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
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
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
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614448358445100?thread_ts=1614448358.445100&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2482
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614448358445100?thread_ts=1614448358.445100&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2482
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
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
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614431519387900?thread_ts=1614431519.387900&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2486
Feb 27, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1614431519387900?thread_ts=1614431519.387900&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2486
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
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
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2488
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX
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
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
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2488
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX
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
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
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2488
Mar 8, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1615199298478600?thread_ts=1615199298.478600&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2488
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
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
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
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
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
Attila
jun 2, 2021
https://attilaaf.medium.com/superasset-contracts-a-scalable-layer-1-account-contract-and-token-design-using-the-bitcoin-utxo-e4d933478d7a
Medium
SuperAsset Contracts: A Scalable Layer 1 Account and Token Contract Design Using The Bitcoin UTXO Model
A Breakthrough design is presented that enables arbitrary state storage and computation in a Bitcoin UTXO by leveraging a technique known…
Craig Wright BitCoin Foundation
https://t.me/joinchat/BZPpc-viP_A3YjU8
https://t.me/joinchat/BZPpc-viP_A3YjU8
Telegram
CSW 306* Foundation BitCoin
BitCoin Foundation
https://t.me/joinchat/BZPpc-viP_A3YjU8
https://archive.is/qjWgg
Jon Matonis
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEyP5Soq8N2tCEHAMQ
B. Association
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEk8wooV-gVBJvYLAg
https://t.me/joinchat/BZPpc-viP_A3YjU8
https://archive.is/qjWgg
Jon Matonis
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEyP5Soq8N2tCEHAMQ
B. Association
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAEk8wooV-gVBJvYLAg
Financial inclusion
Does not involve huge fees
CSW
Jun 2, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1622637566477700?thread_ts=1622632179.470300&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2503
Does not involve huge fees
CSW
Jun 2, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1622637566477700?thread_ts=1622632179.470300&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2503