’s explanation will seem plausible to people who know absolutely nothing about public-key cryptography, and the application thereof in Bitcoin.  And therein lies the rub:  The overwhelming majority of living human beings know absolutely nothing about public-key cryptography, and the application thereof in Bitcoin.

This is how Wright sneaks by the threshold question in the public mind, in furtherance of his grand-scale identity theft.  Don’t let him get away with it!

[Dabs]

In his own words: "Welcome to law."

[GazetaBitcoin]

Announcement:  Project Anastasia now brings us from Romania the correct identification that “Craig Wright este un hoț de identitate”.  Mulțumesc, GazetaBitcoin, for your defence of “Bitcoin: Fenomenul social” against Craig Wright’s lies!

English, Russian, and now Romanian...  Soon enough, the whole world shall know that Craig Wright is committing grand-scale identity theft.

The more, the merrier! I am glad I took part of this action to defend Bitcoin!

There is only one Bitcoin!
Există un singur Bitcoin!