Trial to See Whether Craig Wright is the Creator of Bitcoin Completed its Second Week

So, today I found out that Craig Wright has been in court trying to prove that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin.

Based on my past research into this subject, I would say that there is a high probability that Craig Wright is at least one of the inventors of Bitcoin, if not the main inventor.

Craig Wright Trial Includes Ninja Anecdote Cited as Proof He's Bitcoin Creator Satoshi

Crypto Open Patent Alliance's (COPA) trial to solve the mystery of whether Australian computer scientist Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto, the infamous anonymous creator of bitcoin (BTC), has just completed its second week.

The week ended creatively. Wright's sister Danielle DeMorgan took to the witness stand on Friday to recount a blog post that she wrote that stated when she heard the name Satoshi, a Japanese name, she knew that was Wright. In the blog, DeMorgan recounted the time she saw Wright in the park dressed as a ninja when he was 18 or 19 – a tale she says explains why she connected the dots. She added that she once saw Wright around 2007 or 2008 in a room full of computers and he explained he was working on something important.

Satoshi's Bitcoin white paper came out in late 2008.

Wright's witness Mark Archbold also took the stand on Friday. He had a discussion with Wright about digital currency in 2005 and believed Wright was Satoshi because of the encryption software he wrote in the 2000s. Cerian Jones, a patent attorney, was also questioned on Friday and her statement centered around how Wright's patents showed he could have been the creator of bitcoin.

The trial is set to continue next week. On Monday, more Wright witnesses will testify, according to the court schedule. David Bridges and Max Lynam will take to the stand, followed by his factual witness Stefan Matthews. COPA's witnesses will be questioned from Tuesday, and Wright is set to appear again on Friday for another cross-examination.

a reply to: IndieA

Shouldn’t be hard to prove. Just show us the wallet 😎

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: IndieA

Shouldn’t be hard to prove. Just show us the wallet 😎

Which one?

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: IndieA

Shouldn’t be hard to prove. Just show us the wallet 😎

Which one?

lol, fair point.

We do at least know the genesis wallet (1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa)

If he wants to prove he’s Satoshi, all he has to do is tell the courts x amount of bitcoin will travel from wallet A to wallet B on such and such day. He doesn’t even have to bring his keys into the court room.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
We do at least know the genesis wallet (1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa)

At such an early stage in the game, would the first wallet be irrelevant without at least one other if a transaction is verified by another transaction to start the whole pyramid scheme?

Excuse my ignorance in the origins of Bitcoin but just trying to understand.

a reply to: nerbot

You think that Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme, huh?

After all these years, even?

It's because of ignorance, isn't it?

a reply to: nerbot

Not sure I understand the question.

But my guess is Satoshi made multiple wallets for many reasons. The two big ones was not to put all the eggs in one basket in case he lost access and the other to practice transactions and mining under different parameters.

As to it being a pyramid scheme it doesn’t fit the bill.

At best it could be considered an over valued asset.

One thing people forget is it’s not just a digital asset. There is utility whether people find value in it or not. You can transfer value to anyone in the world without the permission of any entity.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: nerbot

There is utility whether people find value in it or not. You can transfer value to anyone in the world without the permission of any entity.

There is no question it has value. The question is, do the positives outweigh the negatives?

a reply to: putnam6

I’m biased, my stack doesn’t have any Bitcoin… so I suppose that would project my thoughts on that question.

I personally like the blockchains with smart contracts.

But I’m not bearish or anti Bitcoin either.

a reply to: IndieA

If he is Satoshi, then he could explain why Satoshi chose to remain anonymous with something so lucrative for decades.

My guess is that he stole his initial resources and doesn't want to be sued out of existence by those claiming that they own some portion.

a reply to: putnam6

I would say if you take fiat as the alternative, the negatives of Bitcoin and crypto at large are neglegtable...

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: putnam6

I’m biased, my stack doesn’t have any Bitcoin… so I suppose that would project my thoughts on that question.

I personally like the blockchains with smart contracts.

But I’m not bearish or anti Bitcoin either.

I have such meager holdings it's embarrassing to talk about, and even those are down 50%. Still, I find it interesting to discuss there are a few people I know who are absolutely convinced it's just a matter of time.

and yes I knew about it way back when it was just starting, lol the fact I didn't buy in then is why I semi-pay attention now

Think it will be another 7-10 years atleast before it's more mainstream, too many hoops to jump through. Too many questions from the public at large and much depends on the Federal Reserve does it not?

www.marketplace.org...

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: putnam6

I would say if you take fiat as the alternative, the negatives of Bitcoin and crypto at large are neglegtable...

Some suggest that it would be easier and ultimately better to return to the gold standard, the concerns about crypto aren't going away regardless. Till enough politicians figure out how to enrich themselves with crypto there will be no change. Too many don't understand it, think it is a scam, etc. There is no pressure to do anything different, especially in the current political landscape, hell the pressure is just the opposite.

www.forbes.com...

a reply to: putnam6

Eh, you’d be surprised.

It’s actually main stream now with zero hoops. Black rock made an ETF, and there’s other stocks that almost trade to the spot price. There’s probably at least ten stocks you can trade where you’re mainly in BTC, plus, you can buy options and leverage your bet. That can even force them to buy more BTC if they’re forced to hold a certain amount based off of price action.

The Bitcoin halving is in April(ish), and I don’t see coincidence in the timing of the graces from the market overlords in the lead up to that.

I wouldn’t tell anyone to bet the house right now or even buy in. But I wouldn’t be surprised if we see something crazy with bitcoin this spring or summer.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

It's almost like we are replaying 2016 over again....even with Wright.

a reply to: JinMI

I’ll be honest. I don’t know much about Wright or the Satoshi lore.

To me, it isn’t as relevant as where the market is going… Assuming Satoshi doesn’t sell.

And even if he did, I don’t think it would have as much of a long term effect as many would believe.

Max supply is no more than 21 million. Even if a few million enter the liquidity pools, there’s very few assets traded in the volume of bitcoin with such low supply.

It’s in ETFs now, which inevitably get built into 401ks, Roths and the like. That means there’s going to be a constant buy pressure every pay day.

It got the blessing of legitimacy from the strongest market in the world.

My stack has very little bitcoin, but I wouldn’t be surprised if we see bitcoin hit a very surprising high by end of year.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I've followed some of it. As well as the Roger Ver stuff.

If Wright was Satoshi, it's easily proven and he could have done it 8 or 10 years ago when this first came up.

It got the blessing of legitimacy from the strongest market in the world.

Indeed. With all the games and corruption that comes from "the strongest market in the world." They wanted it, they got it. Which is ironic considering the reason BTC was created according to Satoshi....

My stack has very little bitcoin, but I wouldn’t be surprised if we see bitcoin hit a very surprising high by end of year.

Like I said, just like 2016 (60k BTC high)

a reply to: JinMI

BTC ATH was much later than 2016.

But in either event, I wouldn’t be shocked if we see it at a couple hundred thousand before the year is up. Again, I wouldn’t advise anyone bet on that because I personally am not.

I’m mainly in smart contract coins at the moment, and I don’t necessarily have to be right on a majority of them. Only have to have a few hit.

But they have to thank the OG for their success. The legitimacy of BTC bleeds into the broader crypto space.

It’s hard to ignore the ability to transfer large amounts of value quickly without centralized approval. Once you start factoring in built in escrow or algorithms to build in derivatives and interest you start to imagine where a lot of it could potentially go.

I still do stocks too, I’m not a crypto evangelical. The dogma of both groups can be taxing at times. Both can flourish.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

You're right.

I was way off and wrong.

Yet, have a peek at the 4 year on election years for the core of what I was speaking too.

...just don't take numbers from me as I'm demonstrably wrong!

a reply to: JinMI

To be fair, you’re not wrong.

The market usually reacts to our elections.

But I’d implore you to look into the bitcoin halving cycle. I personally think that has more of an impact on its price action than politics.

It’s going to be interesting to see the two intertwine soon though. The more BTC gets tied to the market, the more it gets impacted by broader elements, and the more it affects the market itself.

Liquidity pools are very interesting. If you build a fund of 1b dollars worth of bitcoin, you’re taking x amount of BTC on spot price and tying it to $1b dollars. You offer in shares. Now it’s semi locked in. The USD could have a rough year, but in that fund if BTC performs well it pulls up 1b worth of USD. Now imagine a whole bunch of currencies and assets being tied and compared to BTC. They all bring eachother up because there are trading pools.