We are all Hodlonaut

[o_e_l_e_o]

Can't wait to see the video of this. Some of these tweets are pretty damning.

https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1570743058203037697#m
File CSW claimed was from 2008, using a font not introduced until 2012.

https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1570746535000043520#m
File CSW claimed was from 2008, metadata showed creation date in 2015.

https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1570752651259949059#m
Emai CSW claimed he sent to Kleiman in 2008, headers show sent in 2014 (and Kleiman died in 2013).

Also some input from another user:

Next is the "coffee stains" whitepaper, claimed to be an "early draft". Even though this is a scanned document, the lambda glyph from the OpenSymbol font has been substituted with a glyph from the Segoe UI Symbol font which didn't exist until 2009 and later.

So what happened was: Wright, not wanting document metadata to tell on him, converted bitcoin.pdf to an editable Word document, replaced the name in it, printed it out, put coffee stains on it, and scanned it in again.

However, because the computer Wright used didn't have the OpenSymbol font installed on it, Word substituted it with a recognizable modern font, so Wright *still* got caught with his pants down backdating this document.

Nothing but lies and forgeries.

[1715018643]

1715018643

[1715018643]

1715018643

[1715018643]

1715018643

[1715018643]

1715018643

[worldofcoins]

I just read the case and I'm just surprised seeing someone claiming he created Bitcoin. It's pretty laughable and also a serious case we shouldn't joke about.

Yes, I've also read someone in the reputation section recently but can't remember their name. People are so naive that they say they created bitcoin and don't even understand the basic function of bitcoin take a look at Digitalmonk in reputation section you'll find them.

Because everybody knows that Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin, of which all evidence could be found on his forum profile Satoshi.
So my question here is, why didn't Wright provide the 1.1million Bitcoin he claims to own when the court ordered him?

Satoshi left the forum and if I remember correctly then the account satoshi was hacked and then locked by the admin theymos permanently just like lauda's.

Because for me, this is the case and time for everybody who has ever believed in Bitcoin to stand up for this case.

There was a believer of bitcoin who expected this price of 50k/BTC will be hit and he talked about it briefly, I can't remember the user and topic.

[aoluain]

Can't wait to see the video of this. Some of these tweets are pretty damning.

https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1570743058203037697#m
File CSW claimed was from 2008, using a font not introduced until 2012.

https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1570746535000043520#m
File CSW claimed was from 2008, metadata showed creation date in 2015.

https://nitter.it/bitnorbert/status/1570752651259949059#m
Emai CSW claimed he sent to Kleiman in 2008, headers show sent in 2014 (and Kleiman died in 2013).

Also some input from another user:

Next is the "coffee stains" whitepaper, claimed to be an "early draft". Even though this is a scanned document, the lambda glyph from the OpenSymbol font has been substituted with a glyph from the Segoe UI Symbol font which didn't exist until 2009 and later.

So what happened was: Wright, not wanting document metadata to tell on him, converted bitcoin.pdf to an editable Word document, replaced the name in it, printed it out, put coffee stains on it, and scanned it in again.

However, because the computer Wright used didn't have the OpenSymbol font installed on it, Word substituted it with a recognizable modern font, so Wright *still* got caught with his pants down backdating this document.

Nothing but lies and forgeries.

I'm a bit stoked reading about all these edits - KPMG have unearthed quite a lot of tom-foolery

[BitcoinMoses]

the only truthful thing i read today.. from the guys of CSW "witnesses"
how matthews says he CSW and ayres all met up in 2015 to start to actually do something related to bitcoin..
..
all the crap about the "drafts" white papers they "might" remember. "alleged" to have seen was the lies

none of them seen him do coding, mining, trading or anything in 2008-2014 related to bitcoin

(the 2015 is where CSW started his crypto scam of seeking investors to pay off his ATO debt, and first starts telling people he was involved in bitcoin. )

You are right. I am fully agree with you. The Bitcoin White Paper is written by me. CSW is His Holiness Reverend Pastor Dr Craig Steven Wright. He is great artist of an impersonator. Any way it was my plan ahead.

@Hoddlonaut twitter account I created in April 2007, Jack Dorsey has  changed the year by inserting 1 in the place of second 0. Who ever win or who ever lose it won't create any impact on Bitcoin.

[Bttzed03]

~

Silent followers/readers of this thread like me (until now) would appreciate it if you stop trolling here.

[n0nce]

I'm still catching up.

Genesis message implies full auditability. He gets agitated when speaking on this. Not a cryptocurrency, because no encryption!

Imagine satoshi doesn't know that cryptography is much more than 'encryption'... and that he doesn't know about digital signatures as an integral part of cryptography, after having designed the most popular electronic cash system, completely based on digital signatures....
I hope the judge notices all these lies - my impression up until now is that she does!

Says his approach to proving satoshiness is to use 80-100 people who know his history in court. "People are evidence".

This is ridiculous! No way the judge is buying that, right?

Matonis' signing session. Wright says Matonis was satisfied. Then going through Andresen's session. Didn't want to give a signature file because Andresen might publish it. Says Andresen didn't verify the sig, only check the checksum.

What a signing session, huh? Look at this; valid checksum, but no valid signature.

Code:

message: Hello I am Satoshi
signature: lolol1123definitely_signed_by-satoshi
sha256 checksum: 8cefc0c3b3fc10b0870a6f9e872f8ff3d44883f62f6e34a29db8c02ca0693fac

Wright says he doesn't have key access now, but he used to at some point. "I created the algorithm" (wtf). Now goes into ECDSA technical things. Raises his voice, waves his hands.

Craig Wright created ECDSA?  

Wright said he never had keys, only an HMAC algorithm, "I hash it and I hash it", some sort of key derivation. "I don't think I understand", says Haukaas. Nobody does, Ørjan.

How can he be so delusional, trying to convince the judge that he creates signatures by just hashing a message a bunch of times? Ridiculous.

Now the "I remember reading it … probably when I wrote it" slip-up.

They showed this in court! Brilliant. Such a classic.

https://piped.mha.fi/watch?v=cKbPNFUHLYM


Reading 09/15 now and 09/16 later today..

[franky1]

Wright says he doesn't have key access now, but he used to at some point. "I created the algorithm" (wtf). Now goes into ECDSA technical things. Raises his voice, waves his hands.

Craig Wright created ECDSA?  

Wright said he never had keys, only an HMAC algorithm, "I hash it and I hash it", some sort of key derivation. "I don't think I understand", says Haukaas. Nobody does, Ørjan.

How can he be so delusional, trying to convince the judge that he creates signatures by just hashing a message a bunch of times? Ridiculous.

to explain the social drama history.. of the supposed keys

7 years ago CSW conned people about some signed document that (supposedly) dave klieman signed that he seen $m's of dollars of value. which was apparently according to certain things revealed years ago just a txt file of public keys that (supposedly/doubtful (after death back dated)) kliemen signed as proof of collateral for tulip which then gave W&K some perceived value for investors..(in short no one seen a file of private keys or signed proofs of transactions or signed messages )

.. this then changed story(circa 2016-7) to how the actual private keys were on another printed document with some courier who meant to turn up in 2020.... hindsight now..  who didnt turn up in 2020(no shock)

then it was that the keys were in a trust where the guys were multisig(we know 2009-2013 keys were p2pk/p2pkh.. not p2sh(multisig)
thus that story didnt last long

then he said the p2pk keys were spliced.. where each guys numerics were split into parts using an algo where he kept the algo but the trust had divisions/splits of the keys

then it became how the algo needed some key to work with the splices where he has the key(hmac)

and most recently story that from the genesis.. all keys are derivatives(child) of a parent master key

yea. his story changes depending on who he talks to and what season of the year it is..

[amishmanish]

I saw CSW's posts, he seems a fraud from his very posts. Now this happens when people come to Bitcoin not for contributing meaningfully to the community but with intent to only make money. We respect Satoshi not because his works are still helping us to earn but because he was a visionary of his time, someone who liberated economy from clutches of bank....hail Satoshi. Hail bitcoin

[CoinEraser]

You are right. I am fully agree with you. The Bitcoin White Paper is written by me. CSW is His Holiness Reverend Pastor Dr Craig Steven Wright. He is great artist of an impersonator. Any way it was my plan ahead.

@Hoddlonaut twitter account I created in April 2007, Jack Dorsey has  changed the year by inserting 1 in the place of second 0. Who ever win or who ever lose it won't create any impact on Bitcoin.

Welcome to my ignore list. I don't think you're satoshi. Neither you nor craig wright. Satoshi would never call himself moses.  

I hope hoddlonaut wins and proves that CW is not satoshi!  

[Z-tight]

I hope hoddlonaut wins and proves that CW is not satoshi!  

The people that know CSW isn't Satoshi already know it and do not need any court victory to prove it, the people that have believed CSW's lies won't change their mind because of the outcome of a court case. So Hodlonaut's victory, if it comes will be for us, the bitcoin community to celebrate a victory over the biggest liar against our network, and it will probably slow him down on suing bitcoin developers and enthusiasts when called out for constant lying.

[n0nce]

Should you have accepted the offer? Said he didn't understand at the time. Couldn't handle private keys. ^{[emphasis mine]}

Phrases like this always stink of: (a) no idea about Bitcoin, or (b) deliberately trying to fool someone.

From its very first version, Bitcoin Core handled the 'private keys' for you through the wallet.dat file. And there's nothing hard about 'handling' this file whatsoever!
I know y'all know this, but want to just jot it down so that it's completely clear. When we talk about 'private keys' (managing them, custody of them and backing them up) - most of the time, it's not about working with the keys themselves directly, but usually this term means either the wallet.dat file or a seed phrase. Again, there's nothing complicated, obscure or hard about handling a file or a bunch of words.

To make 100% sure, I even just downloaded Bitcoin Core v0.1 and grepped for 'wallet.dat'.

Code:

> cd Downloads/bitcoin-0.1.0/src
> grep -r "wallet.dat" .
./ui.cpp:        strErrors += "Error loading wallet.dat      \n";
./db.cpp:                    printf("Error in wallet.dat, hash mismatch\n");
./db.h:    CWalletDB(const char* pszMode="r+", bool fTxn=false) : CDB("wallet.dat", pszMode, fTxn) { }

Sure enough, this is how even Bitcoin v0.1 stored and handled the 'private keys'.


I think visualizing private keys as either a file or a set of words takes the abstractedness out of it (especially for newbies), and easily clears up why phrases such as 'could not handle private keys', 'lost the private keys' or 'afraid to use private keys' are all bullshit.

[BitcoinMoses]

Wright says he doesn't have key access now, but he used to at some point. "I created the algorithm" (wtf). Now goes into ECDSA technical things. Raises his voice, waves his hands.

Craig Wright created ECDSA?  

Wright said he never had keys, only an HMAC algorithm, "I hash it and I hash it", some sort of key derivation. "I don't think I understand", says Haukaas. Nobody does, Ørjan.

How can he be so delusional, trying to convince the judge that he creates signatures by just hashing a message a bunch of times? Ridiculous.

to explain the social drama history.. of the supposed keys

7 years ago CSW conned people about some signed document that (supposedly) dave klieman signed that he seen $m's of dollars of value. which was apparently according to certain things revealed years ago just a txt file of public keys that (supposedly/doubtful (after death back dated)) kliemen signed as proof of collateral for tulip which then gave W&K some perceived value for investors..(in short no one seen a file of private keys or signed proofs of transactions or signed messages )

.. this then changed story(circa 2016-7) to how the actual private keys were on another printed document with some courier who meant to turn up in 2020.... hindsight now..  who didnt turn up in 2020(no shock)

then it was that the keys were in a trust where the guys were multisig(we know 2009-2013 keys were p2pk/p2pkh.. not p2sh(multisig)
thus that story didnt last long

then he said the p2pk keys were spliced.. where each guys numerics were split into parts using an algo where he kept the algo but the trust had divisions/splits of the keys

then it became how the algo needed some key to work with the splices where he has the key(hmac)

and most recently story that from the genesis.. all keys are derivatives(child) of a parent master key

yea. his story changes depending on who he talks to and what season of the year it is..

I was looking at his face when the Judge called him come forward to give his Fake_Testament. He was very much broken with a kind of fear.

Finally he said, that he has destroyed the private keys plus all the slices in his hard drive and two dungle sticks drives. So he has no access to the private key of Satoshi  Blocks. Well, any body who lies feel fear of getting caught by the cross exeminers. Now, he thinks, that either Hal Finney or Dave Kleiman may had the Satoshi Blocks Private keys and they are dead, so his story will fit that there is no one who have got the the Satoshi's Private Key. So he is trying to fool the bitcoiners by designing this case to use the court to grant him permission to break the Bitcoin Blockchain by the court order. This interesting but the most interesting is that Jon Matonis and Calvin together have hired Craig to play this fiasco.

CSW has no knowledge of actual Bitcoin Protocol. He and many  bitcoiners also thinks that Satoshi might have lost his hard drive or his computer got  rushed. But truth is, it is Bitcoin Jesus will reveal the secret, and you all know AGD who is the keeper of the private keys.  But Satoshi is just does not have any interest to access to his  Bitcoin. CSW said in 2016 2nd May that he does not want fame and money, so why does he want the court to give wrong order so he could use his 3G power to destroy BTC.

I thinks the Bitcoin community need to organise a case against not only CSW but against all Faketoshis. It now better to organise a Satoshi Nakamoto doxing conference to cross examine him and any one who is claiming to be Satoshi.

He announced that he need to gather 100 men to give prove of witness that he created Bitcoin. What he said is that every Bitcoin community leader are doing drug dealing with Bitcoin and he want the court to give him the right to cease 200 millions computers that have Bitcoin Blockchan and Node.

But in some way, I like CSW's capable credibility and I am wondering why he does not invite Bitcoin Moses to will against the False messiah Bitcoin Jesus ?

Only  Bitcoin Moses can prove that Indeed Bitcoin Jesus and all his Alt Coin disciples are Fake and false.

G

[n0nce]

Did you discuss alternative to current systems? He expressed ideas privately, at work he was interested in improving logging and how the data was held. Can remember him drawing diagrams of how security can be improved, like a blockchain.

Come on! You don't (incrementally - implied) 'improve security' of contemporary electronic money schemes by throwing a blockchain at them.
We all (and hopefully the judge, too) know that blockchain = Bitcoin. A chain-like structure alone is not a security-improving mechanism that can be used to 'improve' security of an existing system.

Sure, Bitcoin is more secure than what we had before, but not because we 'improved' that system by adding a 'like a blockchain' looking structure to it; Bitcoin replaces the legacy monetary system as a whole, and the blockchain structure is just one of many mechanisms that make it secure.

Was logging an interest for Wright? Yes, was big part. He implemented centralised logging ^{[emphasis mine]}, would detect unauthorised changes.

Are you describing blockchain tech? It had the characteristics, can't say if he was certain of it at the time. Some similarity, not an expert.

Wow, centralized logging = blockchain? How much are these qualified people paid to claim they can't tell the difference between box-standard centralized logging (newsflash: every single company on the planet keeps logs about pretty much everything going on on their servers - CSW would not be a genius for implementing this) and a decentralized blockchain?

For how long? Went on until we left the farm.

Supposedly, Craig's cousin mined Bitcoin on his CPU until 2011, but GPU miners killed CPU mining in 2010, no?

Manshaus asks about his background. Goes into his autism research, 30 years of experience in clinical services and science.

You have diagnosed Wright. How was this done? It took a week in April 2020, a series of standard procedures for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Diagnosing autism in adults is actually not even a thing. Like, there are questionnaires and stuff, but you can only really diagnose it in children.

Could the diagnosis be a benefit for coding, cryptography etc? Yes, no distracting thoughts. "World of things", not people, emotions.

This sounds to me like someone who doesn't know much about autism, trying to describe autism. A good friend of mine has been diagnosed with it at child's age; they do very much have emotions, empathy and all that. As far as I know, the issue is mostly about expressing and interpreting feelings, not about not having them at all. The reason they may get distracted less is definitely not because they 'live in a world of things, not people, emotions'.. 

I noticed this a bit as a 'pattern' so far, though. A whole bunch of (Craig Wright's) witnesses described things like they are shown in movies or simply how most people imagine them, not like they are in reality.
Especially around the technical stuff. Like Craig supposedly having a datacenter in his home or claiming that it's hard to 'manage your own keys'. The latter was probably envisioned to look something like this:



To be honest; all the statements about when who first met whom and when they did what together, ... I can't verify. But when they say one word about technical stuff, it gets interesting..

Edit: Done with 5/5 days. I didn't know about all those faked documents / fake evidence. Impressive.

[franky1]

Manshaus asks about his background. Goes into his autism research, 30 years of experience in clinical services and science.

You have diagnosed Wright. How was this done? It took a week in April 2020, a series of standard procedures for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Diagnosing autism in adults is actually not even a thing. Like, there are questionnaires and stuff, but you can only really diagnose it in children.

Could the diagnosis be a benefit for coding, cryptography etc? Yes, no distracting thoughts. "World of things", not people, emotions.

This sounds to me like someone who doesn't know much about autism, trying to describe autism. A good friend of mine has been diagnosed with it at child's age; they do very much have emotions, empathy and all that. As far as I know, the issue is mostly about expressing and interpreting feelings, not about not having them at all.

in short. he didnt like being called a sociopath so needed some other fake diagnoses to cling onto to explain his lack or morals. something that he "felt" others would sympathise to.. and use as a medical defence if ever caught doing immoral things

Edit: Done with 5/5 days. I didn't know about all those faked documents / fake evidence. Impressive.

as for all the forgeries..

well based on investigated info from everywhere apart from CSW (mtgox leaked accounts, ATO filings, company registration docs,)


back in 2011 CSW met with dave kleimen for the first time to discuss cyber forensics. CSW had no bitcoin and nor did dave.
they set up a cyber forensics company in 2011(W&K) to try and get some R&D money from US homeland security budget(CSW inspired idea suggested to dave to help dave cover medical costs) to start some cyber security software for the US defense department.. 4 applications failed. and both CSW and dave parted ways.. didnt talk..  (dave was put in hospital for 800+ days due to medical reasons . and was released from hospital to pass away at home within a month (april 2013.)
CSw didnt know at this point as they had not really talked in a couple years

around this time CSW got reintroduced to bitcoin by someone else after the 2012 price jump from $2 to over $100

craig bought his first bitcoin using the last of his free life savings
he bought 48btc for ~$5k in april 2013(yep not a rich guy)

where CSw started to reach out to Dave again to hear what he has to say.. but

CSW learned about daves death a week after the death
and thats also when CSW started getting wild idea's about starting lots of bitcoin related businesses and passing them off as related to his recently departed old "friend"

and thats when CSW started back peddling the defunct W&K brand to become bitcoin related with all the forgeries..
(even Ira seen many of the 'dave document signatures' as being suspect. backdated and signed in a females signature handwriting style(not daves))

in short CSW had no bitcoin until 2013 and dave had nothing to do with bitcoin.

CSW started his bitcoin games as of april 2013 ..
but kept failing
he even trued to use the W&K brand to get R&D money from the autralian tax office for some IT vetures he had in mind(but never flourished as usual)
and got into real debt by early 2014 where the australian tax office started really sniffing into CSW multiple failed companies

 the rest is just drama..
of debt and forgeries to try evading debt repayments by going deeper down the scammer rabbit hole inventing new companies to shift fake collateral between, that he never had, suggesting to people that he owed money that he was good for it because (well yes he pretended he invented bitcoin and had loads of coins)

.. very short..
anything bitcoin related and CSW related pre april 2013.. dont beleive

[Sebas.tian]

So what can we do to help?

 Let us join him to fight to ensure there is justice at the end of the judgment. Since Hodloanaut stand on a solid ground to defend himself and all bitcoiners in the community, it will be better bitcoiners join him for other people to know that the community is too big to be defeat because all the evidence that will make the case to favour Hodloanaut and bitcoiners are there. I believe, the community will do everything possible within their power to support Hodloanaut to make sure other people learn lesson from this judgement that bitcoiners are in a solid ground that can never be destroy by any man or group of people.

[o_e_l_e_o]

To be honest; all the statements about when who first met whom and when they did what together, ... I can't verify.

Which is kind of the point, I guess. The only "evidence" which is in CSW's favor is things which cannot be verified. Private "signing" sessions, testimonies of friends and family members of things which happened in private and of which there is no hard evidence, his claims about stomping on hard drives, etc. All the actual evidence which can be independently looked at and examined - previous statements CSW has made in writing and on video, the forged emails and documents, the fake signatures, etc. - all show CSW to be the fraud that he is.

Twitter user DanDarkPill has made a great little video of my favorite snippet of the case from yesterday: https://nitter.it/DanDarkPill/status/1570289532838506496#m


Due to my own oversight in failing to make this thread self-moderated when I created it, I have elected to lock it and to create a new self-moderated thread to continue the discussion without spam and trolls here: Hodlonaut Trial