/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>16217112
Stiff

>>16217112
God, what an absolute Chad. He probably has a huge cock aswell

>>16217163
>He probably has a huge cock aswell
This is correct

>egomaniac
>uses a pseudonym
ishygddt

>>16217112
Thanks, Sanjesh for covering for my shift. I'll bring you curry after the movie.

>>16217112
Satoshi is a based and redpilled straight white male. truly a magnificient timeline

>>16217112
I am terrified because he mixes lies (fake proofs) and truth (how scaling is needed, how bitcoin can change the world, inspirational talks, etc).

Will 1 BSV suffice to retire in 10 years, of he's really who he says he is and if he really does what he's going to do?

Or should we go for 10 or even 100?

What if he's just lying and he doesn't sink BTC next year, and instead BTC moons? How crazy will that be if we invest in BSV?

>>16217840
>fake proofs
Sounds like somebody's been GREG'D

>>16217112
Pretty stiff

>>16217455
checked

>>16217840
>fake proofs
Read his blogpost about the signing. If you're not a brainlet you will understand why he did the fake signing

Don't invest in anything before you are certain. You have to do your own research and reasoning

>>16217848
Speak of the devil

>>16217861
if greg could tamper with craigs evidence that his own lawyers submit then craig is fucked he is done it's game over bye bye.

>>16217112
satoshi is a handsome HAPA boy

>>16217873
>why he did the fake signing
here is no excuse for that, also there is a lot of bullshitting in the signing articles of his i read some. they are both technically incorrect and also tend to draw the wrong conclusion from a true or false statement via some random fallacy anyways.

>>16217967
>here is no excuse for that
why?

>>16217967
case in point

>>16217874
Oh, I have this:

Why BTC is bad, the high fees of December 2017 were BY DESIGN:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-December/015455.html

Who is Gregory Maxwell, you ask? Well glad you asked, a BTC Core developer and CTO of Blockstream:
https://www.weusecoins.com/gregory-maxwell-bitcoin-expert/

Why SegWit is bad:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY

Why the Lightning Network is bad:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFZOrtlQXWc

Why Blockstream is bad:

Investor in Blockstream: AXA, see this link:
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/blockstream/investors/investors_list

CEO of AXA:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Buberl

Former CEO of AXA:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_de_Castries

Both of whom happen to be in the Bilderberg meetings:
https://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants2017.html

The earlier CEO is even:
CHAIRMAN STEERING COMMITTEE
Castries, Henri de (FRA), President of Institut Montaigne; Former Chairman and CEO, AXA

>>16217112
"You're only a public figure because you cosplay as Satoshi, right?"
topkek

https://twitter.com/cryptomanran/status/1192888905823068160

>>16217974
because doing fake signing seances in a controlled environment and not letting experts examine the signature or the message is literally fraud. any cryptographer worth it's salt would cringe and recoil violently. satoshi was definitely not a fucking asshat who reused signatures or wrote bogus script and other parlor tricks.

>>16217112
WE ARE THE STIFF MARINES AND WE ARE NOT FUCKING SELLING

> immutable blockchain child porn
NOT SELLING

> ends up in a contempt of court hearing for unsuccessfully trying to graverob his dead alleged colleague, still can't provide evidence
STILL NOT SELLING

> cries in court
NO WAY KIKES

> gets caught out by a district court judge because he thought that people wouldn't check him editing pdfs
FUCK YOU KIKE NOT SELLING

> Ayre dumps bsv and buys himself a new $100m mansion with the proceedings
HAH

> gets roasted by Heart to the point where he actually has to flee the stage while people boo him
NOT FUCKING SELLING

> hires shills whose iqs are so low that their only response to anything is to accuse you of being greg maxwell, because apparently him being a fraud and creg being a fraud are mutually exclusive assertions
NOPE, NO KIKES, NOT SELLING

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwRZgtTEH08&t

>>16217986
The very same Peter Rizun on Craig Wright

>>16218001
You did not answer the question

>>16217978
Basically, he's saying he doesn't have to sign (mathematically prove he has the money) to establish in court that he's Satoshi (prove in the human sense).

But he can only sink BTC if he actually has the money (which are supposedly locked away in the Tulip trust).

If he really does sink BTC, it will change humanity forever. But he may get actually killed by pissed off "investors".

If he doesn't sink BTC, his excuse may be "we're a mining company, we are for-profit and we have to do what brings us that profit". I can see the conflict of interest - they want to establish BSV as the main crypto, they want the massive transaction volume that will sustain mining and allow for using BSV for global shopping/trade, but at the same time, even as we speak, they mine BTC because they have to (profit).

>>16218005

>>16218016
yes i did there is no excuse for a controlled ""signing"" bullshit. it obviously does not benefit him also. he could maximize his gains by signing right and proper while keeping plausible deniability in court.

game theory dictates that he is not satoshi because if he was he would have signed a long time ago instead of squirming and wiggling.

>>16218058
You said there is no excuse for a fake signing. I asked why?

>>16218017
>Basically, he's saying he doesn't have to sign (mathematically prove he has the money) to establish in court that he's Satoshi (prove in the human sense).
apparently false.
also signing as satoshi does not sink btc. especially if he was not talking bullshit and issue childish threats in case that is a concern. but again apparently it's not.

>>16218071
i explained just read it! he is supposedly a security expert he should be the guy that calls guys like him out on their bullshit. not the one committing fraud.

>>16217873
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-TkjEdB1kE

>>16218095
So you can't think of one single reason he would do a fake signing?

>>16217883
>>16217967
>>16217978
>>16218001
>>16218058
>>16218087
>>16218095
>7 posts by this ID

>>16218161
i can the only reason is he can't really sign.

>>16218546
>i can the only reason is he can't really sign.
Are you unable to think of any other reasons?

>>16217112
A picture is worth a thousand words

>>16218560
no good reasons no. only random retarded speculative bullshit 60 iq morons buy into.

>>16218585
it's not a nice thing to make fun of a mans diapers anon!

>>16218586
>no good reasons no
Do you think that is because it is physically impossible that there are good reasons to do a fake signing?
Or do you think it is because you lack the intellect to envision different scenarios where there is a good reason to fake a signing?

>>16218621
i think whatever scenario you lay out here i can tear it apart in 5 seconds.

>>16218723
You're not answering the question:

Do you think that is because it is physically impossible that there are good reasons to do a fake signing?
Or do you think it is because you lack the intellect to envision different scenarios where there is a good reason to fake a signing?

>>16218736
i think there is no good reason whatsoever for a fake signing session. come on i know you want to throw in your genius solution to this you have been itching since post >>16218016 enough foreplay bring it.

>>16217163
He doesn’t know