You do not own your address. You own the tokens that are held in an address. Bitcoin firewalls identity that it does not remove the need for identity. You cannot sign anonymously. There is no such thing. Pseudonymous signatures can be linked to a non-public identity. Identity cannot be transferred. There is no such thing as the ability to transfer identity. It is not a technical problem, it doesn’t exist. It is not something that needs to be solved, it is a definitional condition. You cannot sell or transfer identity.

This is where Antonopoulos and others went wrong on the Silk Road case. Making up the Dread Pirate Roberts defence was asinine. If multiple people use the same key, this does not change identity but rather links each individual vicariously. You don’t remove liability cover add extra people to the liability. In criminal law, where multiple people are involved in a crime, all of those people are guilty.

There have been provisions for many years that mean that in certain crimes, every single individual that has anything to do with the crime is equally guilty.

Consequently, you do not remove guilt by saying you bought the key. You are just as guilty if you did that. If you receive someone else’s key, and you do this willingly, you are willingly attaching yourself to all of the liability that goes with that key. You cannot assume identity but you can take other people’s guilt and share it. This does not mean that another person would get off but rather makes both people equally guilty. Criminal prosecution is not a zero-sum game. If two individuals are involved the total length of prison time just doubles.

When we are talking about small transactions, anything under £1000 or so, then the levels of protections and controls can remain limited. There are different provisions for cash then there are four large transactions. This does not change because you’re using bitcoin.

These are the people who are opposed to recovery of BTC

Arrest =/= charged =/= conviction

CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614421233352100?thread_ts=1614421233.352100&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2477

CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614442861424100?thread_ts=1614442861.424100&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2479

1/2
It really does not matter whether you think bitcoin should be different or not. I did not invent a crypto currency but rather invented a digital cash system that works on the public dissemination of information. That comes with a whole lot of legal obligations. The fact that you do not like that legal obligations come with money is not relevant here.

I am not stopping you from going out there and trying to create a working crypto currency. I have never stopped anyone from doing that. What you cannot do is run around trying to break bitcoin to try and make your boondoggle project that will never work on top of the Blockchain because blockchains are secured not by cryptography but by public information.

In 2010 I did not invite people to come out there and create drug markets.

I tried to give people opportunities to create all types of commerce and exchange and EDI with a focus on the easy low hanging fruit of web-based micro-payments, something that was simple that the time because advertising was in its nascent stage and could have easily been overtaken by digital currency payments

There will not be institutional investment, real institutional investment while there is no methodology that is available to recover stolen or otherwise lost assets from these institutional investors.

It does not matter how many people on discord or telegram tell you otherwise. The law applies to all of these organisations and in fact, following Sarbanes Oxley there are criminal penalties that apply to executives who try and do otherwise

Everybody keeps talking about how all these big organisations are going to start using bitcoin.

Not the scammy MS that we are seeing, that people are calling institutional investors but real institutional investment

Before that is legally available, options for recovery need to be available

No institutional investor who has a real track record and it has not had fraud charges against them in the past will invest in this or build on this or create on this when if something goes wrong the CEO of the company goes to prison which is exactly the state that bitcoin is in without recovery

Have people thought about that one?

When you're pitching this to a major bank or hedge fund or merchant financing facility or Fortune 500 company and the Treasury thereof have you considered that telling the CEO that investing in bitcoin without a recovery mechanism means that the level of risk is excessive and that legally that if the coins are lost that CEO will be facing criminal prosecution under a number of financial acts within the US

My perspective is, probably not

I tried to in 2013

The constant red flag on the project team reports every week was major changes on the code that led to re-factoring the application over and over and an inability to launch because of Core's incessant changes to the protocol that was meant to be set

add to that all of the lies

every myth that is being spread about bitcoin being encrypted, that it is censorship resistant, all of these things are the lies that kill this off

banking, no

Exchange yes

You don't need the alert key, there are better ways of doing this.

banks don't care

you're missing the point, you have to set something up that is better than a bank before a bank will want to compete

way better ways

I am a former academic who taught C++ and C# and not a developer that needs to work in doing this for commercial applications

there is a difference

Yes, I have a Sans Institute coding award for secure coding but that's not the same as writing code that scales well and is really well factored

and banks will take the sawn when they see value, when it is economically viable for them

this is why a spent a lot of money trying to get core banking software and to understand it in the past

It needs to be developed

CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614442861424100?thread_ts=1614442861.424100&cid=C5131HKFX
1/2
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2479

2/2
And, before this will ever be developed and used, banks need to know the same as any institutional investor would want to know which is can I recover

no recovery, no application

The importance of the alert key is to let the network know very quickly that something is wrong.

Equally fast, a false alert can be reversed or disputed

the cost of doing a recovery is going to never be small.

In the short term I cannot and I emphasise cannot see any recovery claim costing less than £50,000

Now, take that into account

proceeds of crime orders will be different and could be collated but, once some of the money has been used in commerce it will be protected from being grabbed and redistributed

as far as banks are concerned the custodial services will be created so that it is unlikely that any bank would ever have less than £50,000 in an account.

Remember, banks do not hold your money

The nature of banking is that you contract with them and give them your money for some other amount such as interest

you do not have money in a bank
you have a debt that the bank owes you

this is the same as bitcoin exchanges right now

you do not own the bitcoin in an exchange

Ever
you own a debt that the exchange has to repay

Ah
now you are talking about something called a depository

The Florentine Medicis would hold gold and issue deposit notes and this is analogous to what you're discussing

my wife's father was an executive at a major bank in Singapore, but the problem is the banks in the period between the 50s and the 70s are not the same thing as they are now

they have moved away from banking and customer service to quick returns in the financial market

banking really is not the problem

The problem is that most banks aren't banking

the small amounts will end up with proceeds of crime is orders. It won't recover everything, likely $0.60 on the dollar but this will be enough to dis-incentivise most crime

Right now, laundering money results in as little as 20% of the proceeds of crime

if you can take away more than that you make it uneconomical

exactly, thanks used to work in partnership with small businesses and firms to grow them

that is the model we need to get back to

but, this idea of bonuses based on short-term profit that often leads to long-term debt has developed since the 1980s

Banks DO NOT hold your money

They pool it

You own a debt

A bank cannot exist with under 50k accounts and deposits

The bank does not care if it is 5usd, you are not holding, they pool

CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614442861424100?thread_ts=1614442861.424100&cid=C5131HKFX
2/2
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2479

CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614448358445100?thread_ts=1614448358.445100&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2482

1/2
Logic is directly associated with analysing truth rationally and coming to a valid answer. Bitcoin is a system based on a predicate. A predicate is a means of constructing a valid proof but to do so requires that each of the inputs also happen to be defined in a way that allows you to construct a proof.

When it comes to bitcoin, it is essential in analysing the system to determine all of the factors behind it.

Bitcoin is not encrypted.

This is an important aspect to note in that encrypted files mean that without a key there is no possibility of recovering the unencrypted information. If you lose the key to an encrypted file, if that key is of adequate length such as 256 bits, the chances of recovery are exceedingly slim and you should give up before beginning.

This point is relevant because had bitcoin been a cryptocurrency that was based on encrypted information, the recovery of data without a key would not be only infeasible but close to impossible. It would not matter if there was a court order. If the court orders information to be decrypted without a key, that leaves an impossible scenario that cannot be met.

The purpose of a system such as lightning is to create a system that does not maintain records. You add a trusted third-party in the form of watchtowers to monitor the transactions that act commercially while illegally deleting financial information.

You see, when you define the terms in a way that a judge understands it becomes much simpler.

So, the defence against changing bitcoin would be that it’s a distributed system and its encrypted. However, anybody who is knowledgeable who runs such a defence would be committing perjury. Perjury is a serious crime. Bearing false testimony and false witness in court as a developer would have to do in order to state that bitcoin is encrypted would lead to a prison sentence if it was demonstrated that they were not being honest.

Luckily, it is very simple to demonstrate that bitcoin is not encrypted by simply providing access to a block Explorer and demonstrating that there are no keys involved at any point. Further, a forensic analysis would demonstrate how all the information within the Blockchain can be extracted using any text and hex viewing tool.

Perjury is an indictable offence in the UK.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/1-2/6

The enactment and commission of such a lie in stating that bitcoin is encrypted by a person who is knowledgeable outside of court and on a sworn testimony is known as a false statement under oath outside of a judicial setting leads to a prison sentence of up to 7 years, it is an indictable offence.

However, where the testimony is delivered in a judicial scenario under oath, this is known as perverting the course of justice.

I would definitely not recommend that any developer stated that bitcoin was encrypted and hence outside the reach of judicial review.

In the UK, the indictable offence of perverting the course of justice is considered incredibly seriously.

When the scenario overlaps and perverting the course of justice and perjury link such that a witness or expert witness in legal proceedings knowingly makes a false statement that is designed to affect the outcome of the case, the sentencing guidelines allow for the discretion of the judge with seven years penal sentencing and other criminal provisions.

The same would apply would a developer state that the GitHub repository is a community management project that is not controlled by a small number of developers. Developers using these tools know very well that a limited number of individuals control access to them and control access to loading the new software.

CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614448358445100?thread_ts=1614448358.445100&cid=C5131HKFX
1/2
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2482

2/2
The logical conclusion in all of this is to very simply not attempt to prevent justice because in the coming cases there will be no way that all the attempted provisions of justice will not be brought to light. We will be ensuring that forensic testimony from respected individuals demonstrates the nature of what I’ve been explaining incredibly clearly. Moreover, the simple fact that we can implement controls of this nature overrides any argument saying that you can’t.

Miners are not issuing but rather act under a unilateral contract. You cannot enforce the rules against a miner unless they are acting in breach of contract. To be in breach of contract, they have to violate the conditions set by the fiduciary managing the network which in this case happens to be the development group.

If miners do not wish to follow the rules, they are not bound because it is a unilateral contract. They have the option to simply stop mining.

Any exchange that decided to list such a fork would also be in contempt of court and subject to freezing orders that would cut them off from all banking, limit them from using AWS, Google, cloud services, DNS, Internet protocol routing…

You get the gist

You see, people seem to think that they can simply avoid all of this but there are interesting avenues that come with contempt of court even globally. Not only is DNS available as an option to take against a rogue miner or exchange, but additionally filters could be imposed in BGP routing tables.

Effectively, the node or exchange seeking to breach court orders would be completely shut off from the Internet. Those who have been involved in Internet gambling understand just how effectively this can work. It costs money to do but then, I have considered all of that in my actions.

So @Rob the simple answer is that miners enforce rules but they don't create them. The requirement to implement those rules would come to a developer group following a court order.

CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614448358445100?thread_ts=1614448358.445100&cid=C5131HKFX
2/2
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2482

CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614431519387900?thread_ts=1614431519.387900&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2486

What people in the BTC world do not understand or try hide is that identity will become part of bitcoin and the overall solution

When this happens, there will be a rush to get out because there is a lot of money that has not pay tax and that has not been legally transferred

Still less than Dot com

Global Dot Com was 4 T USD

In todays money - 7T

which will never exist

Nothing is reversed, it can be returned.the process is not quick and it is not cheap

A freezing order needs to 1st be enacted and then the ownership is disputed.

In the case of my wife and her suit against UFX but she won, the freezing order was issued in 2017. The order to have her money paid was issued only last year.

So this is not a means of taking away cash. What it does mean is that any large amount transacted needs to be done with full AML we see under existing monetary handling laws and with all of the requirements to know your customer and to record all of these details

if you record all the details and if you buy legitimately for value you have no issue

my watch is rated to 1000 m not that I would ever survive that far

but, everything is economic and you're taking a scuba-diving query where you haven't said how deep are you going and implying that you must spend an infinite amount which is utterly in error

In time, it will be likely that different jurisdictions will put different restrictions on serving information

Everything comes down to a cost benefit analysis of some sort

If you have an asset worth $1000 it is no good spending $1 million to secure it

CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614431519387900?thread_ts=1614431519.387900&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2486

CSW
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2488

1/3
How were the 21m Bitcoin actually created, were they in an address or was there some kind of a contract that enabled miners to distribute them? How did the circulation start?

You are confusion the tokens and the coins

The tokens always existed - miner distribute these

Miners DO NOT control Bitcoin

They are acting to enforce the existing rules

There is a virtual pile - these are put into envelopes and given to the miner

In the current code - no. The issue is not specified that way - there are a set number of coin.

Coins are just an envelope to place the tokens into

a satoshi is a token

a coin consists of tokens

in the real world coin consists of atoms it's not so hard

token is Satoshi

each token is individual

bitcoin is created in a virtual envelope or coin

tokens are contained in the coins or envelopes

a token is fungible bitcoin is not

a token is just an integer number

this is why there are no half Satoshi's and there can never be fractional Satoshi

it does if you consider the law of money

a coin or a note contains a certain number of things it doesn't go by weight

think of it like a negotiable instrument

the way the notes came about in history was that they gained a string of signatures

every person who accepted the node signed it

just because money doesn't work this way now and we don't see any of the workings of how many functions doesn't mean that it's not how it is

you can't accept it as a credit card credit cards have nothing at all to do with money they are a credit system

you don't sign a string of credit card receipts,

you have to think of this as a cheque that is being distributed from person to person and never going back to the bank

if you read the history of money, you could reissue different notes as long as you attached the history of the prior note

again, you are not looking into the history of money and how money works

you could give a cheque to 2 different people in the past as a negotiable instrument that was split-level in this, it could be rejoined and different notes could follow as long as there was a history and a ledger of all of the transactions

bitcoin is completely utterly exactly analogous to a negotiable instrument I keep pointing out for people to read books like Mann on money and not the trash that people keep reading that has nothing to do with reality

Yapp stones wwere never money the way that the false story makes out

and if you don't read valid sources you get crud

I specified this above I said the token is fungible

it does not matter which grain of rice you get from a pile of rice

it does not matter which individual Satoshii you get from a pile of Satoshi

the coin is not fungible

just the same way that a negotiable instrument is not completely fungible

the same way a banknote is not fungible

each individual banknote has a completely separate and utterly different serial number that is never repeated

the term bitcoin is completely irrelevant it has nothing to do with bitcoin other then as a marker for a number of Satoshi it is not how many Satoshi are issued or anything to do with a coin it is like a kilogram is 1000 g

a bitcoin does not exist, a Satoshi does

a kilogram doesn't really exist either

when I released bitcoin, every single token was issued

there are just under 21 million times 10 to the eighth

it is not quite exact but it doesn't need to be

miners are rewarded and that is the formation of the distribbuted coin

a coin is not fungible

every coin is not equal

every coin is not directly interchangeable

and yes, a bar of gold versus atoms of gold

you don't care which atom you have

in the case of small coins and nobody cares anymore because it's not worth caring

once, things were different the value of money has changed

a coin is every single UTXO

I UTXO is the coin

the address is just an arbitrary thing that people keep misusing

CSW
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX
1/3
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2488

2/3
every single address should be used only once

there are individual UTXO's

the whole address thing is a myth

it's the same as atoms being fungible and rice being fungible but a particular pot of rice not being fungible

it is how monetary law has worked for nearly 3000 years

all of this goes back to the Roman Empire

again, read something such as Mann on Money that provides a proper background

you need to understand what fungible even means which I doubt anyone here who has not studied postgraduate law does

it is not the typical term you hear people use on Twitter

fungible has a very specific use and meaning in law

it does not mean the typical common use that you see and hear every day

we are not talking about economic theory and common use of fungibility of goods

we are talking about monetary law

fungibility has to do with the law of comixtico

it is analogous to taking grains of rice or wheat of the same quality and specification and then comparing what somebody is owed from that

if the rice grains are mixed, you do not separate the original grains out but rather return the volume or weight originally maintained

the consequence is you do not care about the individual tokens but you care about the amount of tokens

bitcoin tokens that are under a freezing order can be replaced after a court makes an order reallocating those addresses and hence the tokens go back into circulation exactly as they were

the ability to hide money is the reason that the hundreds of attempts to make Cryptocurrencies have failed

bitcoin is not widely decentralised as people make out and that was never a goal

there are proof of work distributed Cryptocurrencies from twenty years ago

I pointed this out many times bitcoin is not the first

bitcoin is the first that is traceable and that's why it will survive

it is the traceability of bitcoin, the ability for law enforcement to interact with bitcoin that is the only reason that it will be here in the future

if you cannot interact with the existing financial system, your system is completely worthless

bitcoin does not replace central banks
it never will
bitcoin does not replace banking
it never will
bitcoin does not stop fractional reserve banking
it cannot

central banks existed on a gold standard

central banks existed on every standard

it does not matter what you have as cash, cash and banking are not the same things they are not related they do not overlap they are completely separate areas of the existing economy

banking does not replace cash and cash does not replace banking

no cash system will ever replace banking nor can any cash system ever replace banking because it is like saying will leaves replace tyres

they are not the same thing

Cash and banking are different

you cannot make a system that will replace central banks because it is a different problem and that is a political issue has nothing and I mean absolutely positively 1 million% nothing to do with technology

it is a political issue

you cannot solve political issues with technology

you cannot attempt to succeed

because there is nothing to fix

yes, an open ledger may help fight corruption but again it will be more than just bitcoin it will require a complete infrastructure of which bitcoin will be 1% of 1% of 1% of 1% of 1% of 1% of 1% of 1%.......

of the system

and that is being generous

political systems require political solutions

that is exactly the point of bitcoin

it is not too much to ask it is what bitcoin can deliver

and a level that no other system could ever attempt to do

central banks don't transmit in cash

you don't seem to understand that bitcoin can be taken down in five minutes any time the American government wants to take it down

bitcoin is billions of times more fragile than any of the Cryptocurrencies existed twenty years ago

any system that does not follow the law will just be stopped

CSW
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX
2/3
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2488

3/3
it will not happen over an extended period it will happen in less then five minutes

you will wake up and it will be gone if it is not following the law

every other so-called Cryptocurrency will just vanish overnight in the future

not slowly

instantly

this has happened before

the entire industry today globally is not even 10% of what crashed twenty years ago

and nobody remembers or at least practically nobody

bitcoin does not survive wars. It needs the Internet

it needs the global Internet

International war not even nuclear war means bitcoin is dead

it has nothing to do with war or the end of society all that crap is just crap society is not ending it is not collapsing it is not failing it is not getting worse it is getting better

we are the best economically that has ever been and this is with the pandemic

we have the best political systems ever and this is with all the crap

we have the best everything

this crap about the world ending in a waste of your brainpower get over it

the world is not ending

it will if people don't protect the things of value which is the foundation of Western society

bitcoin is economically efficient

that is all that needs to be

business won't give a flying fuck about any of the so-called things that people say is the value of crypto

business cares about profit

businesses don't even care about honesty unless it makes them profit

that requires politics

the remaining bitcoin are contracted against the system but technically the issuer owns them and the creator of bitcoin is me. The distinction is that they are contracted and if miners do their job they have a contractual right to them

bitcoin is not a system designed for payments after the collapse, if there is a collapse, there won't be bitcoin

that's not an issue however,

stop planning for a collapse

and no the Ponzi won't survive.

to see a system as valuable you should not be looking at the world collapsing

tokens remain tokens and is not a question of fungibility

SegWit removes the ability to act within the legislative requirements

Satoshi's are fungible
full stop

money-laundering rules cover funding

anti-money laundering law covers funding

it does not matter whether it is money or not, it requires certain controls are in place if you can fund a transaction

Tokens date to the nineteen sixties

Cryptocurrency existed in the nineteen eighties and nineteen nineties

the law covers funding

it has no relevance whether it is Cryptocurrency or not

SegWit doesn't remove identity, identity is firewalled from bitcoin already

you need to maintain records

the methodology is that bitcoin has in any way changed money and funding, it hasn't

funding is any payment using any method in any way of any amount

funding is any transaction or any goods or any services or any exchange

money-laundering rules and the requirement to keep records covers funding not money

if you funded using rocks it is covered

neither do bitcoin transactions unless you have identity

using easy DSA does not make a signature

a signature is an action by a person agreeing to be bound

a digital signature does not just happen because you have a key

legally speaking, there is no difference between honestly transacting in BTC or rocks or BSV or anything

the issue is not whether it is legal it is whether you have the records and can maintain them over time.

CSW
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX
3/3
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2488

CSW
Nov 26, 2019
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1574763022166200?thread_ts=1574763022.166200&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2492

SeAL
eMule credit
KaZaA Token
CNDs
KARMA
Bucking FRs
Micropay
PPay
Grid Acc
Stamps
MicroMint
Payword
Bread pudding
Swift (file store not banking system)
Mojo Nation
MNet
MMAPPS
EP
PlanetLab
Pastry
MobiTip
eCash
Digicash
Shark
Triple
eMule credit
Ellacoya
Globus
Mondex

This is only a small introduction and I've missed out on many peer-to-peer currency systems. All of these existed in the 90s. Every one of them was dead by 2004. Everything being created in league distributed networks or permissioned networks mirrors the work done in these networks.

Basically, everything we're seeing as an alternative to bitcoin has been done. It's been tried, and its failed. My list of Cryptocurrencies from the 90s exceeds 200 so far. Every single time, they worked on closed permissioned systems and isolated tokens. There are proof work systems. There are token systems. Everything was seeing in bitcoin and its copies except the economic system I created.

The one thing that makes bitcoin different is that it is a public blockchain.

All these central-bank systems are regurgitating failed systems from the 1990s and they're not even considering why they failed. I don't think they even know they existed. Large banks tried these. Literally, the market capitalisation for all these Cryptocurrencies in the 90s exceeded $1 trillion in 2001 before the crash. That is larger than we are currently at and were ignoring inflation on this calculation. And it wasn't the same pump either. There was much more investment back then and many more systems.

All of these have been tried. All of them failed. The single system that has succeeded and delivered has been mine.

1 trillion USD.
that was the 2001 market cap

Why would 100s of failures do anything to change their opposition

Besides
Bitcoin is not a crypto currency

That is a myth

Central Banks are not answerable to the public.

CBs don't deal in cash

Bitcoin can be a foundation to create a better ledger, but that is all for a CB

Cash is a function outside of the Central Bank

CBs DON'T issue cash.

That is the mint

CBs issue bonds

In amounts that exceed millions as a base

CBs are responding to pressure based on a lie, that Bitcoin can become a global base money for every thing

They issue a debt

A CB will not be doing this, a digital mint could.

As I have noted the value of bitcoin is as a commodity.

Commodities gain value when they are used and have a purpose. Although wheat will go up in price due to speculation, this also drives others to release excess stock. But that said, the purpose of which is not to hoard but to be used as wheat

the purpose of bitcoin is to be used as a token ledger system

the more it is used, the more underlying value it obtains

I'm trying to tell you that digital cash is indeed possible but it will not be managed by the central bank unless the central bank starts a completely new role

Cash does not impact a CB operation at all

Banks are not cash

CBs operated on Gold - gold cannot be copied

This is been something I have been trying to get people to understand.

Gold has been used as the ledger for a long time but that is not as cash but rather a unit of measurement.

the bank has to eventually buy gold to repay debt

But something important to note here is that bitcoin needs to be used.

it doesn't work is just the HODL asset long-term

So, if you think that it's just volts of gold then you have a problem with how bitcoin will be enabled and valuable

Bitcoin cannot just act as a reserve asset between government banks - those believing this failed to understand how bitcoin and how banks both work.

The error has always been people thinking that gold has been primary money. It hasn't

The majority of the money has never been golden history - here in England, the majority of money was issued as small lead tokens for a long time.

CSW
Nov 26, 2019
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1574763022166200?thread_ts=1574763022.166200&cid=C5131HKFX
1/2
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2492

2/2
gold was only ever a settlement coin between large debt holders. The majority of people never saw gold in their life in the past

even when gold was the base, silver was generally that which was used for large denominations for normal people

if bitcoin becomes gold...

Bitcoin dies

bitcoin requires high-volume exchanges and gold doesn't do high-volume exchanges, it never has

bitcoin has never been designed to be digital gold

the fees increase more than gold

and, with the halving built-in, if bitcoin does not scale and I mean massively scale, bitcoin dies

to work, bitcoin needs to be digital copper

it replaces pennies

You need to check your premises and look at any argument that is being given to you to ensure that you are logically and rationally sound and what you say.

When it comes to the topic of individuals sitting there saying how Cryptocurrency is there to help the people, the first part of the premises that the people were never helped by gold but rather were helped by small tokenised value

the average person throughout history never traded in gold at any point in their life

most people traded at most even in large amounts in silver

digital gold helps criminals and those with a lot of money if anyone

the companies I set up such as Denariuz were formed with that name because that is the name for silver coins not gold

the denarius represented 10 "as" or assarius

depending on when these were issued in history, these were represented by 272, 327, or 341 grams, bronze copper or mixed coins

these replaced ingots of copper

a small lead token was rather valueless

the tokenised value that it represented was what mattered

buying a beer at a pub 600 years ago involved tokenised forms of money including small pieces of pressed lead that most individuals that you see in the movies, the elite would never touch

similarly, the Royal family in England never touches money

the majority of people in England do

The same applied in China

Chinese money was considered as the lowest the nomination being a string of cash

In this, a large number of coins were strong together

Each of those points still had value but they were not considered valuable by the government unless they were strong together in hundreds

eCash and all the others sought anonymity

the government stepped in, the next day they were gone

by the next day, I mean literally not figuratively literally the next day they were gone

bitcoin is no different

This is a distributed system it has nothing to do with political decentralisation all the people all running things in a socialist collective or some BS

This is economically distributed

If one miner goes bankrupt the system doesn't fail

This should be really simple.

Every other system failed because a single company went bankrupt.

In bitcoin, if a miner or some other entity goes bankrupt the entire system does not fail.

That is the only point the sole point the only reason for decentralisation

and section 5 refers to commercial systems

nodes are not average people

SPV is used to send the block header but only nodes need require sending to all other nodes and nodes are big commercial entities

It is very simple, the centrally controlled nature had nothing to do with any of the political BS right now.

it is not about collectivist everyone runs a node BS

It is not about how many nodes people have out there

Three would be fine

Just three nodes existing in the world is fine

Just three companies running all of bitcoin is fine

The entire point is that if one company goes bankrupt, there is someone to replace them.

The point being made of centrally controlled nature is that where a single company fails the entire system fails.

That's it

CSW
Nov 26, 2019
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1574763022166200?thread_ts=1574763022.166200&cid=C5131HKFX
2/2
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2492

SuperAsset Contracts: A Scalable Layer 1 Account Contract and Token Design Using The Bitcoin UTXO Model
Attila
jun 2, 2021

https://attilaaf.medium.com/superasset-contracts-a-scalable-layer-1-account-contract-and-token-design-using-the-bitcoin-utxo-e4d933478d7a

CSW
Jun 2, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1622614463456200?thread_ts=1622614463.456200&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2496

Jun 2, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1622620990460200?thread_ts=1622620990.460200&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2497

CSW
Jun 2, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1622632179470300?thread_ts=1622632179.470300&cid=C5131HKFX

https://www.whois.com/whois/bitcoinfoundation.org

Craig Wright BitCoin Foundation
https://t.me/joinchat/BZPpc-viP_A3YjU8