[HN Gopher] Craig Wright said he invented Bitcoin - lawyers prov...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Craig Wright said he invented Bitcoin - lawyers proved him wrong
        
       Author : guiambros
       Score  : 79 points
       Date   : 2024-09-14 14:08 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.ft.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.ft.com)
        
       | move-on-by wrote:
       | > ...lawyers picked apart Wright's claims that some of his
       | computer documents had been typed before 2008, using evidence
       | from font designers. The witnesses testified that some fonts
       | "hadn't even been created until years after the alleged date of
       | the document"...
       | 
       | https://craigwright.net/
       | 
       | Fascinating.
        
         | churchill wrote:
         | Fun fact: A Microsoft font also helped expose corruption by
         | Pakistan's former PM, Nawaz Sharif [1]. Apparently, documents
         | dated to 2006 were typed up using Calibri, a font that only
         | went into public distribution around 2007.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/12/15961354/pakistan-
         | calibri...
        
           | esafak wrote:
           | Same thing in Turkey.
           | https://balyozdavasivegercekler.com/2012/10/04/dani-
           | rodrik-d...
        
           | ruthmarx wrote:
           | I guess it's prudent to remember to always use Times New
           | Roman when committing fraud.
        
           | RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote:
           | Also fonts helped discredit Dan Rather's Killian memo.
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_authentici.
           | ..
        
       | tastyfreeze wrote:
       | If he's not Satoshi and doesn't have Satoshi's keys the what is
       | the point of saying he is Satoshi? Seems like a long way to go
       | for some notoriety and no financial gain.
        
         | brokensegue wrote:
         | he did try to gain financially. he forked bitcoin into Bitcoin
         | Satoshi Vision.
        
           | hollerith wrote:
           | He also started and made himself CEO of at least 3
           | cryptocurrency startups. One of those startups (nChain) tried
           | extract patent licensing fees from other cryptocurrency
           | players.
        
         | Tuna-Fish wrote:
         | He attempted to sue Bitcoin core devs to alter the algorithm to
         | hand over Satoshi's coins. On the basis that he lost the keys
         | and that the maintainers have a duty to him to help him recover
         | them.
         | 
         | Every part of the lawsuit was just batshit insane. The most
         | insane part was that an UK court allowed the lawsuit to be
         | heard, and forced dozens of people not living in UK to pay big
         | money to defend themselves.
        
           | solarengineer wrote:
           | Do the defendants have the right and the opportunity to sue
           | for legal fees and damages for having to fight this vexatious
           | court case?
        
           | pavlov wrote:
           | While the lawsuit was insane, it serves a good reminder that
           | when Bitcoiners proudly proclaim that "governments have no
           | power over them", it's not quite that simple in lots of ways.
           | 
           | If the governments of the world really started to believe
           | their fiscal powers or national currencies were threatened by
           | crypto, they have an extensive repertoire of tools to shut it
           | down.
        
             | chabes wrote:
             | I disagree. This lawsuit was against a single individual.
             | There is nothing here that is threatening to crypto as a
             | whole.
             | 
             | One thing that will make it harder to regulate as time goes
             | on is that more people will be financially involved. From
             | traditional finance getting involved through funds, to the
             | masses getting involved, the ecosystem has grown far beyond
             | the fringe, and will continue to do so with each successive
             | hype cycle. Hell, many governments themselves have skin in
             | the game now.
             | 
             | I'm curious how you think serious crippling legislation or
             | enforcement would play out.
             | 
             | EDIT: additional thought... this case protects the
             | industry, not the other way around. The industry was being
             | attacked by a fraudulent individual, and the government
             | defended the industry.
        
               | speerer wrote:
               | This is a misunderstanding. The lawsuit was not one suit:
               | it wrapped up one against Wright, but several that he
               | instigated against others. This involved dozens of
               | individuals and companies, sued by him for various ends
               | such as control over the word "Bitcoin", control over
               | bitcoins themselves, and forcible changes to the
               | protocols.
               | 
               | It was absolutely a threat to Bitcoin and other crypto.
        
             | janandonly wrote:
             | Governments can shut down the core developers, or at least
             | force them into hiding and force them to use nyms (like
             | they should do, as cypherpunks anyways).
             | 
             | But stopping people from downloading and running some
             | code... well on a closed eco system like Apple App Store,
             | sure, you can pressure a company into compliance, but how
             | are you going to stop determined people? Who download and
             | share code over I2P and TOR?
             | 
             | It's off course true that if it really came to this
             | globally, the price of bitcoin would probably tumble and be
             | more compatible to other currently more privacy forward
             | coins like Monero .
        
               | sgt101 wrote:
               | Well, you make it a capital office, or less draconian...
               | make it an offense punishable by 10 years of hard labour
               | in a dire penal camp somewhere cold.
               | 
               | In addition you make it an offense to fail to disclose
               | knowledge of the use of such capabilities, and you
               | institute a system of rewards to positively encourage
               | disclosure.
               | 
               | Perhaps you call it social credit.
               | 
               | You are correct that there are a few people who would
               | defy such a system, a very few.
        
             | throw101010 wrote:
             | You misunderstand the point people saying this make. They
             | know governments can suppress their freedoms ultimately but
             | since Bitcoin is an open and public system, the measures
             | governments have to use to "kill" it force them to limit
             | very fundamental freedoms (like freedom of speech to
             | restrict the publishing of its source code, freedom to
             | consume the energy citizens purchase and/or produce how
             | they want, neutral access to Internet, etc.).
             | 
             | These kind of measures are political suicide in Western
             | democracies, hence why politicians are seen as powerless
             | against Bitcoin in these places, why they "let" this market
             | grow and why they just setup ways to tax it as best as they
             | can (at the borders between fiat and crypto).
             | 
             | In places where preserving such freedoms is not a burden
             | for governments you already see bans flourish when it is
             | convenient for the people in power... but even then, it
             | just marginally stops the actual access to Bitcoin as a
             | network participant (which is not limited to mining). It
             | doesn't actually kills Bitcoin.
             | 
             | But everyone knows that if governments around the world
             | decided to install massive censorship, invade the privacy
             | of all their citizen, and magically all were in agreement
             | to do so at the same time, Bitcoin wouldn't survive... if
             | you think this is a possible scenario, is Bitcoin really
             | the thing your should worry about?
        
               | CamperBob2 wrote:
               | _These kind of measures are political suicide in Western
               | democracies_
               | 
               | CSAM has entered the chat. ("Why do you support child
               | abuse, Senator?")
        
               | sgt101 wrote:
               | The one fundamental that you have to understand about all
               | government is that it is essentially a monopoly on
               | violence. That monopoly enables things like taxation and
               | broad social consensus and consent.
               | 
               | But, it's there, and if Bitcoin began to chip away at the
               | core of any state you can expect it to be used.
               | 
               | Some people say that they can't take my gold. Some people
               | say that they can't take my guns. But history says that
               | they can and will and have.
        
               | ForHackernews wrote:
               | China banned bitcoin mining and now there's hardly any
               | bitcoin mining in China. Maybe the legal wrangling would
               | be more involved in western countries, but I can't see
               | why enforcement would be any harder.
               | 
               | ISPs already block bittorrent and blacklist domains. They
               | could easily block bitcoin, too.
        
             | josmar wrote:
             | Ultimately _I_ can memorise 12 words representing my
             | private key. And when the dictatorship finally ends, or I
             | manage to flee, no government can ever freeze my money.
             | 
             | No tax man, no dictator, and no other thief can distinguish
             | someone who memorised 12 words from someone who didn't.
        
               | chx wrote:
               | Erm, no.
               | 
               | No government can freeze your bitcoins.
               | 
               | It's not money.
               | 
               | You might find it ever increasingly difficult to change
               | bitcoins to real money if a country -- or multiple -- is
               | against it. No such thing happens currently but there are
               | constant efforts to bring KYC and so forth to exchanges.
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | > U.S. persons and entities - meaning anyone on American
               | soil or any U.S. citizens abroad - are barred from
               | transacting with the addresses or people added to the
               | sanctions list.
               | 
               | https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/09/14/us-treasury-
               | black...
        
           | meowfly wrote:
           | It looks like the UK is considering perjury and I hope they
           | follow through and are aggressive on it.
           | 
           | We can't have incentive structures where the upside is
           | becoming fabulously rich but the downside is a slap on the
           | wrist.
        
             | idunnoman1222 wrote:
             | There was no potential upside of becoming fabulously rich.
             | Nobody can "extract" those keys.
        
               | pests wrote:
               | No need to extract keys, the Bitcoin devs could just
               | change the code. Even lock up the original and mint new
               | ones for Craig. It's just code in the end.
               | 
               | Similar to how Eth changed the code to nullify the DAO
               | hack.
        
               | greyface- wrote:
               | The Ethereum DAO rollback fork was (for better or worse)
               | widely supported by the community. It's not likely that a
               | court-ordered fork to reassign Satoshi's coins to Wright
               | would have anywhere near the same level of support.
        
               | samtheprogram wrote:
               | But if it were to happen, what are the chances a fork of
               | Bitcoin (that doesn't respect this ruling) becomes more
               | mainstream than Bitcoin?
               | 
               | Less than 10%, and that's generous.
        
               | throwaway48540 wrote:
               | I see it the other way. 10% chance that the Craitoshi
               | fork of BTC becomes mainstream.
        
               | rlpb wrote:
               | It only works if traders also continue to accept such
               | coins as payment, which they probably wouldn't.
        
               | wmf wrote:
               | His plan was to sue everyone into using his fork.
        
               | charlie0 wrote:
               | It's my understanding that simply changing the code
               | doesn't really have an effect until all the nodes in the
               | system update to use it.
        
           | hollerith wrote:
           | >The most insane part was that an UK court allowed the
           | lawsuit to be heard, and forced dozens of people not living
           | in UK to pay big money to defend themselves.
           | 
           | Minor correction: according to the wikipedia article on
           | Wright, the Crypto Open Patent Alliance sued Wright, not the
           | other way around.
           | 
           | However, IIUC Wright's attempts over many years to
           | fraudulently extract patent licensing fees and other
           | undeserved benefits from the industry drove industry leaders
           | to spend money to sue Wright. Those attempts included
           | Wright's suing many people.
           | 
           | I'm outraged by Wright and hope Wright is forced to stand
           | trial in criminal court for perjury and forgery.
        
             | tim333 wrote:
             | I think that was a different court case. Wright has been
             | involved in several.
        
           | ruthmarx wrote:
           | > forced dozens of people not living in UK to pay big money
           | to defend themselves.
           | 
           | At the risk of not being able to enjoy castles and blood
           | pudding on vacation, couldn't they just ignore the suit?
        
         | sabhiram wrote:
         | We are talking about it aren't we?
        
         | bdcravens wrote:
         | He received quite a bit of financial gain, latching on to and
         | being funded by Calvin Ayre (of online gambling fame)
        
         | lawn wrote:
         | He did manage to bamboozle the billionaire Calvin Ayre, who
         | financially backed up Craig. Seems like a pretty fruitful scam
         | to be honest.
        
       | outsomnia wrote:
       | > In one instance, the lawyers set about trying to disprove the
       | legitimacy of handwritten notes. ... Sherrell's team tracked down
       | the printer of the notepad in China, proving that the exact
       | version of that notebook had not been released until years after
       | Wright's claims.
       | 
       | lol
        
       | latexr wrote:
       | > A legal notice on Wright's website1 now states that he is not
       | Satoshi and that he has been ordered not to carry out any more
       | legal proceedings based on these false claims.
       | 
       | I can see the notice, but how does that work? Did the court order
       | that specific phrasing and page? Have they seized the domain? Are
       | they going to run it indefinitely? Is there anything stopping
       | Craig from purchasing a new domain and using that?
       | 
       | 1 https://craigwright.net
        
         | diggan wrote:
         | It doesn't look like a seized domain/website, then his own
         | personal "logo" wouldn't be there, and it would be clear some
         | agency was behind it, but seems that has been published by
         | himself.
         | 
         | Skimmed through the linked court docs but didn't find anything
         | about him being forced to publish something like this, although
         | that would make sense if he was.
         | 
         | Seems weird to write in 3rd person though, but wouldn't be the
         | weirdest thing that guy engaged in so who knows, diggan
         | certainly doesn't.
        
           | greyface- wrote:
           | Here's one relevant court judgment:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40981612
           | 
           | I haven't read other case documents, so it may not be the
           | final word on the matter. In particular, it doesn't contain
           | the actual notice text.
        
         | speerer wrote:
         | Your first guess is precisely right: the court ordered him to
         | post that notice on his Twitter accounts and website. It's for
         | a limited time of a few months.
        
       | ydnaclementine wrote:
       | Would be trivial to prove but he can't. Like saying you own a
       | particular house but you don't have the key to the front door.
        
         | fecal_henge wrote:
         | What if you lost the key?
        
       | Evidlo wrote:
       | Wish there was more detail about the typeface and notebook
       | sleuthing.
        
         | speerer wrote:
         | The expert evidence is actually available online:
         | https://archive.org/details/copa-v-wright-trial-documents
        
       | Simon_ORourke wrote:
       | In fairness, anyone trying to convince me of any given fact of
       | authorship could do well by leaving the bright red shirt and
       | braces combo in the wardrobe.
        
         | ionwake wrote:
         | I just don't understand why the guy claiming he is the creator
         | and main programmer of a cutting edge anti-establishment crypto
         | asset, would present himself as a suit and tie wearing business
         | man who drinks champagne.
         | 
         | Like wtf is going on.
        
           | akira2501 wrote:
           | Sophistication arbitrage. It's a common technique of the con
           | man.
        
       | unyttigfjelltol wrote:
       | So, to recap, a large global industry is built on a foundation
       | that the true identity of a particular currently-anonymous person
       | must never be identified and certainly not posthumously.
        
         | tim333 wrote:
         | I think the crypto industry would go on. It's just Satoshi
         | would rather keep his head down.
        
           | sroussey wrote:
           | I really expected Satoshi to move his bitcoin between wallets
           | during the trial.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Anything in this story that wasn't news 2-6 months ago?
       | 
       |  _Craig Wright Lied About Creating Bitcoin and Faked Evidence,
       | Judge Rules_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40416629
       | 
       |  _Judge rules Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39704116
       | 
       |  _Bitcoin Creator Isn 't Craig Wright, London Judge Rules_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39705642
        
         | refulgentis wrote:
         | Yeah, inter alia, this includes commentary/interview with the
         | lawyers
        
       | grahamj wrote:
       | This man is a true hero
       | 
       | ...to liars everywhere. He lied, he forged documents, he filed
       | suits. Most people will never go to these lengths to back up
       | their lies, no matter how big the potential windfall. You have to
       | respect the dedication if nothing else.
        
         | jamesmotherway wrote:
         | It's certainly interesting, but he's not a hero.
        
       | Levitating wrote:
       | Adam Back wrote Bitcoin (as well as haschash). It's not that much
       | of a mystery.
        
         | tim333 wrote:
         | Or maybe not.
        
       | yieldcrv wrote:
       | It was always sad to me that most of the people I met who
       | believed him were non-native English speakers.
       | 
       | Just my experience with his followers in person. Made me suspect
       | they couldnt detect nuance or bullshit in our language.
        
         | jamesmotherway wrote:
         | It's frightening to think about the implications of this when
         | generalized toward mainstream topics.
        
       | lightweb wrote:
       | Craig is still Satoshi, no matter what a court has (temporarily)
       | ordered him to state. Craig has followed the legal process 100%
       | for years at this point, paid every (massive) court-ordered
       | payment. The majority of cases feature him as defendant because
       | Bitcoin ultimately threatens the establishment and must be
       | controlled at any cost. This is the true source of the negative
       | sentiment and constant attacks.
       | 
       | He just today waived privilege on X and began outlining
       | accusations against his previous legal representation for not
       | following his explicit instructions, and instead followed orders
       | from a man who has been recently convicted in a UK court, is
       | facing bankruptcy in that country, and has fled as a fugitive
       | from justice. The rabbit hole goes deep.
       | 
       | Craig and the BSV Association have worked together with AWS and
       | Aerospike to conclusively prove the Bitcoin protocol is capable
       | of scaling to at least 120GB sized blocks, at over 1 million
       | P2PKH transactions per second. The BTC core team said this was
       | impossible, yet BSVA has provided data from a public cloud
       | provider, with geographically distributed nodes to prove it is.
       | What's more, it's been stated that it does so at an initial cost
       | that is drastically less than most anticipated. These costs are
       | highly likely to be lowered through optimization.
       | 
       | The majority of opinions expressed in this thread will most
       | certainly be abandoned in time when the full body of work can no
       | longer be ignored. One only needs to perform a simple patent
       | search to discover the depth of research and innovation
       | established on blockchain, and then realize that the sheer number
       | of applications and grants are not the work of someone attempting
       | to pull a con. It is true innovation, the same way Bitcoin was
       | and is.
        
         | slater wrote:
         | Thanks for your input, Craig!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-09-14 23:02 UTC)