Updates from the COPA v Craig Wright trial

[cryptosize]

That's exactly the reason identity isn't proven the way community wants satoshi to come forward and introduce himself . Keys can be stolen , public identity can't be altered ( well , that doesn't apply to rainbow people ) .

If someone had stolen Satoshi's keys, chances are he would try to liquidate his huge stash (1.100.000 BTC) either to become rich (in terms of USD/EUR) and/or to destroy BTC's reputation (with a sharp drop in fiat valuation).

Also, nobody has revealed Satoshi's identity so far, but HmmMAA claims it's a covert NSA/CIA conspiracy (they "know" who Satoshi is, but they just won't tell anyone, even though we know governments want to destroy BTC).

My knowledge is limited

And yet, you're here to judge others and claim that you have some sort of "technical expertise".

Wanna tell us what's your expertise? What do you do for a living in the real world? (I don't want to reveal it for you)

[1714789714]

1714789714

[1714789714]

1714789714

[1714789714]

1714789714

[LeezHamilton]

The COPA - v- Dr Craig Wright Litigation is a very high profile litigation in history.

Without an extra ordinary evidence Dr Craig Wright and his barrister will be embarrassed. No body knows what will happen next week. But I have got a Prophecy, which will be an extra ordinary twist.

Read my prophecy. Click the link bellow.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5484503.msg63639307#msg63639307

Comment on my twist, bet on it, you might get 1.1 BTC as a bona fide gift from the twister Satoshi Nakamoto  

  

[DooMAD]

drivel

If nothing else, this thread is certainly giving me some new names for my distrust list.  Maybe it's a good thing it's not a self-moderated topic.  The vermin seem more eager to out themselves this way.  Obvious BSV shills and trolls are obvious.

~LeezHamilton
~Cryptomultiplier
~HmmMAA

[hilariousetc]

Day five:

More of the same from Craig today as he has been playing more of the blame game and pleading the Shaggy Defence (it wasn't me) and everyone but him is responsible for the faked documents he has submitted in evidence of him being Satoshi. Today he claimed Christen Ager-Hanssen basically hacked into not only his computer to plant faked documents to frame him but that he also hacked his phone and had access to all his personal communications such as emails and whatsapp messages for months. Quite impressive to hack both devices of one of the world's most leading security experts and for Craig not to know he was being monitored for such a length of time.

Craig also got a telling off for reportedly speaking with Australian Financial Review during the trial. In fairness to him it did look like they ensnared him on his way out and spun a offhand comment into an entire article, that is if you believe Craig, which we all know the answer to that question but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt here.

There's a couple of Craig Wright bingo cards for anyone watching and wants to play along:

https://twitter.com/Twentynothing00/status/1755921531568296360


https://twitter.com/THBitcoinBuddha/status/1755909856093962444


If anyone wants a recap of the first few days of the trail the excellent Dr Bitcoin podcast has done an hour episode covering some of the juiciest bits and it's well worth a listen rather than just watching the stream or reading tweets etc: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOnnlLm8_9c

Trial is adjourned until Monday. Will be back with updates then.

The UK Court should have allowed relaying the full livestream for media coverage. Why the court has taken such decision is confusing, may be not for others but is for myself.  Ultimately COPA will win the case.

You can request a link to the stream but you need to give them your full name. Not sure why it isn't fully public but maybe they don't want people recording and sharing it en mass. It's not terribly exciting unless you enjoy listing to Craig waffle on about irrelevant bullshit. I'm sure it will get spicier once the expert witnesses are called.

[franky1]

More of the same from Craig today as he has been playing more of the blame game and pleading the Shaggy Defence (it wasn't me) and everyone but him is responsible for the faked documents he has submitted in evidence of him being Satoshi. Today he claimed Christen Ager-Hanssen basically hacked into not only his computer to plant faked documents to frame him but that he also hacked his phone and had access to all his personal communications such as emails and whatsapp messages for months.

as expected.. nothing new. he done same tactic with ATO in 2014

heres my theory
Christen Ager-Hanssen invested into CSW scam over the years (financially or sweat equity of promised returns. and now wanted out). and CSW/CSW sponsors like Ayres said "if you act like a disgruntled employee and cause some social drama leaking things that will cause a media storm to get my name viral again, to make me news worthy and notable again ill pay you, and you can be made whole and exit with a golden handshake" (paid dupe)
as that too is not a new trick of CSW

[BlackHatCoiner]

Anyone can claim , but only one in each case can prove it . That's the point we are now , proving in court . Either he is or he goes to jail for perjury and other things . Isn't that great ?

Do you really believe he is Satoshi? Let's leave the court asides for a moment. Do you find the overall "evidence" convincing to you?

If i steal your keys am i the owner of your coins ? Or am i a thief who illegally posses your coins ? And more importantly , if i steal your keys am i you ?

No, but if you claim to be me, and you have no other ways to prove such a thing (like a drivers license), then a signed message from the PGP is at least required. You can't claim to be an anonymous person with no evidence apart from forgeries. Satoshi, whoever he is, posted a PGP key. This, along with the genesis public key, are the only elements which can certify his identity. Beyond that, not much else is known about him.

You can't treat potentially everyone as Satoshi. Everyone is not Satoshi until proven otherwise. And as time goes by, these signed messages will count even less as solid evidence due to the development of quantum computing which will sooner or later be used to compromise his keys.

[LeezHamilton]

Anyone can claim , but only one in each case can prove it . That's the point we are now , proving in court . Either he is or he goes to jail for perjury and other things . Isn't that great ?

Do you really believe he is Satoshi? Let's leave the court asides for a moment. Do you find the overall "evidence" convincing to you?

If i steal your keys am i the owner of your coins ? Or am i a thief who illegally posses your coins ? And more importantly , if i steal your keys am i you ?

No, but if you claim to be me, and you have other ways to prove such a thing (like a drivers license), then a signed message from the PGP is at least required. You can't claim to be an anonymous person with no evidence apart from forgeries. Satoshi, whoever he is, posted a PGP key. This, along with the genesis public key, are the only elements which can certify his identity. Beyond that, not much else is known about him.

You can't treat potentially everyone as Satoshi. Everyone is not Satoshi until proven otherwise. And as time goes by, these signed messages will count even less as solid evidence due to the development of quantum computing which will sooner or later be used to compromise his keys.

Satoshi had 2 PGP keys with MIT server. Aaron Swartz hacked MIT to destroy Satoshi's PGP Keys. Aaron Swartz is not dead as his dead donkey drama were staged to fool the government. His full names then was Aaron David Swartz but he has dropped Aaron from his names and now he is known  by is last two names. Any one can fool any one but not their own grandfather.

Satoshi does not need to prove anything to any one and he is not craving for a Nobel Prize in economic.

[franky1]

Satoshi had 2 PGP keys with MIT server. Aaron Swartz hacked MIT to destroy Satoshi's PGP Keys. Aaron Swartz is not dead as his dead donkey drama were staged to fool the government. His full names then was Aaron David Swartz but he has dropped Aaron from his names and now he is known  by is last two names. Any one can fool any one but not their own grandfather.

Satoshi does not need to prove anything to any one and he is not craving for a Nobel Prize in economic.

i know ur trolling.. but its a laugh to think you even want to attempt to now say satoshi is also a reddit creator and wire fraud convicted guy
maybe its time u stop wasting your life wanting criminals to be satoshi and actually spend some time learning about how bitcoin works and how facts work and do something with yourself to better your life and prospects

[LeezHamilton]

Satoshi had 2 PGP keys with MIT server. Aaron Swartz hacked MIT to destroy Satoshi's PGP Keys. Aaron Swartz is not dead as his dead donkey drama were staged to fool the government. His full names then was Aaron David Swartz but he has dropped Aaron from his names and now he is known  by is last two names. Any one can fool any one but not their own grandfather.

Satoshi does not need to prove anything to any one and he is not craving for a Nobel Prize in economic.

i know ur trolling.. but its a laugh to think you even want to attempt to now say satoshi is also a reddit creator and wire fraud convicted guy
maybe its time u stop wasting your life wanting criminals to be satoshi and actually spend some time learning about how bitcoin works and how facts work and do something with yourself to better your life and prospects

You are an interesting person. No, I do not think the way you have described here, I was reading you many post. Actually I am a reader, I am not a BTC buyer or trader, I am just a SR. I like too do what you said but have no much time for it.  Can teach me some technical thing if you have some time for me ? 

Real Satoshi is an Angel. He has nothing to do with business world people or money mongers or criminal. Satoshi first created rBitcoin in the Reddit in back May 2007.  you can look for Metadata of rBitcoin of Reddit. Satoshi did not created Reddit.

A Request: My friend like to create Bitcoin address offline, which software or BTC address generator is good for her ?  I am not a technical person. I know only Journalism. Thanks for your comments. 

[pinggoki]

More of the same from Craig today as he has been playing more of the blame game and pleading the Shaggy Defence (it wasn't me) and everyone but him is responsible for the faked documents he has submitted in evidence of him being Satoshi. Today he claimed Christen Ager-Hanssen basically hacked into not only his computer to plant faked documents to frame him but that he also hacked his phone and had access to all his personal communications such as emails and whatsapp messages for months. Quite impressive to hack both devices of one of the world's most leading security experts and for Craig not to know he was being monitored for such a length of time.

Wow, now it's a planted documents that's being a defense against the litigation. The holes in his story just keeps getting bigger and bigger day by day, it seems that there's no other for Craig now but to admit I guess, this is probably a last ditch effort to try and delay the case as there's going to be an investigation that the documents that proves him to be Satoshi are planted by Hanssen, totally weird that he trusts someone on his computer and that he didn't know that it was compromised, goes to show that he's a big fat liar.

[HmmMAA]

Do you really believe he is Satoshi? Let's leave the court asides for a moment. Do you find the overall "evidence" convincing to you?

Back in 2016 i thought it might be him based on the body language after breakdown . I had already watched the bitcoin belle panel and bitcoin doco documentary which intrigued me . Later i started researching with others and found that he was not as incompetent as the majority said . The things that added to my opinion that he possibly is was his series about how bitcoin works , whitepaper , small world networks , philosophy and more . This guy is definitely a polymath and a really sharp mind . People in here will laugh with this but it's common for those that just stick to others opinions because they are too lazy to do some proof of work (sick ) .
At this point i'm 95% certain that he is satoshi or was one of the architects behind the pseudonym . The last 5% will be either a significant proof like a receipt of bitcoin.org purchase or something significant like what he mentioned in the trial that there is a steganographic message in the whitepaper which only satoshi could know . A public signing message will be insignificant after that and probably people will understand why he chose to do it this way .
Of course there is the case that none of this happens and i'm just wrong , but that doesn't mean that the process is wrong .

No, but if you claim to be me, and you have no other ways to prove such a thing (like a drivers license), then a signed message from the PGP is at least required. You can't claim to be an anonymous person with no evidence apart from forgeries. Satoshi, whoever he is, posted a PGP key. This, along with the genesis public key, are the only elements which can certify his identity. Beyond that, not much else is known about him.

Your assumption is that he has no other ways to prove who he is and that satoshi is anonymous while it's just a pseudonym .  And based on that assumption you think that he should do what most people want which is to sign . By doing that he's admitting that what most think is the right thing to do . He choose to do it the hard way , and if he can't he will be discredited and possibly go to jail .
Joseph Vaughn-Perling said in one of his interviews back in 2016 :
"The world can learn much from what he has done and how. He is showing what cryptography does and does not do. It is a lesson that the world needs to learn before mass adoption can occur."
"People do not understand what cryptography does and does not do. People do not understand pseudonymous. Having a key means you have a key. It does not mean you had it previously, or that you will have it in the future."

You should read and listen about what Ian Grigg has said about identity and the problems with PGP keys . You have a false impression of how identity works .

You can't treat potentially everyone as Satoshi. Everyone is not Satoshi until proven otherwise. And as time goes by, these signed messages will count even less as solid evidence due to the development of quantum computing which will sooner or later be used to compromise his keys.

I disagree , not everyone can be satoshi . I can't be , as i don't have the technical skills . You too even with more skills . Probably 99.9 % of the community doesn't have the skills . Don't fall to the childish motos of maxi's like we are all satoshi or wagmi . That's for 5yo's .

Edit. I think i missread your last quote , did i ? My english suck . I totally agree .

[franky1]

HmmMAA & LeezHamilton's information "sources"(pronounced for satire) are closer to ketchup, not credible

I had already watched the bitcoin belle panel

fun fact
even going back as far as CSW's first public appearance (in that panel you speak of).. bitcoin belle later opened up, admitted and debunks many things about CSW, she admits she was duped into introducing him to the "big players" of bitcoin via his conniving tactics

[BlackHatCoiner]

[...]

Just wow. I believed the answer to my question would be a "no", and that you just supported big blocks. I mean, we had our disagreements about block size and privacy in the past, but believing with certainty that CSW is Satoshi? That assertion goes beyond the extreme of the fallacies.

I don't have anything in response. Just look at the mountains of evidence of Craig being a pathetic liar and actively submitting forgeries, which you must be ignoring.

[LeezHamilton]

I thought he say himself a complete fool or idiot but called himself a complete 'arse'

 https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/i-was-a-complete-arse-to-my-solicitors-bitcoin-inventor-tells-court/5118705.article

[HmmMAA]

I mean, we had our disagreements about block size and privacy in the past, but believing with certainty that CSW is Satoshi?

I don't believe with certainty , don't twist my words . Certainty has a specific meaning . I'm not 100% certain , but if you decide to spend time and don't get your opinion from what others offer you you will see that things are as others say . In other words get outside of your echo chamber . May i ask what will you say in the extreme case he proves in court that he is satoshi ? Will you leave this community as it's against your bias and never use bitcoin again ?   

I don't have anything in response. Just look at the mountains of evidence of Craig being a pathetic liar and actively submitting forgeries, which you must be ignoring.

I don't ignore anything contrary to you and most in here , on the opposite i take those into consideration and i want to see if there are other reasons that those seem like something obvious . Do you disagree that we should have courts to solve cases like this or should we look at what twitter majority says to come to a conclusion ?

What you don't understand is that this is his only trial so far that has to do with identity . It's his last chance to prove what he says for years in his way . If he doesn't provide the necessary info i'm on your side . if he provides it you will be on my side or will you try to find excuses to still stand on your opinion ?

[cryptosize]

HmmMAA & LeezHamilton's information "sources"(pronounced for satire) are closer to ketchup, not credible

I had already watched the bitcoin belle panel

fun fact
even going back as far as CSW's first public appearance (in that panel you speak of).. bitcoin belle later opened up, admitted and debunks many things about CSW, she admits she was duped into introducing him to the "big players" of bitcoin via his conniving tactics

HmmMAA is not a good judge of characters, otherwise he would have understood that CSW is a huge narcissist/attention whore. Satoshi was quite the opposite, a humble person. Everyone with basic human psychology knowledge must have noticed so far.

Regarding polymaths, other people are polymaths too, but he loves to diss them... why? Because they don't support CSW's narrative.

Gotta love his double standards... he even criticizes politicians for bribery, but he does the exact same thing via PMs (bribing with BSV and trying to influence young, gullible students).

His hypocrisy is beyond the roof and I'm surprised nobody has noticed it so far.

it's common for those that just stick to others opinions because they are too lazy to do some proof of work (sick ) .

Says the guy who believes climate change is caused by red meat & gasoline consumption.

Don't pretend you're a critical thinker, because you're not. You're closely following a little girl's (Greta Thunberg) narrative. Such a shame for a supposed 50-year old guy...

[BlackHatCoiner]

I don't believe with certainty , don't twist my words . Certainty has a specific meaning . I'm not 100% certain

"I don't believe with certainty". Meanwhile:

At this point i'm 95% certain that he is satoshi or was one of the architects behind the pseudonym

In other words get outside of your echo chamber

I think you should get outside your echo chamber. This isn't about the Bitcoin community or "Bitcoin maxis" as you keep calling everyone around here. It's common sense and a vast amount of evidence suggesting he is not who he claims to be. This person has made it blatantly clear that he is a fraudster to whom I wouldn't trust a single word coming out of his mouth. He has repeatedly lied and presented forgeries. I don't know what else counts as evidence of him being a scam. You choose to ignore all the evidence, and stick to insignificant details, like "both him and satoshi were smart!", "both were involved in cryptography!" or "what if he presents receipt for bitcoin.org?!", as if such a document couldn't be counterfeited given enough money.  

"But isn't there a chance?". Negligible. Judging by the facts, I'd rather bet franky1 for being Satoshi if I had to choose between the two.

Do you disagree that we should have courts to solve cases like this or should we look at what twitter majority says to come to a conclusion ?

We have courts which can hopefully notice the fraud in this case. However, a trial isn't the holy grail of truth. Bribery in judiciary is not so uncommon phenomenon. Just because a court says he's Satoshi doesn't mean the public has to unquestionably take this as true.

[Lucius]

~snip~
What you don't understand is that this is his only trial so far that has to do with identity . It's his last chance to prove what he says for years in his way . If he doesn't provide the necessary info i'm on your side . if he provides it you will be on my side or will you try to find excuses to still stand on your opinion ?

You are one of those people who want to believe that something is true, regardless of the fact that from 2016 until today, CW Faketoshi has failed in all discussions and trials where he presented hundreds of pieces of evidence that were proven 100% false by experts before these same courts.

It's funny that you consider this trial to be some kind of final solution to the problem of "is CW Satoshi or not?" if the chance for that is less than 1%, although some will say that it doesn't exist at all. Regardless of the court's decision, CW will continue to claim that he is Satoshi, and people like you who, despite all the evidence that he is not, will continue to give him some incentive to continue to prove it.

[LeezHamilton]

Hello Dr Craig Wright,

after all the cross examination questions, you were very annoyed on Friday, How was your weekend ?  Have you had a good sleep ?   I am sure you are reading this Thread, can you confirm me your current situation ?  I am a Journalist and Bitcoin Historian.  By December 2024, I will publish the complete Bitcoin History, I have Two Chapters covering your stories. I am covering every year a new Chapter in the Book.


I want to interview you.  Can you grant me an appointment.  Don't worry if you cannot prove that you are the real Satoshi.  Any one can claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto.  I am drafting 1001 questions for you which I will pass to you soon for getting ready for a Panoramic Interview.  After the interview you will realise some thing new regarding Bitcoin and Blockchain and its future.  



 

[HmmMAA]

You are one of those people who want to believe that something is true, regardless of the fact that from 2016 until today, CW Faketoshi has failed in all discussions and trials where he presented hundreds of pieces of evidence that were proven 100% false by experts before these same courts.

It's funny that you consider this trial to be some kind of final solution to the problem of "is CW Satoshi or not?" if the chance for that is less than 1%, although some will say that it doesn't exist at all. Regardless of the court's decision, CW will continue to claim that he is Satoshi, and people like you who, despite all the evidence that he is not, will continue to give him some incentive to continue to prove it.

If you read more you will see that this is the only trial so far that has to do with the identity issue . All previous trials were about defamation ( McCormack , Hodlonaut ) or if bitcoin was created by more than one person ( Kleiman ) . Cobra's case was dismissed due to cobra wanting to remain anonymous .
"The identity case is expected to hinge on expert analysis of documents on computer memory sticks which Wright says he found in a drawer at his home last year. Wright will maintain that these will show his work leading up to the registration of www.bitcoin.org in 2008 and the minting of the first bitcoins in January 2009. (The blockchain contains the front-page headline of The Times on 3 January, 2009.)"
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news-focus/news-focus-bitcoin-identity-dispute-comes-to-court/5118638.article

So yes , this is the only case so far that has to do specifically with identity . 

I don't want to be true that satoshi is csw , i want to see if this is a reality or not , based on a decision of someone who understands evidence . For example , even if only 1 document proves that csw is satoshi judge will declare him as satoshi , while community will dispute that and stick to the point that the others are forgeries . Why so ? Because we are not judges or lawyers .
This case can be won very easy if he provide that 1 evidence . Will he ? Grab your popcorn like me and wait . In a few months we will know who's right or wrong .