Craig Wright admits he isn't the inventor of Bitcoin after High Court judgment in UK Australian Craig Wright has finally admitted he is not the inventor of Bitcoin after losing several cases in the High Court of England and Wales, whose judge has suggested he be investigated for perjury. Wright has for years claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto – the pseudonym used by whoever wrote the whitepaper that defined …
Another History of Craig Wright Fraud And Deception: The Bitcoin Supercomputer Saga
“Unraveling the umpteenth Potemkin Village of our favorite Satoshi Nakamoto cosplayer”
“Unraveling the umpteenth Potemkin Village of our favorite Satoshi Nakamoto cosplayer”
Ermm.. Wow! Seems like he was a bitcoin miner only in the sense of "when in a hole, keep digging". But I must confess to owning not 1, not 2, but 11 of the world's top supercomputers and I would have been a bitcoin billionaire, if only I hadn't spent so much time getting them to run Crysis.
I'm... Confused...
Who's this Spartacus bloke anyway?
I invented edible sticky tape, to stop the contents of your tortilla / burrito from dribbling down your shirt. And yet society ignores me genius! Well they'll be sorry! When I invent my self-driving combine harvester with infra -red human tracking technology!
This post has been deleted by its author
pay more than £6 million of COPA's costs – something that might be hard to enforce as the ruling notes that the not-Bitcoin creator makes about £160k.
That's the risk he took. 'Winning' or 'Loosing' the case doesn't matter as you will have to pay a proportion (0% - 100%) of your and/or your opponents legal costs - especially as the 'game' is a complex as this one.
Item 199 on page 53 of this says the decision regarding "...whether a prosecution should be commenced against Dr Wright for his wholescale perjury and forgery of documents..." is being left to the British CPS. I for one hope that they do decide to prosecute for the possible offenses (See items 40 and 201), as someone has obviously been taking the piss!
Looking at Dr. Wright's Wikipedia entry, it says his PhD of 2017 was on "The quantification of information systems risk"... which is ironic as he seems to have spectacularly failed to assess the risks/rewards of disseminating the (dis?) information that he has, and of playing the high-stakes game in the first place. Looking at his business pedigree (See Wiki), it looks to me as if he has - as so many people or organizations do - believed his own hyperbole!
Sadly, I'm diabetic these days so I can't even enjoy the popcorn:-)
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Except he still cost the other lot $M which realistically they will never recover from him.
This is only BITCOIN so nobody cares, but the next time someone claims to have invented Linux or the internet and takes some poor open source contributor to court who can't afford to fight a London libel case.
Well, he was a doctoral student at CSU, according to their archived web page, and CSU shows his doctoral thesis1 as filed.
Supposedly this is his second doctorate, but the first one is in theology; and while Bitcoin is something of a cult, I don't think a DTh would be terribly useful in inventing it (even if Bitcoin was "invented" by pasting together a bunch of already well-known technologies).
1What would be a dissertation in the US.
So he made up claims about a made up currency, it's cost him £6m and jail time may well happen.
The way crypto frauds normally work is that you make up claims about a made up currency, your customers lose £6m and jail time may well happen.
A British perjury sentence will likely be far less than SBF got though, and anyway who really gives a shit about who invented this crap? Just stay well away, and ignore rich promoters of it like Dorsey, who are keen to give it the appearance of respectability with things like a "patent alliance".
I think tax officials are only really interested when whoever holds the keys to those wallets liquidates some fo those thousands of bitcoins for actual currency, in which case there's the matter of capital gains tax.
After all, lots of things have hugely over-inflated "values" which are set by supply-and-demand, or perceived intrinsic worth. You could be living in a house that your parents bought in the '70s for a couple of grand and it could nominally be worth something like half a million quid now. Nobody is asking for that nominal half a million to be taxed, until you try to sell it.
Now, there's an argument that people who hold assets worth vast amounts of money should pay a wealth tax on them, but such a thing doesn't (yet) exist, and capital continues to accumulate capital. Also, trying to identify bitcoin wallet-holders based on a nominal worth (of something with an inherently unstable value) is a bit of a fool's errand, as a wallet is inherently anonymous until someone tries to do something with it other than a direct transfer to another wallet (at which point, in most countries now, there is a requirement for "exchanges", payment processors, and vendors, to establish the wallet owner's identity).
Interestingly, one of Craig Wright's main arguments in the past has been that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, and thus those early bitcoins should all belong to him, and therefore whoever has the keys to that wallet should hand them over to him. The glaring logical flaw in this argument should have already established today's news, that he is categorically NOT Satoshi Nakamoto, beyond reasonable doubt several years ago.
My money is on the real Satoshi having sadly passed away only a few years after the original invention of Bitcoin.
Now, there's an argument that people who hold assets worth vast amounts of money should pay a wealth tax on them, but such a thing doesn't (yet) exist, and capital continues to accumulate capital.
There are some examples, and growing pressure to institute some form of wealth tax. Existing one would be US property taxes based on assessed value of property rather than any ability to pay, or realised value. Which is especially a challenge when it comes to gentrification.
...as a wallet is inherently anonymous until someone tries to do something with it other than a direct transfer to another wallet (at which point, in most countries now, there is a requirement for "exchanges", payment processors, and vendors, to establish the wallet owner's identity).
Yep. A long time ago I mined some bitcoins. At the time they were worth a few cents and a novelty, then became worth a little more but mostly used for darkweb transactions. So de-anonymising seems sensible given anonymity tends to end up hand in hand with criminality. I very much doubt my coins were one of the 'lost' whale wallets, and were only ever in a cold wallet, but sometimes wonder if they'd ever been identified and I get a tax bill. Tax liability on use seems fair, tax on a notional value at some point in time seems a whole lot less fair, especially given the volatility in a lot of crypto.
Yeah, I'm not against the idea of wealth taxes, especially on people who own assets that far outstrip their day-to-day survival needs by many orders of magnitude to the extent that the mere existence of their wealth means that many others have to go without.
There's a bit of a difference between tangible assets, like cash in the bank, or bricks-and-mortar property, though, and some intangible notional entity like bitcoin, which hasn't come into existence by depriving someone else of their assets.
FWIW, I, too, mined some bitcoin in the early days, at a time when dedicated USB ASIC chips were just starting to appear. At one point, I had about 0.1 BTC, which at the time, was worth about half of what I'd spent on the hardware (as a curiosity), and used in electricity in mining it. Fast-forward several years, and that was worth a couple of thousand, and I have gradually, over time, "spent" pretty much all of it on various online transactions; a bunch of Amazon vouchers, a couple fo 4K monitors, a nice gaming chair, a high-end laptop for my wife included. None of that has taken me anywhere near the CGT threshold of course, and I've been careful to not do anything with it that might attract the attention of the tax man.
If I'd held onto it, it would nominally be worth a bit more now than when I "cashed out", but all-in-all, I've probably ended up with about 20x what I put in, as a curiosity something like 15 years ago. With hindsight, I'd have just bought a bunch of bitcoin in 2006 or 2007 and retired on the proceeds, happy to be taxed on them. Hindsight still has 20:20 vision...
That's true, but the tax is not strictly a property tax rather than a payment for services that the council provides, estimated from the size of the property and indirectly the number of people who could live there. It replaced a system that directly demanded payments for the number of people resident at a property (when it was the "Community Charge", aka the "Poll Tax"), which was deemed unfair because it did not make any allowance for the ability to pay, even though it was quite 'fair' in that all people paid the same (although it was levied against the main resident of a property).
So they returned to something not that dissimilar to the previous "Rates" system based on property value (although the original "rates" were based on the number of windows in the property!)
The other thing that makes it not a property tax is that it should be paid by the resident, not the owner of the property, which is important when you consider rented properties.
That last point is a very good one. I'd be inclined to say that council budgets should be paid out of general taxation, council taxes should be abolished entirely, CGT is brought in line with income tax (and treated the same, there should be no difference in the tax you pay on earned income through work, and unearned income through being rich already), and more higher tax bands are added for the super-rich, say 50% at £200k, 60% at £1m, 75% at £10m, and 100% for anything over £100M*. Nobody needs £100M, let's keep dragons fictional, and not have humans sitting on piles of wealth while the serfs in the village starve, eh?
*Figures are, ummm, figurative, and as an example only, implementation details TBC...
Strictly speaking, it's based on the "banding" of your property, which I think has more to do with the type and size, than its value directly. For example, all 4-bed houses in an area would be the same band (D I think IIRC), and attract the same level of taxation, but could be worth wildly different amounts due to the state of repair and location.
Now, there's an argument that people who hold assets worth vast amounts of money should pay a wealth tax on them, but such a thing doesn't (yet) exist, and capital continues to accumulate capital.
Death duties in the UK, AU and NZ (and elsewhere?) to extent once tried to serve this purpose but at have vanished in AU and I suspect are easily circumvented by the very wealthy elsewhere.
Perhaps deeming persons (natural* or otherwise) with vast wealth to have earned income as a designated percentage return each financial year and tax that might make more sense (and definitely no deductions.)
If a clever chap buys a social media flagship for a few tens of billions of dollars and cannot make at least 15% pa on his investment I think it is a fair surmise that said chappy isn't propably too clever after all and deserves to pay a dunce tax of 15% on the billions he has pissed against the wall. Emptying the chaps financial bladder so to speak.
* many obscenely wealthy natural persons are a total disgrace to humanity and an affront to nature herself.
"I still find it strange that something virtual can have a percieved value so high."
But that's true of all currency. The only value of any currency lies in what it can be exchanged for. It's a a conceit that only works as long as enough people subscribe to it.
Somebody earlier referred to bitcoin as an invented currency as if all other currencies weren't invented. It's not like they grow on trees you you know. If they did we could burn down the forests and even effectively revalue currencies.
People like you are the reason billionaires exist. I'm willing to bet that your value to the organisation you worked for was vastly more than £40k, yet that surplus value didn't go into your wallet, but almost certainly into that of a private equity investor somewhere who doesn't work a minute of their life. Without going "full Karl Marx" here, it doesn't take an idiot to realise that the checks and balances that are supposed to keep capitalism reasonably fair have been eroded in recent decades, and that a readjustment is overdue.
People are too easily led to focus on "scroungers" who just about scrape an existence "living off benefits," whilst ignoring the very real scroungers who live like kings off the backs of everyone else's labour.
Is the "high court" not the highest court? Is there a way to appeal beyond the highest court to the King himself??
In any event surely his appeal is now impossible since he's admitted he's not Satoshi. If he planned to appeal he would not have been willing to make that admission.
I found the inventor(s) of Bitcoin who are a group of English University Mathematicians and one of them I will name here with the last name of EASTMAN! It took a while to find him using some quite old-school detective work but unfortunately he is now deceased! His wife knows nothing about the Bitcoin system so she is of no help! The other inventors ARE still alive but are elderly and DO NOT have all the keys necessary to move their still-sitting-there Bitcoin stash worth about 75 Billion Dollars USD or so!
I should note though I do have enough group-based information that a BRUTE FORCE determination of the key(s) IS NOW POSSIBLE via close examination of the social activities and common lifestyle parameters of the deceased such that the entire key set will be recoverable. The other inventors have no knowledge of me BUT I am quite sure they would be open to them donating almost all of that Bitcoin stash to some deserving UK and Global charitable organizations and a few well-researched startup fundings! I will get nothing OTHER THAN some satisfaction in finding the ACTUAL originators of Bitcoin using plain-old common-sense detective work and some social engineering tactics!
Now You Know!
V
All i have to do is move ONE SINGLE Bitcoin out of that $75 Billion USD stash into a public wallet and THAT EVENT will move the ENTIRE Bitcoin market!
I have been asked by one of the parties to refrain from doing anything until a specific legal framework has been defined AND on my side, I have asked that one party to contact all the other Bitcoin group inventors to ask if I may be part of a fiduciary group that will distribute the funds to a pre-defined set of charitable organizations and to a newly instantiated globally-focused small technology company-oriented startup fund that is designed to accelerate novel technological and novel social solutions to BIG environmental and BIG social problems/issues!
$75 Billion USD can do a LOT of worldwide good and i aim to be part of that monetary distribution process to ensure that only the most technically sound solutions and/or the most innovative and groundbreaking solutions are funded to the NECESSARY degree. My only compensation will be travel and basic office expenses plus a small monthly honourarium.
Again, the inventors of Bitcoin are a small group of English mathematicians!
V
On cix back in the 90s, there was someone who was convinced their IMMENSE SKILLS would enable their program to successfully predict the lottery numbers. (It wasn't just their programming skills that were superhuman - they told the rest of us they had got an ex to give them a certificate saying they were great in bed: we were suitably impressed...)
I can't remember what their username was - nanos?
It wasn't you, was it?
In any case, there isn't the real money in the market to buy the Satoshi stash at anything like the alleged value.
I was wondering what you were doing these days. I guess you managed to get your late husband's wealth out of Nigeria with the kind assistance of all those nice internet people. :)
I see that you are unselfishly assisting some typically absent minded math dons to recover their crypto wallets and with your assistance endower benevolent causes globally. You sainted lady!
bonitas non est bonitas, quae commodum quaerit Carmen Flumenis
Adam Back is British - invented Hashcash. A similar system is used in Bitcoin.
Hal Finney was American - worked on Bitcoin code, received the first Bitcoin transaction.
Nick Szabo is American - pioneered smart contracts, conceptualised decentralised Bit Gold.
Gavin Andresen is Australian - early developer of Bitcoin.
None of them are the actual Bitcoin inventors! The last name of ONE of the inventors is Eastman sooooooo i will simply preface with an assertion that it will take the mere movement of ONE Bitcoin to a different public wallet to PROVE that it was the parties i have asserted!
I can tell you that the parties in question HAVE ASSERTED that the invention of Bitcoin was an academic exercise done to test whether a long-term means of publicly distributed double-entry book-keeping style of data storage could protect digital assets of ANY TYPE from over-reach and/or seizure by third parties.
Looks like it worked!
I also note that as of 2024, advanced age and personal health issues have precluded the original members/inventors from making publuc statements so as to protect their own and their families' personal privacy.
I only have enough contact via a 3rd party intermediary to ensure the confirmation and veracity of MY claim that they are the original inventors of Bitcoin!
I am quite sure i can recover the required part of the wallet keys to move ONE bitcoin to another public wallet. After that, my offer of a fudiciary oversight of that $75 Billion USD Bitcoin stash still stands with the group!
We shall see what happens!
V
The group looks like it has ALREADY internally specified which wallet that One Bitcoin will be moved to in order to showcase their ownership of the Bitcoin wallets)! I personally don't have the ENTIRE key set BUT the intermediary DOES HAVE MOST of the key set and the rest I am quite confident due to the access to external supercomputing systems that I have, means it that I could VERY LIKELY determine the last few parts to allow movement of all such funds.
Since I have offered to be a FIDUCIARY, that means there is an EXTENSIVE LIST of global legal and taxation parameters that MUST be followed to ensure that $75 Billion USD worth of Bitcoin stash is used for BOTH Charitable purposes and for Technology-specific Global Environmental and Social Issues-oriented Small-Company Startup Funding purposes ONLY (i.e. minus monthly office and travel expenses plus oversight office staff salaries/honourariams!)
For the purposes of the proposed funding system, both UK-specific Taxation rules and EU Corporate Non-Profit Entity rules will be followed for distribution of funds to various charities and to the global-oriented small-company startup fund. This is MY SUGGESTION but the Bitcoin Inventors Group has given me NO INSTRUCTIONS as to their own personal wishes. I have NO specific personal contact with the group other than through what seems to be a personally-related entity.
That said, MY CLAIM that the specific group of UK-based Mathematicians that I believe to be the actual Bitcoin Inventors may have enough merit to alarm the original group such that they might actually ARISE out of their slumber to publicly address this Register-postings thread! I have PUBLICLY instructed them via this thread to MOVE One Single Bitcoin to a public charitable Bitcoin wallet of their choice to ensure the world KNOWS it was them!
From there, I would be VERY OPEN to becoming part of the global evaluation committee to ensure funds are PROPERLY distributed to worthy charities AND to the specific breakthrough and innovative companies and inventors who NEED startup funding in order to address the great and small social and environmental issues that press upon the world's populations still in this year of 2024! I want to PERSONALLY EVALUATE and TEST those discoveries and inventions such that we can offer a good likelihood of success via the rapid infusion of sufficient funds and infrastructure that can PROPERLY SOLVE much of the world's pressing social and environmental issues!
So to the Bitcoin Inventors, I'm all ears as to your desired wishes! So please do send the world a VERY LOUD MESSAGE that you're not all dead yet! Send also a very public message on a worldwide public forum if you do support my suggestion of DONATING ALL (or most!) of your Bitcoin funds to worthy charities AND a massive tens-of-billions of dollars startup fund that will infuse many thousands of worldwide small-company entities and inventors with financial and technical resources that will allow them to help SOLVE much of the world's social and environmental issues!
I want to be PART of the evaluation and testing committee, so please do message me here or in your public forum what your wishes are!
Thank You,
StargateSG7
V
Actually, i'm quite human and not some stupid A.I. model. I did in fact find the Eastman Bitcoin inventor character via a set of deep journalistic detective work since i do have a Broadcast Television Production diploma with some reporting courses under my belt which gave me a good foundation for finding out the What, Who, When, Where and Why of Bitcoin.
Again, the original Bitcoin inventors are a set of UK-based mathematicians!
V
P.S. Don't like my assertion? Too Bad! The Proof is in the Pudding! A bunch of math professors from various parts of the UK are the ACTUAL creators of Bitcoin who did it as an academic exercise to determine if digital assets can be protected using distributed public forums. AND .... It All Worked! Blockchain works! PERIOD !!!
Reply to this message PUBLICLY by posting your Bitcoin Wallet Address here and I will TRY to move One Bitcoin to you if I can recover the last part of the key(s)!
Once moved to your wallet proving the assertion that the full funds are available, one day later you will donate 0.75 or 3/4ths of that One Bitcoin or $49,939 to your local SPCA (Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) or equivalent agency within your state, province or country. You will name "Bitcoins from EASTMAN et al..." as the original donor! The rest of the money you can keep for yourself. Buy a bottle of Canadian Fireball Cinnamon Whiskey and any British Columbia Ice Wine on my behalf and have a few toasts of both along with some REAL whipped-cream-based five-layer German-style Black Forest Cake chocolate cake loaded with real cherries soaked in Asbach Uralt Brandy with all your friends praising the REAL Bitcoin Inventors!
(One Bitcoin = $66,585 USD)
Reply here with your Bitcoin Wallet Address!
V
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
