Bitcoin creator? Craig Wright 100% Satoshi Nakamoto?

[cabron]

If he patents blockchain, would it mean that it will not be open source, and does it mean all other altcoins may also be affected?

He can't obtain a valid patent on that because bitcoin is open and unpatented years before Wright ever heard of it.  Once something is published that becomes a bar to patentability called prior art.  But this doesn't stop someone from making spurious patent lawsuits as a form of harassment, they'll ultimately lose, but they still waste their opponents time and money.

Of course, he could attack altcoins but most major altcoins have massive premines that they can use to pay him off-- or use to fund litigation to stop him.  His scheme mostly centers around harassing Bitcoin and Bitcoin forks and so far he's left other altcoins alone.

This is going to be used for fud to every altcoin which they can constantly attack. All they need is media and still can manipulate the market thru it including BTC. Looks like the government will be on his side too.

What amuses me is that Craig Wright is an awful coder which should have automatically shown that he wasn't Satoshi Nakamoto. Only a genius (like Hal Finney) could have written the whitepaper and made the original code. Craig Wright is some loser with a collegiate level understanding of coding.

His coding capability I guess wasn't the point of it, It was sort of his idea and partnership for creating BTC which was said by Kurt Wuckert recently who is an advocate of the BSV. CSW did have some alliance even when he is obviously can't code well and can't prove he is Satoshi.

[1715626663]

1715626663

[1715626663]

1715626663

[Viecoin]

If Craig Wright holds as much BSV as he claims to have in BTC, he should indeed, feel relieved to pay $100 million.

[mynonce]

There Was No ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’ Lawsuit
Depending on what you read, you might get the real story, or ... not.
https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/12/08/there-was-no-satoshi-nakamoto-lawsuit/

[franky1]

If Craig Wright holds as much BSV as he claims to have in BTC, he should indeed, feel relieved to pay $100 million.

he doesnt need to pay that.
the damages are for CSW to, in practical terms pay himself.
basically human CSW has to pay $100m to corporation company name, owned by CSW $100m.

-$100m out +$100m in = $0
all he has to do is from his corporate company letterhead tell the court the payment is satisfied and settled. thats it.
after all he is not going to argue with himself that he didnt pay himself, and try to sue himself..

[im posible]

If he really is Satoshi Nakamoto, he shouldn't have bothered to go to the court to win some bitcoins, because he can easily control bitcoins which if they are created automatically he knows the flow and how to acquire bitcoins. But that's just my guess, maybe there are things that are more complicated so that Satoshi Nakamoto needs to be present at the trial.

[Ararbermas]

Why he waited for long time just to claim that he's the real creator? Is that because bitcoin nowadays is so expensive and very successful invention? Well that man wants a rewards probably. Lol  just imagine satoshi nakamoto is known from japan. But craig wright clearly not from asian countries.  

[fenican]

It's really not that complicated. If you want to prove you own Bitcoins, simply sign a message with the private key. Done. You're verified to be the owner. Even a crypto novice knows how to sign a message or can google it.

Claiming to own coins by promulgating fake news articles to the media only establishes one as a fraud and an ignoramus. CW is both, in spades.

[DapanasFruit]

Now, the he won the trial, can he prove the ownership of those bitcoins? This is what we are waiting for as CW can't prove his ownership. Because as said before, he will prove his ownership once he wins the trial. And also, he plans to donate much of those to charity. So can he move those bitcoins? That's the next big question here. This is interesting to follow if he can really prove such ownership.

Now, that would be the most exciting thing to watch. Since he is already declared the winner for the Bitcoin on the question then the whole cryptocurrency industry is gonna be watching when he will be moving the BTC into another wallet so he can be donating the same to charity. Or will this be another joke coming from Mr. Craig Wright...whom I believe is WRONG from the very start? Anyway, we have only one thing that we should be thankful for this man: free entertainment!

[franky1]

Since he is already declared the winner for the Bitcoin on the question

thte coins were never in dispute or question. both sides were not arguing about coins.
the court case was about a company set up in 2013. where both parties did not dispute the "said" collateral.

what CSW won was the company name.. nothing more.

he does not ned to prove anything to the court. not even any settlement via coin movements.
CSW as a person has to pay CSW the company owner $100m(pay himself -150+150=0). which CSW the company owner just needs to write a company letter to the judge saying "payment received, no dispute" and thats it.

this case is nothing to do with coins. and CSW as a scammer he is, knows this. and will instead pretend it has to do with the coins and pretend that the next entertaining "no dispute" settlement of court ordered damages being paid is further proof of collateral holding(facepalm)

but again none of this proves ownership of coins. nor has actually in reality ever been about proving ownership of coins.
the reality is he doesnt own the coins. its all just drama and fakery and scammy manipulation for media press and speculation

[rodskee]

Now, the he won the trial, can he prove the ownership of those bitcoins? This is what we are waiting for as CW can't prove his ownership. Because as said before, he will prove his ownership once he wins the trial. And also, he plans to donate much of those to charity. So can he move those bitcoins? That's the next big question here. This is interesting to follow if he can really prove such ownership.

if he can prove to be satoshi then yes the coins/bitcoin inside Satoshi wallet expected to be moving soon? and why need proving Himself when he can just move the coins and everything will believe him.
and why not also logged in to his account here in forum? he can easily ask theymos of His ownership and sure His account will be unlocked.

If he really is Satoshi Nakamoto, he shouldn't have bothered to go to the court to win some bitcoins, because he can easily control bitcoins which if they are created automatically he knows the flow and how to acquire bitcoins. But that's just my guess, maybe there are things that are more complicated so that Satoshi Nakamoto needs to be present at the trial.

+1 here lol, like what my point also .

[LogitechMouse]

This Fake-toshi drama has been there for years already. He spent millions proving to the court that he is Satoshi where in fact he really isn't Satoshi. Well, he made us laughed a bit though .
There is only one very simple way for him to prove that he really is Satoshi. Sign a message of the address where a million Bitcoin is stored. That's it.

Ok he won at the court. Does it prove that he is Satoshi. Do we believe that he really is Satoshi now? Do you think people who is in crypto for quite some time will believe that this shitty scammer is Satoshi? Maybe those newbies will believe but for others not a single chance. Proving in the court and winning isn't enough to prove that he is the real Satoshi. He can just claim it, I can just claim it too without spending any penny, a beggar can claim it, my dog can claim it and anybody can claim that we are Satoshi Nakamoto. Just sign a message where a million Bitcoin is stored and if he can do it then we will believe in him.

[avikz]

I'm just informing. --- no comment ---

Bitcoin trial: (Wright) Defendant wins dispute over $50B in Bitcoin
https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/bitcoin-trial-defendant-wins-keeps-173905475.html

Craig Wright Cleared of All Charges Except a Conversion Count, Jury Awards $100 Million to W&K Info Defense
https://news.bitcoin.com/craig-wright-cleared-of-all-charges-except-a-conversion-count-jury-awards-100-million-to-wk-info-defense/

Australian who says he invented Bitcoin to keep $71b stash after winning trial
https://www.smh.com.au/business/markets/australian-to-keep-billions-in-bitcoins-after-winning-trial-20211207-p59fcm.html

Bitcoin trial: Defendant wins, keeps Bitcoins worth $50B
https://lasvegassun.com/news/2021/dec/06/bitcoin-trial-defendant-wins-keeps-bitcoins-worth-/

Bitcoin creator Craig Wright 100% Satoshi Nakamoto
https://coingeek.com/bitcoin-creator-craig-wright-100-satoshi-nakamoto-says-kleiman-v-wright-jury/


(edited)

I know Miami court has given their verdict that Craig is the creator of bitcoin. Most surprisingly Craig has agreed to provide a huge sum of money to the family of Kleiman. But now it's interesting to see that whether he is able to access the stash that we believe belongs to Mr. Nakamoto.

Things have become very interesting now! The entire community should keep a close eye on the events. Unless Craig is able to access Satoshi's bitcoin stash, it means nothing to the community.

[hd49728]

I know Miami court has given their verdict that Craig is the creator of bitcoin. Most surprisingly Craig has agreed to provide a huge sum of money to the family of Kleiman.

If my memory is good, Wright does plagiarism in his thesis and tried to claim as Bitcoin's founder and owner of Bitcoin's White paper. Do you trust him?

But now it's interesting to see that whether he is able to access the stash that we believe belongs to Mr. Nakamoto.

I believe he won't have access to satoshi's coins. Because very simply, he is not a real satoshi and he can not have access to it now but reasons are not because he lost private key or disk. It is just because he has never owned it.

[franky1]

I know Miami court has given their verdict that Craig is the creator of bitcoin. Most surprisingly Craig has agreed to provide a huge sum of money to the family of Kleiman. But now it's interesting to see that whether he is able to access the stash that we believe belongs to Mr. Nakamoto.

Things have become very interesting now! The entire community should keep a close eye on the events. Unless Craig is able to access Satoshi's bitcoin stash, it means nothing to the community.

guess you didnt research..
the court has not given a verdict that craig invented bitcoin.
the court has not given damages to the family of kleiman
craig does not have access to the stash

again lets correct it
the court has given a verdict that a 2013 company called W&K is not part of kleimans
      meaning its wrights.
the court has ordered craig(human) pay W&K(craig the business owner) $100m
the court does not need to see bank statements or block explorers to ensure damages are paid
the court only needs to receive a letter from W&K(craig) that W&K has settled the $100m and will not dispute the $100m

that is all

[Sakoshi No Tomato]

I feel sorry for the Judge's great grand children. Give me 5 minutes with faketoshi and I will ask 5 questions that only Satoshi and the ones he blessed with his kindness have the answers to...  of course  the proof of knowledge is there.

1- How is the name written and what does it REALLY mean.
2- why 144 blocks per day (not why 21 million coins)
3- Other than the famous  "chancellor on brink" message, how is the other secret message concealed?and what does it say?
4- why sekp256k1 and what does it represent on a bigger scale?

5- and last, did he really mine genesis block? And why was the highest difficulty target set  to 1d00ffff?

[fullhdpixel]

Well, I still don’t know whether he is Satoshi Nakamoto or not, but all this while he could have ended all these troubles by just moving the coins in the Satoshi’s wallet, that way he would have easily shut down everyone that is doubting him as the Satoshi Nakamoto.

How do we believe him that he is the one who created Bitcoin if he can’t prove it? He’s not the only that has claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto or the only one said to be, there have been other people who the world believed were Satoshi Nakamoto, and others who have claimed that they are. But at the end we still find out that they are not. He has been the only one that has kept persisting for long now. So I guess he just has to prove himself and that is it.

[Rufsilf]

Why he waited for long time just to claim that he's the real creator? Is that because bitcoin nowadays is so expensive and very successful invention? Well that man wants a rewards probably. Lol  just imagine satoshi nakamoto is known from japan. But craig wright clearly not from asian countries.  

How could you possible know that the creator is from Asia? Is it just because of the name Satoshi Nakamoto? That's why you can automatically say that he/she is from Japan or somehow in the Asian countries. Don't forget the fact the we are pseudo-anonymous, so we can't just say which part of the world we are. That's just a vague reasoning you got there.
So @Ararbermas, is it safe to say that you're from the Middle East or somewhere in UAE? Lol.

[mynonce]

...
So @Ararbermas, is it safe to say that you're from the Middle East or somewhere in UAE? Lol.

I think that's not safe. But what's safe is, that Satoshi pre-released the Bitcoin draft 'Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System' at http://www.upload.ae/file/6157/ecash-pdf.html, a UAE issued domain name site.

In August 2008, Satoshi pre-released the Bitcoin draft 'Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System' at http://www.upload.ae/file/6157/ecash-pdf.html, a UAE issued domain name site.

Here is Satoshi's original email dated 22/Aug/2008

From: "Satoshi Nakamoto" <satoshi@anonymousspeech.com>
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 4:38 PM
To: "Wei Dai" <weidai@ibiblio.org>
Cc: "Satoshi Nakamoto" <satoshi@anonymousspeech.com>
Subject: Citation of your b-money page

I was very interested to read your b-money page.  I'm getting ready to
release a paper that expands on your ideas into a complete working system.
Adam Back (hashcash.org) noticed the similarities and pointed me to your
site.

I need to find out the year of publication of your b-money page for the
citation in my paper.  It'll look like:
[1] W. Dai, "b-money," http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt, (2006?).

You can download a pre-release draft at
http://www.upload.ae/file/6157/ecash-pdf.html  Feel free to forward it to
anyone else you think would be interested.

Title: Electronic Cash Without a Trusted Third Party

Abstract: A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow
online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without the
burdens of going through a financial institution.  Digital signatures
offer part of the solution, but the main benefits are lost if a trusted
party is still required to prevent double-spending.  We propose a solution
to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network.  The network
timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of
hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without
redoing the proof-of-work.  The longest chain not only serves as proof of
the sequence of events witnessed, but proof that it came from the largest
pool of CPU power.  As long as honest nodes control the most CPU power on
the network, they can generate the longest chain and outpace any
attackers.  The network itself requires minimal structure.  Messages are
broadcasted on a best effort basis, and nodes can leave and rejoin the
network at will, accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of
what happened while they were gone.

Satoshi

[boyptc]

Well, I still don’t know whether he is Satoshi Nakamoto or not

There's actually no need to put this on the court if he's the real satoshi. It's easy for him to prove that he's satoshi by just moving those million of bitcoins on his stash to prove everyone wrong that's doubting him. It's been years I guess since he's fighting for his stance of being the owner, the logic is just simple for proving it.

But there's no proof for that and I don't follow his cases that have to be brought up to the judge.

[gmaxwell]

the court has given a verdict that a 2013 company called W&K is not part of kleimans
      meaning its wrights.

Nah, that's another lie of wrights.

https://www.reddit.com/r/bsv/comments/rc9iev/judge_bloom_has_already_seen_the_wk_operating/