/biz/ - Business & Finance

Imagine unironically shilling this charlatan for free.

Go back in time and read the newsgroup mails.
"Smart contracts" and things like that were a vision even before the 2000s.

Finney = Satoshi

>>10923408

"A digitised electronic signature (which could be related to a electronically scanned image of a paper based signature) is not the same as a digital signature. A digital signature is associated with a unique numerical code and value. This code, when associated with the correct cryptographic algorithm, allows one to verify the authenticity of the author of a digitally signed document with an extremely low probability of error."

- CSW 2008

>>10923417
lmao kys cuck

>>10923416
>for free
>implying

Interesting paper but it's not blatant enough to move anyone on this issue.

>>10923408
This is it!

Protip: look for plagiarism.

>>10923408
>>10923689
??? What are you on about?


Also OP he's not larping. He worked at Sans

Also, you can tell this paper was written with Microsoft word while the bitcoin paper was written in Latex.

>>10923703
Craig wright is a con man, you can find plagiarism in most of his papers if you bother looking for it.

>>10923408
Are you really this blind? Can you not see the blatant lies of Craig?

Or are you a paid shill whose only way to justify this nonsensical post is by being compensated?

Disgusting.

>>10923408
Funny how all the "proof" is always either recently created or uploaded somewhere isolated (like this link) or embedded into a database CSW controls, like his backdated blog. (pic related)

Show me usenet messages or something similar, his messages embedded between other messages from other people. You know, like a real conversation between scientists and developers on mailing lists.

RIP biz, shilling a con man now?

>>10923718
You fool that's how academic research work

It will be plagiarism,

If it's quoted and reference it will APPEAR plagiarised but in reality that's HOW academic research works. You dumb neet

It would be absolutely hilarious if there was a mass exodus to bch soon

>>10923417
this
finney is definitely satoshi.
ask yourselves why the last thing satoshi ever said on any satoshi nakamoto username on any platform was a few months before finney died?
why hasn't any satoshi account said anything at all whatsoever since then?
if this cunt was satoshi you know 100% he would say bitcoin cash is bitcoin on some satoshi account, why the fuck wouldn't he?

>>10923798
Academic researcher here. No, that's not how academic research works. If you get caught plagiarizing you lose your job and your paper gets retracted.

>>10923849
Why do people ASSUME it's either X person or Y


Why can it NOT be a group of 2-4 TOGETHER.

CSW
HAL
NICK
DAVE

>>10923922
No I'm talking about when writing things in ur paper. Don't u quote and refer other writing???


>>10923849
What did Ryan say?
What has Gavin said?
What did Cal say?

>>10923798
>being this stupid
Its obvious you didn’t go to uni, plagiarism is a BIG deal when it comes to writing papers

>>10923949
Of course I quote other people. The problem with Craig Wright is that he copies without quoting, which is plagiatism by definition.

>>10923408
>>10923793

I just went and dug up actual archived links. Confirm for yourself.

CSW blog archived June 2nd 2014:

https://archive.is/cI5LW

> Tomorrow - back to the DNS paper, my statistics dissertation and work.

No mention of triple entry book keeping
CSW blog archived May 25th 2015

https://web.archive.org/web/20150525013625/http://gse-compliance.blogspot.com/2008_08_24_archive.html

> Tomorrow - back to the DNS paper, my statistics dissertation and work. I have a cryptocurrency paper out soon. Twenty years. Triple entry book keeping. BDO was good for something.

Suddenly it appeared. CSW confirmed for time traveling Satoshi!

kys

>>10923408
Vitalik called him out. As a fellow sociopathic russian autist I can tell that he knows CW isn't satoshi and he is certain about it, he wouldn't call him out if he didn't know for sure.

>>10924003
This pretty much settles the issue. Also the term 'cryptocutrency' didn't exist before Bitcoin.

>>10923937
what evidence is there that its not one person?
>>10923949
I don't give a fucking shit what those faggots say.
why should I trust ANYONE?
there are plenty of ways to prove it without causing tax problems, and I am 100% certain craig would use those satoshi accounts to his advantage if he could.
he's a massive faggot, and there is no reason to believe he wouldn't be all over the place pushing bcash as satoshi.

>>10923793

https://www.giac.org/certified-professional/craig-wright/107335

Here are more papers of CSW

>>10924136
Plagiarism gold mine.

>>10923949
>What did Ryan say?
>What has Gavin said?
>What did Cal say?

People get fooled by sociopaths. Especially autistic programmers.

Sometimes people have nefarious interests. For example getting others to believe CSW is Satoshi and spreading the rumor he's going to get a shitload of money in 2020, is going to make it more likely to talk gullible people into lending him money with "Satoshis stash of BTC" as collateral. If you're getting a cut of that and you can always say "I was also fooled!" has zero risk and a possible big reward.

If CSW is Satoshi, why does he have to constantly forge "evidence"?

His first evidence, the signature that fooled Gavin was forged:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609707

He forged blog-entries to suggest he was working on triple entry book keeping (aka blockchain secured by PoW):

>>10924003

He doesn't know how the Bitcoin address format works. (see pic).

If this isn't enough to discredit him, then you're either complicit in his scheme or so far gone that nobody can save you from yourself.

>>10924159
Dumb mug. Should atleast do some research


Blockchain accounting.

See below dumb mug

>>10924159
What does this say. Or should I spell it out for you?

>>10924273
And what does that prove? When was the book printed? Can you provide evidence for when the book was printed?

>>10923408
Remember that Bitcoin does not implement smart contracts. There are no indications that Nakamoto had smart contracts in mind.

>>10923408
CSW is too retarded to come up with a revolutionary idea like Bitcoin, also his pathetic man-child rants on Twitter are a further proof it's not him.

Have a look at the old posts on BitcoinForum by Satoshi and you'll realise that these two people have NOTHING in common and their personalities are opposite. CSW is a pathetic con artist, nobody should give him attention

>>10923408
To establish the formation of an electronic contract using
the Internet, the general common law of contract and the doctrine
of international law are legitimate. There is little fundamental
difference in the process of offer and acceptance in the “real
world” to the Internet. Whether conducted by writing, orally, or
implied from the conduct of parties contractual negotiations are
formed in a similar manner whether completed by telephone, face to
face or over the Internet (using methods such as e-mail or the
Web).

Really glad I'm out of academia

>>10924400
>Be Satoshi
>Know that the battle is already won
>Be generous to those with vision
>Describe how bitcoin works so those who understand can buy the real bitcoin for cheap
>Keep mining the compromised, worthless chain to separate fools from their USD
>Use it to buy even more of the real bitcoin
>When the time is right, move the genesis coins into a btc/bch atomic swap

Why would he give definitive proof before 2020? It goes against his own best interest. He intends to totally crush non-believers in one fell swoop. There is no other winning strategy and this strategy has no counter.

>>10924286
if you look closely, it says to stop supporting scam artists

Fucking prick

>>10923469
Digital signatures have been figured out already for eons

>>10924273
just noticed your id is BtC, pretty rad bro, just bought 100k btc.
>>10924426
kek yes it does

>>10923793
CSW is such a fraud. LMAO

>>10924452
>Why would he give definitive proof before 2020?

So if doesn't want to give proof in the first place, then why the ridiculous attempts to forges such proofs?

You call people who demand actual proof fools and non-believers.

This isn't a religion where there are true believers and non-believers, as you called your opposition.

The whole premise of Bitcoin is to eradicate the need for belief or trust.

It's highly interesting how this is absolutely cultist.

The absence of proof *is* proof to you.

>>10924476
>kek yes it does
Then show where in the whitepaper.

I follow crypto since before ethereum ICO and I remember clearly that ethereum introduced the concept of smart contracts.

Brock Pierce= Satoshi

Prove me wrong

>>10924493
well the bitcoin that he is building is the one I have always been on board with.

I never bought into a settlement layer coin for something called Lightning. I never bought into a coin that thinks transactions are spam. I never bought into a coin that would consider PoS as a viable solution.

Kinda a weird coincidence the main figure advocating and actively building the unstoppable juggernaut bitcoin was always meant to be.

>>10924496
most of it is disabled (actually deleted) now but it started with a huge amount of scripts called op-codes which enable simple smart contracts and other shit.
lightning network for example is using smart contracts.
eth introduced turing complete smart contracts, which bitcoins are not because its dumb.
that's how you get shit like the dao fuckup.

>>10924530
So have a discussion about the technological aspects then, or the economical for that matter.

There's no advantage to introduce CSW, or anybody really, as some sort of authority.

Even if the claimed authority has merit, that doesn't matter, because everybody can make mistakes. A historical example was Einstein who dismissed quantum mechanics.

And the worse case is, that the claimed authority turns out to be a total fraud.

Given the history of forged evidence, the overall different character of bitcointalk-satoshi vs. CSW, the incompetence of CSW (not knowing how bitcoin addresses work, not knowing the bandwidth of 56k, ...), the latter case seems a lot more plausible.

You have this huge mountain of things that point towards "CSW is a fraud" vs. your vague "he's promoting what I think is the real bitcoin^tm".

Take a step back and try to look at it unbiased.

If you still come to like BCH better on technical terms, wouldn't that be an even better position for you to stand on?

And on the other hand, the discussion between BCH vs. BTC is moot anyway. Buy and use whatever you like. I don't care what you use, and you shouldn't care what I use. Maybe I'm all in Dogecoin. Doesn't really make a difference one way or another.

But thinking that promoting CSW as "the real Satoshi" somehow merits BCH is only a logical fallacy, that most probably, given the evidence, will bite you in the ass anyway.

>>10925194
>the overall different character of bitcointalk-satoshi vs. CSW
Why is it NOT possible to assume that Hal or Mike were using the Satoshis account and CSW was not allowed anywhere near it. He was just told do to the security/economic parts?

>>10925240

You can come up with ad-hoc explanations for everything that is thrown in your way.

Do you know which people argue that way? Religious people do. They already know what outcome they want and argue backwards from there. Everything that's counter their view get's rationalized away.

The rational way to look at things, is to start from a blank slate and look at the evidence and then go with what is most probably real.

Satoshi disappeared.

Years later CSW goes public with a forged signature claiming he is Satoshi.

Here's where the story should end. This isn't just failure to produce evidence, this is evidence that he's a fraud.

And I'm sure the next thing that you'll say is something like "yeah, but what if he wanted to you to think that way, so only real-bitcoin-believers who see the true way of real Satoshi get enlightened blabla".

You're religious, bro. Not rational.

>>10925386
>And I'm sure the next thing that you'll say is something like "yeah, but what if he wanted to you to think that way, so only real-bitcoin-believers who see the true way of real Satoshi get enlightened blabla".


Come on i'm not that stupid.

Okay lets start RIGHT from a clean state

>Is it possible that Satoshi was a group and to assume that Hal or Mike were using the Satoshis account and CSW was not allowed anywhere near it. He was just told do to the security/economic parts?


Yes or no?

>>10925447
>>Is it possible that Satoshi was a group and to assume that Hal or Mike were using the Satoshis account and CSW was not allowed anywhere near it. He was just told do to the security/economic parts?
>Yes or no?

Yes.

>>10925447
>>Is it possible that Satoshi was a group and to assume that Hal or Mike were using the Satoshis account and CSW was not allowed anywhere near it. He was just told do to the security/economic parts?

Then why is he lying by telling people he is satoshi when this is actually a group?
And why would he forge a 'proof' instead of telling the truth.
It doesn't add up.

>>10925447
>>Is it possible that Satoshi was a group and to assume that Hal or Mike were using the Satoshis account and CSW was not allowed anywhere near it. He was just told do to the security/economic parts?
>Yes or no?

Is that it? Your argument that's supposed to counter all the forged evidence and BS Craig regularly twitters is "so there is a chance?"?

C'mon, don't be the guy from Dumb and Dumber:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA

>>10925455
Good so, you said yes

He cannot sign or do anything with the orginal keys or say anything due to tax and legal issues. He has mentioned this on twitter and from newmouers others.


Had to eat

>>10923408
>Craig
>Satoshi
>Wright
people need more proof than this?

>>10925813
>He cannot sign or do anything with the orginal keys or say anything due to tax and legal issues. He has mentioned this on twitter and from newmouers others.

Again, ad-hoc explanations. How can you be so gullible?

That's literally like the guy who always owes someone money saying shit like "I'll get you the money, I promise. It's just like, you know, I had to pay for my dogs medicine and my rent was late."

You're still arguing backwards from the position assuming CSW = Satoshi.

Hi, my name is Rob. I am Sataoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin.

Now, for every argument you bring forward to defend the position CSW = Satoshi, is it equally applicable to defend me, Rob, being Satoshi?

Because, I truly am Satoshi and I really appreciate you understanding, that I can't sign any cryptographic proof of that, because the tax authority would be on my ass if I did.

>>10925879

Okay, for that point, i agree with you

How about that S and CSW BOTH agree and see this in the future.

I also think this makes logical sense in the future.

When they both highlight there will be few miners in big server farms.

>>10923408
Btrash btrash btrash

>>10923408
There are scientists that have names that anagram with satoshi nakamoto that wrote things like this and about e-cash etc in 1990s u fuck , craig is not satoshi just a fake wall

>>10925926
this pic will always btfo any small blocker lmao

>>10925926
>How about that S and CSW BOTH agree and see this in the future.

What about it? It proves that CSW and Satoshi agree in this regard. Many people do. Are they all Satoshi now? Or only the ones who forged signatures and backdated blog-entries?

Again, I have no beef with people who agree with CSW on a technological ground. I think they are wrong, but at least they can be honest about it. If you think centralization is the way to go for bitcoin, go ahead.

If that truly was the position of Satoshi and he never changed it, then he was wrong about that, if you ask me.

We had centralized versions of e-gold and they all had their doors kicked in by three-letter-agencies.

What happens if we have to push a large portion of the Bitcoin network through TOR? Or channel it via satellites and ham radio? Don't forget, that Bitcoin in its essence is the adversary of central banks and nation states. Do you want to push Gigabyte blocks through TOR? Good luck.

This goes to the point, that even if Satoshi came back, for real, it means nothing. He's not a god. He made mistakes.

Satoshi thought that there's a trustless way to realize SPV nodes, which is impossible. We know that now.

Satoshi also didn't anticipate ASIC's and mining farms.

>>10925926
Q woke me up...

Give it time

>>10926035
Q predicted this

>>10926019
>If that truly was the position of Satoshi and he never changed it, then he was wrong about that, if you ask me.
just kys

>>10926056
Grown ups are talking. So please refrain from interrupting.

>>10926019
>>10926019
>We had centralized versions of e-gold and they all had their doors kicked in by three-letter-agencies.
>What happens if we have to push a large portion of the Bitcoin network through TOR? Or channel it via satellites and ham radio? Don't forget, that Bitcoin in its essence is the adversary of central banks and nation states. Do you want to push Gigabyte blocks through TOR? Good luck.


Those are good points, I agree.


I just feel deep down he wants Bitcoin to suceed.

Put it this way, he is rich and probably has a $ billion hes 48 years old.

He could Retire, but he works and works like crazy, hes obsessed with knowledge and to learn, and is immature


Have a OPEN mind and read this.

Tell me, does this sound like someone who wants to scam and run off or does he actuall care about bitcoin from a people .

This post pushed me more towards his side

>>10926081


Thank you, here is the post

This guy is a BILLIONAIRE. He is set for life, but still CARES for Bitcoin.
What do you think, if you read this objectively and from outside.

I make this as a call to all miners, to all entrepreneurs, to all business people and to all those seeking to create something more. To change the world and leave a mark.

I call not for you to fight for me.
With Me.

To compete with me, and to compete to achieve more than me. At worst, to compete against me, but, to compete!
nChain, as BMG are miners. We are developers, we are entrepreneurs, and we are creators. We live or die on profit.

I write this document knowing that it is our one and only opportunity. Our opportunity as a world, as one people, one race for that is all we are. Far too much time has been squandered already. Many believe that the seed of this idea is out there and that once it takes root, it can never be extinguished. That is in error. If Bitcoin fails, then the idea will never be what it was designed to be. There will never be a free, open, hard and uncontrolled money. Nothing else will replace it. What comes will use the technology, but it will be something else, something monstrous and something that enslaves and not something that frees.


I have pledged to create at least ten whitepapers a week; I average 12. White paper 682 has just been uploaded and I will have 685 before the end of the weekend. These lead to ideas and implementations that we patent and that will be used on Bitcoin (BCH). Some, such as Keyportapp have used a couple of my earliest and simplest ideas. What is to come does not even scratch the surface.

Whether you like patents or not is of no consequence. The simple matter is these are a tool, and I shall use any and all tools at my disposal to achieve my goals.

This is simple. 5 billion transactions a day by 2020 and 5 billion people using Bitcoin (Cash) by 2030.

>>10926107
I will NOT be your leader. I will do, and if you follow, if you do not compete, I will leave you behind. If you compete to build this system, I will embrace you as a brother, a sister and a friend. In sports, when we compete, we grow closer. We can compete and respect the ability of those we compete against. We can not ever respect those who do not try, do not strive.

In 2012, I started working on a microservices architecture for a node. This was iDaemon at the time, and it will be continued in Terranode. This was not as easy as I hoped. Not as simple. However, it is happening, and it will allow the development of the bitcoin node and protocol piece by piece. Not as a monolith system, but in components. Not because of me, but through the help and sweat of others who are far better coders than I ever tried to be.

In December 2015, I ran from the attention that was suddenly and unexpected cast upon me. For that and for the time before where I tried to develop and research in obscurity, I am sorry for that but little more, I should have handled things better, but, if you do not like it, I do not care. I will never be what many want me to be, I will never be your king, your leader, but I shall be a steward for Bitcoin. I shall create and develop and work both on the front line and behind the scenes. I was called a fraud as I “could not” have been as qualified as was reported. Well, here is the thing, I exceed all you know and have achieved more since then. I do not care if you think this is bragging.
That is your reaction to feeling inadequate for all those times you know you could have done more, to have studied harder. I am working on my fourth doctorate, and I have these in fields that are said to be incompatible, and I no longer care. I am even a qualified motor mechanic; I do not simply box myself into what others say is a limit. There are no limits other than those you impose on yourself.

>>10924286
time to get off 4chan craig

>>10926118
In 2020, the reward will halve. In 2024 or earlier, it shall do so again. That is only six years away. In this time, the mining reward will drop to 6.25 and then 3.125 Bitcoin a block. Bitcoin is not sustainable unless it is a cash system, OnChain. Moreover, with the changes to BTC, I


The Ponzi of speculation for pump sake, this will not survive without growth for another 5 or 6 years, and the result is that the idea of sitting in your pyjamas and making money will come crashing down.
Just realised, like a brainlet. i have this saved on word and c&p but its online a A call to arms
Important bits


I am saddened to see that cannot ever be achieved. It will be on BCH. For, I will not allow Bitcoin to end. In time, people will see the one difference that exists between BCH and ALL other crypto-coins. The one thing that BCH has retained and all others eschewed. The one thing that determines if it lives or dies long term


People fear intelligence. They do this as they cannot understand it. Strength is simple to understand, but intelligence, drive and achievement, scare people. Well, it is time the world was scared!
Please read it in full

>>10926087
>I just feel deep down he wants Bitcoin to suceed.

Feels aren't reals.

>Put it this way, he is rich and probably has a $ billion hes 48 years old.

Do you have proof of that, other than his word?

>He could Retire, but he works and works like crazy, hes obsessed with knowledge and to learn, and is immature

And what's the outcome? Show me viable output. No bullshit copypasta "academic papers" that don't get published or only in journals that publish everything if you pay for it.

> Tell me, does this sound like someone who wants to scam and run off or does he actuall care about bitcoin from a people .

I remind you of the many examples of him counterfeiting evidence of being Satoshi. This is a fact.

> This post pushed me more towards his side

"The backfire effect occurs when, in the face of contradictory evidence, established beliefs do not change but actually get stronger." -- https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Backfire_effect


> Satoshi is a god and Craig Wright is his prophet. The scripture foretold it and it is unchangeable. Everything we learned since Satoshi ascended to heaven that goes against what the scripture foretold is heresy.

That's your argument. I'm sorry if it sounds dick'ish, but it's true.

>>10926081
>the creator of something was wrong
lol retard, nice to know you could build something better

>>10923408
fake and gay
can't sign the key can't prove satoshi

>>10926081
Just realised, like a brainlet. i have this saved on word and c&p but its online a A call to arms
I will have to go in around 1.5 hours,

But will continue if the thread is alive tomorrow/.


Deep down, I just think something else is there.
I still keep 40/60 BTC/BCH


If you had a child and it was taken away and mutated how would you feel.
When they took btc and perverted it, it must have been like watching a child being taken
painful


fight and win is best - which i think is why he became more angry and pissed.

Read his OLD posts and it seems like a normal person.

He is becoming a psycho now though :(

>>10926107
>>10926118
>>10926137

Why this appeal to emotions?

Everybody can produce bullshit whitepapers. Just look at all the shitcoin ICO's that are basically all just whitepapers with a fancy website.

Where's the code? 10 whitepapers a day is good and all, but a distributed consensus network doesn't run on whitepapers.

You asked me if this sounds like someone who wants to scam people. Yes, it does. Maybe I'm "backfire effecting" myself here. But this cliche-manifesto does make it more scammy in my view.

Reals, not feals.

Code, not PDFs.

>>10926171
>the creator of something can't be wrong
the creator of communism was wrong for one you fucking retard.
there are millions of cunts that created something and were wrong about how it would work out
not saying satoshi was right or wrong, just saying your argument is fucking stupid

>>10926171
Is Satoshi infallible?

>>10926159
>Do you have proof of that, other than his word?
>>He could Retire, but he works and works like crazy, hes obsessed with knowledge and to learn, and is immature
>And what's the outcome? Show me viable output. No bullshit copypasta "academic papers" that don't get published or only in journals that publish everything if you pay for it.


Will post proof/good enough proof in 10 mins

For this
Yeah feels aren't real i agree.

>>10926159
>>He could Retire, but he works and works like crazy, hes obsessed with knowledge and to learn, and is immature
>And what's the outcome? Show me viable output. No bullshit copypasta "academic papers" that don't get published or only in journals that publish everything if you pay for it.
Can you see that? Maybe country restriction

Please let me know asap. i can copy and paste sceenshots and print the website and upload to PDF

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?search=WRIGHT+CRAIG+STEVEN&DB=EPODOC&submitted=true&locale=en_EP&ST=singleline&compact=false&DB=EPODOC&query=WRIGHT+CRAIG+STEVEN

>>10926320
Yes, I can access that page.

I've read across a few of the abstracts. So far they are all either prior-art or trivial.

This stuff might sound smart, but it's not new. For example:

> IMPLEMENTING LOGIC GATE FUNCTIONALITY USING A BLOCKCHAIN

That's mast. Look, published in October 2017 on medium.com, not by CSW. https://bitcointechtalk.com/what-is-a-bitcoin-merklized-abstract-syntax-tree-mast-33fdf2da5e2f

Then in November, submitted as a patent application by CSW.


> Determining a common secret for the secure exchange of information and hierarchical, deterministic cryptographic keys

Cool That's Diffie-Hellman key exchange, invented in 1977.

> Tokenisation method and system for implementing exchanges on a blockchain

For Christ's sake. There are already working network operating on this principle, long before this patent was published.

> Agent-based turing complete transactions integrating feedback within a blockchain system

That's a good one. That's literally every program that access a blockchain. You wrote a trading bot? That's that. You wrote a program that waits for a transaction and plays "Ode to Joy" if it arrives? That's that.

Dude... it's not looking good. I really hope you didn't actually buy BCH, at like 0.3 BTC or something.

I'm still missing the evidence of him being a billionaire.

>>10926320
He's not actually building stuff. He's conning you into thinking he's building stuff.

Satoshi is redpilled and based. Pic related.

>>10923711
First Bitcoin client was only for Windows

>>10926540
>>10926540
>Dude... it's not looking good. I really hope you didn't actually buy BCH, at like 0.3 BTC or something.


No, I did at 0.18-1
Can you access this?

Old transcripts with the ATO. His history in Bitcoin


Thats why i think and belive he is a part of the group Satoshi


https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2644012/20140218-Transcript-Redacted.pdf

>>10924426
There was code for a poker client in early Bitcoin source

>>10924005
funny how bcashfags always ignored the evidence

>>10926726
worth cents

I will have to catch up tomorrow.

Please let me know your thoughts.

You have shed some light. But still gut says keep 50/50 and he was a part of the group

>>10924433
Satoshi was a group of people, Craig, Dave and Phil if you believe him. If not Phil then someone else. Satoshi always replied with delay because obviously all the posts were discussed by the group. Craig might have been the one who started it (or Phil if you believe him, in case this paper is nothing like Bitcoin then that supports Phil's story). Anyway, as a lone man Craig is just a high functioning autist

>>10924005
>>>10924005
>>10924005
>>>10924005
>>10924005
>>>10924005
>>10924005
>>>10924005
>>10924005

>>10926540
also thanks nice to have a civil discussion

>>10926785
>Anyway, as a lone man Craig is just a high functioning autist

One of US!!!
One of US!!!
ONE OF US!!

>>10926726
>>10926726
>Thats why i think and belive he is a part of the group Satoshi
>https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2644012/20140218-Transcript-Redacted.pdf

What exactly makes you think CSW is part of Satoshi? The story about the mining from 2009 to 2011?

Even if the document is real, which is questionable, again, this is only what one person said to another person.

That's not proof. And by the way, it perfectly fits into the story that CSW simply embezzled taxes that were meant to be spent on research, then when the tax man came to collect and he hadn't done any research, he came up with the story of being Satoshi and ... we're back to the guy who owes you money and has 1001 heart breaking stories why he can't give you the money right now, but later, for sure. I promise. It's in the Seychelles, for real. I wish I could prove it to you, but I can't right now and the only other guy who could is dead. But trust me.

Really?

>>10926770
Again, assuming this is true, which is questionable: $5000 worth of BTC, $0.03 a piece, that's 160k BTC, not 1 million BTC

And it has nothing to do with him being Satoshi or not.

Imagine being so retarded and impressionable that you're actually led to believe a nobody fat fuck failure like Craig Wright is satoshi. Holy fuck some of you are fucking fools. No wonder you lose so much money.

>>10926589
kek Nicky our smallblocker whi thinks bitcoin should be gold 2.0 aka bitgold isn't Satoshi

>>10923408
http://archive.is/1sgtz

God I really hope satoshi is legion we do not forget

Whatever the case, CSW is going completely off the deep end and I love it. Kissing men, releasing dozens of white papers (maybe just trying to patent troll), getting the panties of bcore beta males in a twist, etc.
The absolute impotent rage of people who told me they insta market sold their BCH after the fork only to see it moon multiple times, when they tell me "I HATE BCH!!!" Thanks faketoshi! I love you.

>>10923408
if he was really satoshi he would use his bitcointalk acct and literally post his identity.

>he isnt satoshi

>>10926917
That's what he had before starting W&K Info Defense with Dave in 2011.
>W&K was an entity created for the purpose of mining bitcoins

>>10923408
Did anybody actually read this document?

I just did. It has absolutely nothing to do with

Blockchains

Proof-of-Work

Distributed networks

Smart contracts.

It's a summary of contract law and jurisprudence, trying to find some analogies with digital signatures.

Kind of like "what's the similarity between post stamps and a RSA signature." Given that the former has legal jurisprudence, how could that translate to the latter.

You motherfuckers should read more. You're all getting sucked in by some buzzwords.