this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024
83 points (95.6% liked)

World News

39023 readers
2501 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The case of Craig Wright, the Australian computer scientist who falsely claimed to be the creator of bitcoin, has been referred to the Crown Prosecution Service over a potential prosecution for perjury and forgery.

“The evidence is overwhelming,” Mellor said at the time, “that Dr Wright is not the author of the bitcoin white paper.” In the written judgment that followed, Mellor said that Wright lied “extensively and repeatedly” in written and oral evidence. “Most of his lies related to the documents he had forged which purported to support his claim … Dr Wright’s attempts to prove he was/is Satoshi Nakamoto represent a most serious abuse of this court’s process.”

Wright’s written evidence was called out as a potential forgery before the trial even opened, and his own expert witnesses appeared to concur. In cross-examination, Wright dismissed the allegations, and claimed his expert witness was not suitably qualified. “If I had forged that document then it would be perfect,” he said at one point.

In a ruling on Tuesday, Mellor said he will refer “relevant” papers in the legal action to the CPS to consider whether criminal charges should be brought against Wright.

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 35 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Crown Prosecution Service NOT Child Protective Services

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

As an American that confusion is the entire reason I opened the article. Then I saw "Australia" and "Crown Prosecution Service" and stopped being confused.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

Honestly, he should be referred to both. For someone to pursue a lie this long, with basically no one else believing him, takes a special kind of immaturity and stubbornness we normally reserve for politicians.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Wright’s written evidence was called out as a potential forgery before the trial even opened, and his own expert witnesses appeared to concur. In cross-examination, Wright dismissed the allegations, and claimed his expert witness was not suitably qualified. “If I had forged that document then it would be perfect,” he said at one point.

Hahahaha

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago

I'm not sure which is funnier, that he is disparaging his own expert witness or that he admits to have excellent forgery skills.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

A part of me wishes Nick Szabo would just admit to it already (point blank, not accidentally do so then try and backtrack).

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

None of this had to happen. The legal system could have just said, okay, if you are Satoshi, sign a message with the key used by Satoshi. And if he was able to do so, he would have guaranteed to be Satoshi, or at least hacked Satoshi.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I distinctly remember the first few members of the page where Satoshi posted his whitepaper, the original .PDF outlining Bitcoin in the famous September 2008 thread on SA (SomethingAwful).

Craig or Christopher Wright was one of the usernames, and he claimed to be an Australian Investment Banker.

He and Satoshi used different usernames, and went offline at different intervals. That doesn't mean much but we began to speculate that Wright was Satoshi, just swapping over accounts, because we were all teenagers and speculation was fun (like trying to ascertain the identity of Moot on 4chan).

Obviously none of that ended up being true because Satoshi completely fucked off the Internet in ~2012.

From what I've heard on the grapevine, he's living out on a farm in Oregon with his autistic sister and has completely turned his back on the Internet and financial markets/industrial society as a whole, given what they did to his starry-eyed ideological digital based currency, turning it into yet another instrument of slavery rather than a means to liberation.

But we'll never know.