The Conspiracy Against Satoshi Nakamoto and The World
- SN wrote to two mailing lists before releasing BC. The "Cryptography" list and the "Cypherpunks" list. Why are there zero emails from the latter?
- Hal Finney wrote in his deathbed last email that after initially installing bitcoin in Jan 2009 he forgot all about it until 2010, yet there exists a lot of correspondence between HF and SN during that time. Why? Insiders say this is because HF let SN use a shell account on HF's server and the passwords to HF's email accounts and vice versus.
- Was bitcoin announced Aug 22nd 2008, Oct. 31st 2008 or Jan 3rd 2009 or Jan 11th 2009? Or was discussed in mailing lists before any of those dates?
- How many versions of the bitcoin white paper have you seen? Insiders say the original was in ASCII and the subsequent PDFs had version numbers.
- What happened to the original Sourceforge mailing lists, forums and code repos? Edit: the sourceforge project has suddenly returned!! Not seeing any forums though.
- Are there mysterious deaths surrounding SN?
- Why didn't anyone think to put SN's correspondence or the bitcoin white paper on the blockchain. If SN did, what happened to it?
- Did the Bilderberg Group purchase the "Blockchain" company? What else do you need to know to understand SN may be in danger?
- Re. Craig Wright. SN claimed nothing, but gave away his ideas to the public domain, anonymously. Does that sound like CW?
- If SN was in danger what would it look like? Email/date alterations. Deletions. Coverups. Censorship. Did that happen?
- SN mentioned microtransactions for things as minute as viewing a web page. He mentioned future exchanges would be willing to process "free transactions". He mentioned bitcoin being the end to fiat inflationary bubbles. What happened? Bitcoin was supposed to save humanity but it currently looks like a worst case scenario for income disparity. Sound like Bilderberg to you?
- If SN was in danger; his writings lost, trusted friends compromised or dead, his comms monitored and manipulated, what should be do? What org could he turn to for help?
Ask me questions if you like. I know people who may have answers.
I’ve done plenty of research. Roger Ver and the Chinese miners tried to hijack Bitcoin so they could implement untested and unproven increases to the block size that would have led to a massive centralization of power into the hands of the biggest miners. All because they were too impatient about Bitcoin not being viable for coffee transactions immediately. I was there for all of it. The insane shill campaigns, their purchase of r/btc to further confuse people with their BS claims that BCash was “the real bitcoin because white paper”.
The Core team took the conservative, decentralized approach, and gained consensus with Segwit. Ver couldn’t get any consensus for his unlimited block size, so he hardforked his vision, and we see exactly now how that went.
Later 2 solutions are not a scam. If you think they are, then I’d be interested to hear why.
Dude you are 100% wrong and have bought into the propaganda that Blockstream peddled. Ameurey was the main catalyst. (There were many and VERY FEW OF THEM WERE CHINESE, Jihan Wu is just very recognizable. ) I am a miner and watched it all happen in real time. You 100% have bought in to the propaganda.
Spend some time https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/ and ask questions and look around. Then for giggles spend some time here https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin/ and ask questions and see how long it takes for them to ban you. Censorship alone will tell you where the truth is. You have been tricked. Use the logic and critical thinking that brought you to support Trump and apply those same skills to crypto and you will see through the BS
You assertion that Roger Ver was part of the whole thing PROVES you are misinformed by propaganda. The split happened 4 months BEFORE Ver was even involved. You are seriously misinformed.
Are you trying to gaslight me right now? Are you actually trying to claim that Ver and his Bitcoin Unlimited plans weren't part of the main push to fork away from the main chain?
I was there too bro, watched it all happen. You being a miner means literally nothing in terms of knowledge. I could just as easily say "No YOU fell for the propaganda" like you're trying to claim I did.
Is this an r/bitcoin reference? Otherwise I have no idea what you're referring to. And if it is, that censorship was a DIRECT result of fighting against the non-stop shill campaigns that Ver was paying for there. Then they all cried victim when mods did something about it. Again, I was there for all of it.
My logic and critical thinking skills are doing just fine, and have lead me to the exact conclusion I've laid out. I gave BCH and the "real Satoshi's vision" crowd PLENTY of chances to prove themselves, and each time they failed. I even went down to Mexico for Jeff Berwick's crypto conference to hear them out and give them a fair shake. Not only did they not deliver on any real supporting evidence for their claims, but they would lie on stage directly about BCH's functionality (that was the point that sealed it for me).
Guys like Jeff and Roger and Jihan, and several others in that community just scream scammers to me. So many red flags, and the dishonest tactics they implemented in what they saw as a "war for the name bitcoin" made me never want to support anything with their names near it.
Again, you've provided ZERO information to counter anything I just said, only claimed that I'm "100% wrong and have bought into the propaganda that Blockstream peddled" (which by the way, is the only argument I ever see from Bcashers, and never any actual evidence or legitimate arguments to support why I should support BCH over BTC).
Then you recommend a sub (r/btc) that fucking banned me 2 years ago simply for asking the same questions I asked down in Mexico but never got answers to! And then you try to claim that r/bitcoin is where you'll get banned for asking questions? You get banned for being a BCH shill, which sure it's a bit subjective, but understandable if you were there to see what the shilling campaigns there looked like a few years ago. You can't bullshit someone who knows what their talking about, and it appears to me that you are quite full of bull shit. (Though I appreciate this discussion we're having anyway, and if you want to keep it going I'm still open to hearing why BCH will one day surpass BTC as the "real bitcoin").
But don't give me that "you're 100% wrong" bull shit, because I am not, and I have done the research. More than likely 99% of the people you've talked about this with before.
Edit: Also, not for nothing, but i would be interested to hear your take on how me saying "Roger Ver and the Chinese miners tried to hijack Bitcoin so they could implement untested and unproven increases to the block size that would have led to a massive centralization of power into the hands of the biggest miners."
I'll give you my take: The blockchain was supposed to be able to store arbitrary data. It was supposed to make money from transaction fees. Transaction fees were suppose to be set by the people doing the transaction, and/or the owner of the block/bitcoin. For example: I could take a bitcoin hash and split it up into tiny partitions, then use them for arbitrary commerce, such as streaming a video. I could say you must pay $0.25 to stream this 500MB video, this allowing bitcoin users to host their indy media and pay for the bandwidth, without any Credit Card company, bank, CDN, or gov't being able to interfere. That's why Satoshi was all happy about expanding the size of the comment input box, which took up the majority of the space on the original UI. You could also attach arbitrary files, such as pdfs, through the menu drop-down. Now then, how was that supposed to happen in the beginning when bitcoins themselves were worthless?
Answer: I can take my little piece of a bitcoin and operate my own merkle branch, and replicate it as I see fit, putting whatever the hell I want as data in the chain, for example: deductions from my website user's loaded funds of USD the added to their account using a credit card. Then at the end of the day, I can insert a compressed representation of this arbitrary data structure I created for my specific use case and needs and then insert it into the blockchain permanently. The owner of whatever coin/block I wish to put my data, can for example, charge by the Byte, a transaction fee. He can extract his payment and leave some remaining which get consolidated up the tree in temporal succession. Thus encouraging other nodes to incorporate that arbitrarily sized data. Nodes can be incentivized to grab the data/transaction quickly by being given a larger share of the associated fee residuals. Nodes could even charge requesters to host and transmit old data blocks. The possibilities are endless, but bitcoin seems very narrow in scope for some reason.
I don't know why, but I've seen it said that bitcoin has high minimum transaction fees. $5? $26? If so, why then did some vers of the whitepaper say "There will always be exchanges willing to process transactions for free."? Always?? Satoshi was pretty sure of what was supposed to happen. Something really weird is going on, IMHO.
Side note: I read that the sequentially versioned bitcoin whitepaper used to be included in the program releases. Along with a change log that contained the entire changelog history. Some docs explaining coding style, the versioning definition, and lots of comments. I don't understand how that info could be disappeared from the entire internet's memory.
Can anyone else confirm that the bitcoin sourceforge was non-existent a few months ago both at soueceforge and archive.org? I know, I searched archive.org. Nothing was there. But it's there now, except for the version control repo and the comms in the forums.... So, who is able to alter archive.org? Isn't that a big deal?
I saw different versions of the white paper. Some mention usenet and newspapers. Some mention this weird Byzantine Generals thing. I saw one that talked about "we need a way to send money that cannot be reversed. No matter how good the argument. No matter what.". Can anyone confirm or explain?
It's been getting harder and harder to find these other versions. I also saw a "Bitcoin ebook" that was published to elaborate on the white paper. Can't find the doc anywhere. But I know people with printouts.
I wish there were more people interested in historical preservation. I find it intriguing.
Another example of how you have no idea what you are talking about.
The original block size was 32mb and that was the block limit for bitcoin for a long time (look it up) Satoshi put a 1mb limit in as a temporary cludge because of some griefing issues So FYI something that has already existed isn't untested or unproven.
You are wildly misinformed but it looks like you are not interested in the truth.
You've swallowed all the propaganda. Very surprised you are even a Trump supporter.
Ok let's look at it this way. You're a fellow Trump supporter after all.
Does it bother you at all that you share the same opinions as the Chinese on this matter? Genuine question.
"cludge". love it. ;)