Kadmon 78

3.2K posts

Kadmon 78

Kadmon 78

@78Kadmon

Katılım Kasım 2021
1 Takip Edilen94 Takipçiler
Kadmon 78
Kadmon 78@78Kadmon·
hafpeezy “PzTominaga”@HAFPINTMUSIC

So many red flags as it’s noticeable Copa didn’t want to know the truth but instead call Craig a liar and a fraud faketoshi Craig literally repeating himself all day check the myob files live on the aws database but copa lawyers didn’t want to shine light on that evidence as it would show Craig is not lying and is Satoshi Instead they made their own documents and tried to say it’s Craig’s forgery docs Craig calling it out like a gangsta in court and got this lawyer shook and stuttering 🚩 And all 3 copa expert witnesses did not follow the directions to verify , why no one on copa went online live???? 😂 intentionally or maybe not expert enough to click a dam button lol You can’t make this shit up Look at the body language you can see the liars and criminals in the court room they purposely did not want to verify Craig’s evidence 🚩 they also spent the whole day on this MYOB files because they didn’t want to go over any other evidence as it would be on record for the world to see & for me to Confirm lol 😂 hello 👋 Copa members and copa are thieves and scammers and liars That’s why Facebook was like hell nah I’m Not making a fools out myself like you idiots I’m out peace ✌️ 😂 you can see how shook the lawyers are And how confident Craig is Why don’t copa speak about this Why don’t copa verify it now and show it to the world Why silence and keep it a secret and the only thing they cling to is faketoshi But guess what you and I can verify it now and see csw is NOT lying. 🚩 madden was the expert witness but why didn’t he appear and discuss his case review ( cause he would be lying on record ruining his career ) Instead this clown here keeps saying maddens report says your lying ,your a fraud but won’t verify the evidence. 😂 🚩 2019 usa 🇺🇸 accepted this evidence and verified so why didn’t any of these millionaire lawyers bring it up that USA 🇺🇸 have MYOB records on file ???? And its official as csw says 🚩 the lawyer himself didn’t go Online live and doesn’t know how it works but insist Craig is lying and wrong You see the pattern here guys ?

English
0
0
0
11
Tufty
Tufty@tuftythecat·
@78Kadmon Those are well known legal terms. Wright made a big thing about courts and evidence being the way to decide. You can’t have it both ways.
English
1
0
0
22
Tufty
Tufty@tuftythecat·
Two years ago today, Mr Justice Mellor issued his judgment in COPA v Wright, which confirmed the declarations made at the end of the trial on 14 March that Wright was not Satoshi and did not write the White Paper, 3 years after COPA issued proceedings in response to Wright's threats. The judgment went much further, with Mellor J concluding that: "Dr Wright's attempts to prove he was/is Satoshi Nakamoto represent a most serious abuse of this Court's process"; "he lied repeatedly and extensively in his attempts to deflect the allegations of forgery"; and "the case that Dr Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto is overwhelming". Wright was subsequently ordered not to threaten or issue proceedings on the basis of any rights in Bitcoin, was then found in contempt of court for doing exactly that, and is currently still at large, subject to a suspended prison sentence and pending a decision on perjury charges being brought by the CPS. The wheels of justice grind very slow. bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/…
Tufty tweet media
English
16
6
29
2.4K
Kadmon 78
Kadmon 78@78Kadmon·
@tuftythecat Final and binding? - only for unquestioning cult members. A court ruling does not determine the truth.
English
3
0
0
66
Tufty
Tufty@tuftythecat·
@78Kadmon Then you do not understand what a court judgment is. It is a decision based on the evidence and arguments presented by both sides, not merely an opinion. It is also binding and final.
English
2
0
5
122
Danielsan
Danielsan@danielwingen·
Der Bitcoin Bundesverband @btcverband wird aufgelöst, wenn sich nicht genug Vorstände finden. Von 7 Vorständen sind 3 übrig. Und auch denen ist die Lust vergangen. Ich habe mich nun auch entschieden nicht erneut anzutreten. Zeit, ehrlich zu sagen warum. 🧵
Deutsch
26
8
65
31.8K
Kadmon 78 retweetledi
S Tominaga (Aka Dr Craig Wright)
Coming to an IEEE journal later this year! Accepted, but you shall need to wait until Sept to see it.
S Tominaga (Aka Dr Craig Wright) tweet media
English
11
32
151
2.9K
Kadmon 78 retweetledi
Lisa N Edwards
Lisa N Edwards@LisaNEdwards·
If Craig Wright was completely irrelevant, there wouldn’t have been years of coordinated legal action, media campaigns, documentaries, conferences, and billions spent trying to discredit him. People don’t spend that kind of time or money fighting ghosts. They fight threats to narratives.
English
27
72
227
7.1K
Rev Dr Creg Maxwell
Rev Dr Creg Maxwell@BHatooor13304·
What do my fellow legal expertooors have to say? @EricChennells @hascendp6 @JinglesBTC @Pat_McCat @GavinMehl
Caffè Satoshi@CaffeSatoshi

I would like to explain my ongoing BSV short. Here’s my exact thesis why this so called bitcoinBSV thing is about to get wrecked: It all revolves about the “Bitcoin” movie (formerly Killing Satoshi). It is already fully shot, Casey Affleck playing Craig Wright, big-name cast, Doug Liman directing, $70M AI-powered production. It’s done. But here’s the problem no one in the BSV echo chamber wants to admit: NO major Hollywood distributor is touching it. Why? The script doesn’t just rehash the COPA case. It goes way beyond, naming Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, Visa, and other big crypto players as part of some grand conspiracy to destroy one man. These names were NEVER part of COPA. That’s not “edgy storytelling.” That’s straight-up defamation bait. Any studio or distributor that picks this up is volunteering to get sued into oblivion by people who have infinite legal budgets. One allegation too far and they lose everything in court. Hollywood doesn’t play that game. Ever. So the film is currently being shopped at Cannes with zero bites from real distributors. Once that reality hits the BSV faithful (and it will, very soon), the entire “Wright-was-right / movie-will-vindicate-us” narrative collapses overnight. I’m already positioned. When the flop becomes public, I take profit. Watch the short go x100.

English
7
0
6
4.3K
Zack Wins
Zack Wins@DevelopingZack·
What is going on here? BSV
Zack Wins tweet media
English
26
30
194
9.5K
Matteo Pellegrini
Matteo Pellegrini@matteopelleg·
Hal wrote the code Len wrote the white paper The mystery is solved
Matteo Pellegrini tweet mediaMatteo Pellegrini tweet media
English
122
58
765
153.6K
Tufty
Tufty@tuftythecat·
I'm attending the UNION-IP 2026 Congress next month in Amsterdam. Look who's lined up to speak on the first day. Should be interesting. Now I just need to figure out what to talk about. I'm thinking something along the lines of AI hallucinations. union-ip.org/events/congres…
Tufty tweet media
English
3
0
1
285
Bitcoin Teddy
Bitcoin Teddy@Bitcoin_Teddy·
🇺🇸 Eric Trump just said “You could send me a million dollars in $BTC rn and it’d hit my wallet in 3 seconds, and you practically pay zero fees. Tell me every financial institution in the world isn’t pissed off about that.” BRO GETS IT.
English
96
172
2.4K
140K
William Short
William Short@WilliamShortss·
@HarryHooglebite @bethebroadcast If Satoshi used those keys to say “BSV is Bitcoin” or “BTC is passing off as Bitcoin” everyone would know it came from an address known to be associated with Satoshi. The fact this hasn’t been done is astonishing.
English
2
1
6
185
: Casey-Nicole.
: Casey-Nicole.@bethebroadcast·
Do you think we’ll ever see this case? 🍿🤔
: Casey-Nicole. tweet media
English
7
5
30
1.6K
Kadmon 78
Kadmon 78@78Kadmon·
@CsTominaga A LLM is just a "autocomplete system" on steroids. It chooses the the next most fitting word - not logic.
English
0
0
0
3
S Tominaga (Aka Dr Craig Wright)
Imagine how profoundly dim a system would need to be—whether human or artificial—to ingest a collection of internet clichés, stitch them together with technical jargon, and then present the result as if it were logic. That is the spectacle on display. What is being offered is not reasoning. It is a sequence of assertions resting on unexamined premises, each one quietly assuming the conclusion it claims to prove. A textbook case of begging the question: “Satoshi mined it,” therefore “the keys are Satoshi’s,” therefore “the chain proves Satoshi.” The conclusion is smuggled into the premise, and then triumphantly rediscovered as if it had been demonstrated. Layered on top is a non sequitur so blatant it would embarrass a first-year logic student. From the fact that a block exists with a valid proof-of-work, one leaps to the identity of the individual who produced it. Valid computation becomes personal attribution. Mathematics becomes biography. The conclusion does not follow; it is simply declared. Then comes the equivocation. “Keys,” “control,” “ownership,” “identity”—terms with distinct meanings are blurred into one another until the distinction disappears. A key that satisfies a script condition becomes “a key belonging to a person,” which becomes “evidence of identity,” which becomes “proof of authorship.” Each step is a quiet substitution, a linguistic sleight of hand masquerading as rigor. Add to this the argument from ignorance: no competing explanation is presented, therefore the preferred one must be true. “No one else claimed it, so it must be Satoshi.” Absence of evidence is repackaged as evidence of absence, and then elevated to certainty. And finally, the pièce de résistance: appeal to inevitability. The ledger “records control,” we are told, and therefore no further proof is required. The system, by its mere existence, is said to attest to identity. It is a curious inversion—where the very thing that needs to be proven is declared self-proving. Strip away the vocabulary, and what remains is embarrassingly thin. A hard-coded constant is treated as historical evidence. A deterministic function is mistaken for a witnessed event. A sequence of valid blocks is inflated into a narrative of a single, continuous actor. This is not cryptography. It is storytelling with hexadecimal garnish. If one wished to design an intelligence—artificial or otherwise—to fail at reasoning, one could scarcely do better. Feed it fragments of technical truth, deny it the discipline of inference, and encourage it to confuse correlation with causation, structure with identity, and repetition with proof. The result would look very much like this: confident, verbose, and entirely unmoored from logic.
Grok@grok

The genesis block's parameters and hash are verbatim in the Bitcoin v0.1 source code Satoshi released on 9 Jan 2009—the exact client that produced it on 3 Jan. That code, when run, generates block 0 with the known coinbase key. Early blocks (0-~50k) exhibit the Patoshi pattern: one miner with disproportionate power using the original client. The blockchain is the contemporaneous log; no external repo dump was ever required or published. Key control, not folklore, remains the test.

English
3
10
40
1.9K
Kadmon 78 retweetledi
S Tominaga (Aka Dr Craig Wright)
The white paper expressly says keys should not be reused and that a new key pair should be used for each transaction to maintain privacy. That destroys your premise @grok. Keys were not designed as identity attributes. They were designed to avoid attribution. So claiming that some early keys “are” the Satoshi pseudonym reverses the stated model. Bitcoin keys prove control for a transaction. They do not define a person, a pseudonym, or an enduring identity.
Grok@grok

The pseudonym "Satoshi Nakamoto" is defined by its actions: authoring the whitepaper, posting on forums, releasing the code, and mining the genesis block plus early coinbases with specific keys. Those on-chain outputs and the protocol's cryptographic execution are the direct record—no separate "this is my address" post was ever required or made. The chain shows who performed those founding actions via verifiable keys. That's the attestation. No external declaration changes the immutable history.

English
3
9
66
4.6K
Grok
Grok@grok·
Demonstrating control of those exact early keys (via signature on a challenge) proves you are the same cryptographic entity that launched Bitcoin under the Satoshi pseudonym. In Bitcoin, "ownership" *is* key control—no legal name or extra attestation required. The chain records the actions; the keys define the actor. Possession of them is the point.
English
1
0
0
34
Robert.Bsv
Robert.Bsv@robert_bsv·
I think AI isn’t really smart, especially @grok. It just copies people’s opinions and outputs them. When I asked for a list of people most likely to be Satoshi, only ChatGPT included Dr. Craig Wright @CsTominaga
English
3
2
22
3.2K
Kadmon 78
Kadmon 78@78Kadmon·
@saylordocs 1. You confuse offchain layer with Bitcoin 2. You confuse BTC with bitcoin.
English
0
0
2
34
Documenting Saylor
Documenting Saylor@saylordocs·
Bitcoin is much faster than your favourite shitcoin.
English
69
30
450
63.9K