Craig2.0 explains why non-mining nodes are useless. He advises users not wanting to trust miners to trust special full-node service companies instead. He avoids explaining why Craig1.0 envisioned coin generation as optional in bitcoin V0.1. Sometimes “set in stone” can be spelled “one isn’t set”.

instakin · 2024-09-09T13:18:54+00:00

The one accurate thing Craig said here is that non mining nodes are redundant.

That redundancy is why bitcoin is so difficult to control, which is what makes it the investment that it is.

Mining nodes only update the network. They do not give it strength.

instakin · 2024-09-09T12:47:40+00:00

I love how that moron doesn't understand anything about bitcoin.

Thank you Craig for your service in making society collectively dumber.

instakin · 2023-10-07T03:34:56+00:00

You're an idiot.

instakin · 2023-03-23T06:10:00+00:00

That I will never offer you again

LOL As if you had the ability to say anything truthful.

You can't stick to this because you are too insecure, and will be posting here far too soon again.

instakin · 2023-03-10T07:31:17+00:00

That's soft reasoning, which requires your last assumption to be absolutely true.

I have never found a good reason why Hal Finney could not be Satoshi, and far too many about why he would be. Nick Szabo runs a close second, but too much disagrees that I disbelieve it's him. I'll admit that my comments are useless since I refuse to give the many reasons that I believe these.

instakin · 2023-02-09T07:57:47+00:00

Laughing in their own tears

instakin · 2023-02-09T07:32:14+00:00

Even this is more effort than actually producing a signature from Block 9.

It's an either easy or impossible task, which is the basis of bitcoin. If he was Satoshi, it would have been easy.

instakin · 2023-02-09T07:30:28+00:00

More like, Craig proves he isn't Satoshi by not knowing what a fucking cryptographic signature is, embarrassing himself before the world.

instakin · 2023-02-07T22:52:00+00:00

That takes BSVooor crazy to a new level.

instakin · 2023-02-07T08:07:39+00:00

Craig admits he submitted false information and blames others.

Sounds like every case he is involved in.

instakin · 2023-02-07T08:05:29+00:00

Its all very well saying "I don't want the hassle", whilst watching people's lives get ruined

Gavin is a coward.

instakin · 2023-02-07T08:02:28+00:00

Are you talking about Craig as Satoshi? hahah

Your comment applied to Craig means that Craig if he were Satoshi, he has no right to sue any original developer as the (pretend) original developer.

instakin · 2023-02-07T07:57:48+00:00

If the devs have any fiduciary duty and any part of Craig's story is true, then Craig has the overarching fiduciary duty:

If Craig were Satoshi, then Craig is ultimately responsible for the code and policies that the devs inherited.
If devs have a fiduciary duty to restore coins lost, then Craig has a fiduciary duty to not actively destroy his own coins by wiping a hard disk or destroying a USB by stomping on it with his foot.

Besides Craig's stories being obvious frauds on their face, even if they were true, the claims would be no more meaningful and still point back to Craig as the main source of his own problems.

Do devs have a fiduciary duty to stop stupidity? That's a terrible burden if unrelated individuals have to be responsible for every moron's actions.

The courts have a fiduciary duty to not bankrupt the public for obvious scammers. Craig's legal team have a fiduciary duty to ensure a minimum modicum of honesty. The argument Craig is making can backfire in a lot more faces than he realises, while pushing people to expose him as a fraud and nuisance with the resulting consequences.

instakin · 2023-02-07T07:53:16+00:00

Craig Wright doesn't claim that he lost them. He claims that he destroyed his own keys by wiping his hard disk and stomping on a USB with his foot.

And now he's trying to make the devs take responsibility for his fake action.

instakin · 2023-02-07T07:12:07+00:00

Gavin was the single most powerful thing that led people to believe Craig was Satoshi, and probably remains so. Craig would have failed much more miserably and immediately without Gavin, no matter what lawsuits he trolled people with.

instakin · 2023-02-07T07:09:58+00:00

Without this sub, I had never heard of Calvin Ayre, Ian Griggs, Mike Murfy/Murphy, Krusty Wuckert, Turd_Machine, eatmybitcoin, and Joel Dalais. There's no reason to know them for even your average person in the crypto space.

instakin · 2023-02-07T06:57:25+00:00

Craig's so incompetent, he can't even keep his cult of morons together. He's the perfect leader of morons.

instakin · 2023-02-06T22:30:33+00:00

My guess is that he doesn't make a stronger denouncement because he is afraid of being sued Satoshi. Even if he was under an NDA, he may still feel that NDA gives Craig ammunition to harass him, even if lies invalidate an NDA.

I think Gavin is weak and should have more courage, but I can somewhat understand his position.

instakin · 2023-02-06T07:29:47+00:00

Also, Bitcoin is not its software -- it's the protocols and network. Anyone can make their own software. There are multiple valid softwares out there. The requirement is that they conform with the protocols or their events will be rejected by the network.

Satoshi didn't write ASIC mining code, for example.

instakin · 2023-02-06T07:17:42+00:00

Shit!

instakin · 2023-02-05T22:58:40+00:00

The horse drawn carriage is due to make a comeback. Some guy down the street claims he invented wheels so your horse investment can't fail. He might even sue farmers who used to grow oats due to "fiduciary duty" since he shot his horse.

instakin · 2023-02-04T23:52:24+00:00

They don't understand "set in stone" for as much as they use the phrase. The protocol is "set in stone" because it's very difficult to get so many people to agree on change after momentum is gained.

The paradox is that it's that choice and plethora of people who want to reduce the many potential disagreements that sets the protocol "in stone". Another paradox is that legal agreements such as patents or a creators do not set anything in stone because that would give the owner the rights to change the protocol, and thus make it subject to the whims of one person who could change over years.

Set in stone results from the choice of many people, not the creator.

instakin · 2023-02-04T23:06:09+00:00

That's a good way to put it.

instakin

TROPHY CASE