the facts on his tax investigation is very murky, he’s been getting fat rebates of the tax payer for scientific research and development purposes, so maybe he’s using that. If this is all true and his supercomputer is legit, then he’s a powerful man thats not to be messed with.
And why even mention this. I was not even alluding to that
That was a related company he ran and as such that being settled separately, the money used and spent and if you read the articles he has to repay (some of) it to the ATO. And is now history. He needs more investment money for the future, one reason for drawing media attention to his supercomputer.
But since you brought it up, why hasn’t he used some of that bitcoin to repay the ATO for the tax bill from the R&D grants problems. It just adds to the question.
So your saying he could be trying to convince people he’s satoshi to get investment? but he said he doesn’t want money.
ian bloody grigg has only gone and jumped on the satoshi bandwagon
this story gets more and more interesting…
‘‘The death of Kleiman left the team somewhat unbalanced, and it played merry hell on the lives of those left in the team. It is no exaggeration to say that the Satoshi experience marked the people far more than could be appreciated from outside - they changed, their personalities flayed, their tempers tested, their lives turmoiled. Dave Kleiman died in suspicious circumstances, a story yet to be fully told.’’
Yes to that
You could be right. Not the smartest move since if it goes bad he could come off slightly worse for wear.
Oh you have a lot to learn about academics, companies, tax problems, conning people, etc.
This is why the issue over not using any at all of the around 400 million USD worth of coin he has if he was SN, is such an elephant in the corner.
1 Like
i dont believe he conning people, but there are some strange things i cannot explain. In the bbc interview he claimed to have spent some of the original coins, but i cannot seem to find any evidence yet to support this. Also wouldn’t have someone noticed if sotoshi’s coins were moving?
Craig the man
Yet, a warning to all. Satoshi was a vision, but Craig is a man. The two are not equal, not equivalent, not even close. Which is why the team aspect is so important to understand, something the world will not appreciate for some time. It is true that Craig is the larger part of the genius behind the team, but he could not have done it alone.
Nor - as a warning - is the man the vision. Not even close. As you come to know Craig you will discover he is no legend, no God, no saviour. He’s just a guy, a prickly one at that, he’s a lot like those very difficult geek/nerd/blatherers that turn minor IT support into a social drama. In short, Craig is human, in that very way that Satoshi could never be.
This doesn’t detract from the magnificence of history - that speaks for itself. But please, don’t dump your visionary expectations onto one man. He’s not up to it, you’re not going to like the result, and it’s inhuman.
Satoshi Nakamoto has died, yet long may Satoshi live. Now we really are Satoshi, now you all are. There is no longer any excuse, we each in every way are responsible for taking the vision forward.
1 Like
ian grigg 02/05/2016
Mate, have you got any sleep since this started. No offense but you seem a little obsessed.
2 Likes
im a full time crypto trader, what else do you expect me to be doing.
1 Like
hes debating with the ATO on how much tax is owed. His view is bitcoin is only taxable when its ‘deployed’.
Again I am NOT referring to this. That is over the paying back of R&D grants for his other company. You conflate too much.
And little do you know of Australian tax law. The tax office can and does attribute realisation of capital gains if they want to. Reasons are varied and the Tax office does make full use of the realisation provisions when they want to.
1 Like
The tweet above that one lends more cred also…
Edit: It seems inevitable that he is headed into court, so getting in front of the Satoshi question would make sense…it certainly was a dry confession, legal like. Maybe he plans on doing the real confirmation in front of a judge.
1 Like
craig wright explains the potential of bitcoin in the future and compares bitcoin tech to the banks tech Craig Wright interview on Vimeo
1 Like
craig wright talks competition in artifical intelligence code combined with blockchain identity. Craig-Interview-Part2 on Vimeo
craig talks the potential of distributed organisations, his grandfather, the value of the dollar, his socks CraigWright-Interview-Part3 on Vimeo
Gavin’s “clean” USB stick could be infected with malware the moment CW put it in his system to copy the signature. The Electrum download could have been compromised and downloaded from a different source. Maybe far fetched, but Gavin himself admitted the possibility that it might have been faked.
1 Like
Yes, but he first typed in the wrong sentence and the verification failed. Then they realized they left out the signature CSW and then the verification worked. Another point to make is that Gavin also said he was convinced before he even saw the signature, remember, he mailed a lot with Satoshi and took over the project from him.
That doesn’t say anything by itself, Electrum could have been made to ignore the public key input and use a hard coded public key that belonged to the private key CW used to sign the message.
True, but this could also have made him too trusting in this demonstration.
I still lean to the theory that Dave Kleiman was Satoshi and that CW helped him, and that’s why he can be so convincing in conversations, but is unable to give hard proof.
3 Likes