/biz/ - Business & Finance

[person who does not know No.19103624]

why does AA look like he has corona?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYv0qvPOX2U

[Anonymous No.19103682]

>>19103624
i watched it at 2x speed wtf why is he blinking so much

[Anonymous No.19103733]

He simply looks like the entitled retard he is.

[Anonymous No.19103875]

>>19103624
isn't he that licking hammer guy?

[Anonymous No.19104624]

>>19103624
Remember when Craig's legal team destroyed this phony?

I remember

[Anonymous No.19104673]

>>19104624
holy kek heroin addict pedophile btfo

[Anonymous No.19104686]

>>19103624
His wife caught it while taking BBC up her arse and infected him as she said "I don't do blowjobs honey".

[Anonymous No.19104733]

>>19104673
Get this, imagine being Andreas, sitting in court and having Craig's twitter shitposts read out loud to you:

>Q. I'm introducing Exhibit 32. I really want you to turn to the second page where you see a tweet under the handle Dr. Craig S. Wright.
>A. I see it.
>Q. In that tweet he calls you a shitcoin expert?
>A. It appears so. I don't remember reading this tweet. That is the term that was reported as derogatory in this article.
>Q. Says the only thing correct is you know how to spell Bitcoin?
>A. Yes. That's what I am reading here.

Ahahahaha, it's comedy gold

[Anonymous No.19105117]

I don't think Andreas enjoyed being taken in for deposition under oath one fucking bit. He's even denying his own statements about Craig with obvious pilpul and memory lapse lel oldest trick in the book:

>Q. Is this a tweet that you tweeted?
>A. I don't remember. Apparently I would assume so.
>Q. Any reason to believe that you didn't tweet it?
>A. No.
>Q. Take a minute -- read it to yourself and let me know when you're done.
>A. Yes.
>Q. Do you see you are embedding some article or some other contact by information by a Mike V?
>A. I am quote retweeting Mike V.
>Q. Thank you. You're quoting his tweet that says "it appears that CSW". Who is CSW?
>A. I assume that refers to Craig Wright.
>Q. Thank you. Is -- what do you mean by you assume it refers to him?
>A. I don't know what Mike V said in there but CSW is often used as shorthand for, I think it's his name, his initials.
>Q. Yes, his middle initial is S.
>A. I assume that is Craig S. Wright.
(Andreas starting his 'playing dumb' routine)
>Q. "It appears that CSW is in the possession of the @Satoshi account. Both of them don't know how to use commas and they share the same false narrative." You retweeted that?
>A. I quote retweeted that, yes.
>Q. Then you wrote your own message on top of that?
>A. Yes.
>Q. What did you write in that message?
>A. "LOL. Every message Faketoshi writes disproves his attempted fraud. The real Satoshi was capable of forming sentences with punctuation and grammar. We have plenty of samples both formal and conversational. None were sloppy like Faketoshi. Blocking @Satoshi. You should too."
>Q. That was all related to Craig Wright?
>A. That was related to the @Satoshi account which is the account that I'm actually referring to in the final sentence where I say "blocking @Satoshi, you should too"
>Q. So when you state "every message Faketoshi writes disproves his attempted fraud." Who are you referring to?
(Andreas getting increasingly nervous)

[Anonymous No.19105122]

>>19105117
>A. I assume from the context that I am referring to the postings of the @Satoshi account.
>Q. And -- so you're not referring to Craig Wright when you state Faketoshi?
>A. I don't believe I have mentioned Craig Wright in this tweet at all.
>Q. But you're retweeting a tweet from Mike V. who says "it's Craig Wright who is the @Satoshi account" and you're building on his statement; correct?
>A. I'm retweeting a tweet that is referring to the postings posted by the Satoshi account and the fact that those postings don't know how to use commas and share the same false narrative.
>In that tweet Mike V. is speculating that it appears that Craig S. Wright is in the possession of the Satoshi account and I am talking about from context it appears I am talking about the postings of @Satoshi as not being consistent with the real Satoshi who is capable of forming sentences with punctuation and grammar and of which we have plenty of samples both formal and conversational. None were sloppy like Faketoshi and I am blocking - or sorry - next sentence blocking @Satoshi. You should too.
>Q. So I want to make sure I understand. Is it your position that this tweet has nothing to do with Craig Wright?
>A. I don't recall my state of mind at the time when I tweeted this but I do not refer to Craig Wright. I do not mention Craig Wright. an I am -- I do mention however @Satoshi, an account that is posting as Satoshi and in that context I use the term Faketoshi and I talk about the writing style of the @Satoshi tweet.
>Q. So I'm not asking you about your state of mind when you tweeted it and I'm not asking about the Satoshi account. All I want to ask you is -- my only question is, is it your position that this tweet has nothing to do with Craig Wright?

[Anonymous No.19105154]

>>19105122
>MR. ROCHE: Objection, asked and answered.
>THE WITNESS: I don't recall what this tweet is other than what I read right now this tweet was posted a year and two months ago
>Q. So you can't state either way whether or not it was referring to Dr. Craig Wright?
>A. I can state definitively that I do not mention Craig Wright anywhere in my tweet.
(OH NO NO NO WE GOT TOO COCKY BROS)
>Q. That's fine. The jury will be able to read the tweet. My only question is, do you have any recollection as to what it is referring to and your answer is no?
>A. I do not have any recollection of what this is referring to.

Andreas "Backtrack" Antonopolous

[Anonymous No.19105180]

>>19105117
>>19105122
>>19105154
nobody's reading that, pajeet, if you're a recent hire at nChain please lurk more before embarrassing yourself

[Anonymous No.19105193]

>>19103624
he looks like a coomer

[Anonymous No.19105197]

>>19103624
adrenochrome

[Anonymous No.19105205]

>>19104624
>makes a living posting about bitcoin on the internet

holy kek

[Anonymous No.19105229]

>>19105117
dude I wish there was a video of the deposition
I wanna see this ugly cunt sweat while the lawyers grill him

[Anonymous No.19105251]

>>19105180
Kek imagine being this butthurt, go suck certificed Shitcoin Expert Andreas' dick.

Pic related Andreas trying to worm himself out of his own fucking statements

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536/gov.uscourts.flsd.521536.500.6_1.pdf

[Anonymous No.19105306]

>>19105251
I literally talked shit about this faggot 3 posts above you braindead pajeet faggot.
Doesn't change the fact that you're a braindead pajeet faggot and no-one is reading your faketoshi bullshit.
I hate andreas more because he has 2 brain cells and he can manipulate people.
But you're the more pathetic one, shit for brains currynigger.

[Anonymous No.19105313]

>>19105229
If he had a spine, he should just stand by what he said and claim Craig is a fraud in court.

But nooo, he uses the plausible deniability route to say maybe he wasn't acshully talking about Craig after all!! In fact he was talking about nobody in particular! He just said it in a hypothetical, it was all a joke PLEASE PLEASE DONT HURT ME

Fucking top lel

[Anonymous No.19105358]

>>19105306
B U T T H U R T
U
T
T
H
U
R
T

[Anonymous No.19105367]

>>19105251
>>19105313
dude this is great thanks for posting
I already knew anonopolous was a spineless little bitch. but holy shit hes backpedaling so hard in this deposition

[Anonymous No.19105433]

>>19105367
It's so comical. They are all hardasses talking shit on twitter, people like Roger Ver, Vitalik, Mccormac, Andreas and the many other clowns.

But when the chips are down and they have to be accountable for their statements in a court of law with legal penalties, they are scurrying like little rats.

If Craig was a fraud just prove it in court - should be the easiest thing in the world right? With all the blogposts and evidence produced by Mr. Maxwell, it'll be a slamdunk!

[Anonymous No.19105480]

>>19105433
im not a lawyer but couldnt he just say its a matter of opinion that he considers CSW a fraud?`
but hes too much of a pussy to even do that. like holy shit have some integrity and at least stand behind your own bullshit. they really all talk a big game on the internet but fold like lawnchairs when push comes to shove.

[Anonymous No.19105563]

Its a jewish legal system, AA destroyed Faketoshi there though. CWS cocksucker are pathetic.

[Anonymous No.19105629]

>>19105480
>couldnt he just say its a matter of opinion that he considers CSW a fraud?
No, because fraud is a legal term. It's implies that he committed a crime. Just like it's not a matter of opinion if you say so-and-so is a murderer. It's a defamatory statement. So if you call someone a fraud, there has to be victims who were defrauded. So if you state in a court of law that someone committed a crime without any evidence to back it up, you can be charged with perjury.

It's a trap they put themselves in. They all call him a fraud on twitter where there are no consequences, but NOBODY is willing to call him a fraud in court under oath. You of course understand why. Because it's a lie and none of them can prove it.

[Anonymous No.19105648]

>>19105563
Oh the total irony of this statement

[Anonymous No.19106200]

Bump.

Where are all the Andreas fans????

[Anonymous No.19106506]

>>19105629
>but NOBODY is willing to call him a fraud in court under oath
i would do it anons for 100 btc

[Anonymous No.19106519]

>>19106506
or 2,000,000 bchsv i guess one can make an exception if it has larp potential

[Anonymous No.19106541]

>>19106200
Avoiding all faketoshi posters

[Anonymous No.19106563]

>>19106200
i never liked the guy much he is putting in a lot of work to explain bitcoin to everyone that's nice but there is something off putting in him that makes me instantly distrustful. also he is a literal sjw unironically at that.

[Anonymous No.19106565]

>>19103624

He's always looked like that, he's greek. I appreciate him for his insights, not his lack of sleep or excessive back hair.