Craig Wright sues Bitcoin Core developers to recover “stolen” coins [pdf]
ontier.net
ontier.net
As it becomes normalized to make any claim with no proof, and to gather followers who believe you, we regress as a civilization.
In the physical world and the US receiving stolen goods is a crime. I mean it would be nice to be able to mark stolen coins or coins used in ransomware as unusable...
I don't see how this works in "decentralized" bitcoin universe. Also signing documents with the name of you LLC is a thing now?
What am I missing?
There is no way any of this ends well for Craig Wright.
He does (as of a couple of years ago) have a PhD from the Computing and Mathematics department of a real University if that's what you mean.
"Money", banks, and the financial system broadly are a system of laws, contracts, and faith.
Bitcoin can clearly exist outside the modern financial system as a thing that manages a distributed ledger, but any time it attempts to become "money" it is going to smash into one or more of those.
This is an example of "any regulated financial industry will need to enforce these laws, regardless of how offensive those laws are to math."
This specific issue may or may not have merit, but in the long run regulation of things that can be regulated inevitable (exchanges, things that have a physical address in countries with laws, etc).
Politicians and judges aren't really swayed by "it's MATH, bitch!" and in fact most of society isn't really run that way either.
He's been spending most of his time promoting BSV (Bitcoin Satoshi Vision) which is a hard fork of BCH (Bitcoin Cash) which is a hard fork of original Bitcoin (BTC). The main purpose of BSV is to support fast, cheap microtransactions. Essentially, pay someone $0.00001 for reading their web content or watching their video instead of watching an ad. He's also been filing a ton of patents and sending threatening letters to people demanding they take down "his" Bitcoin whitepaper from their website.
One reason all this matters is BSV may be extremely undervalued if he is really Satoshi ($204 per coin vs BTC $49,767).
His opinion is that BTC (the original) is not Bitcoin, but his twice forked shitcoin is the really real actual bitcoin.
This whole thing reads like a troll. Tulip Trading? Hard forking the main chain?
Even if he could somehow make the developers fork the code, I highly doubt that the network would just silently accept that.
Thanks for for making me smile like crazy.
Bye
Developer
So what's the deal here? Would this essentially just require everyone to collectively agree that he owned the coins?
>The current value in sterling of the digital assets at the Addresses is approximately £3.65bn, ...
Craig is a scammy piece of shit. Send the lawyers and demand letters this way next, please.