COPA v Wright, the identity issue – Day 6. 🧵
Well I've had a lovely weekend, and I'm ready for my second, and unfortunately last, week in court. Today, COPA's Jonathan Hough KC will continue his cross-examination of Wright. Wright will remain in the witness box likely into Wednesday, while the remainder of the week will be cross-examination of his fact witnesses.
We're moving to Court 26 today, on the third floor, said to be a whole four degrees cooler than Court 30. PM me if you have any practical questions around attending.
As always, court starts at 10:30, or in 2.5 hours from now.
Well I've had a lovely weekend, and I'm ready for my second, and unfortunately last, week in court. Today, COPA's Jonathan Hough KC will continue his cross-examination of Wright. Wright will remain in the witness box likely into Wednesday, while the remainder of the week will be cross-examination of his fact witnesses.
We're moving to Court 26 today, on the third floor, said to be a whole four degrees cooler than Court 30. PM me if you have any practical questions around attending.
As always, court starts at 10:30, or in 2.5 hours from now.
If you'd like to tip me a little for my work, you can use norbert@walletofsatoshi.com or this QR code.
I truly appreciate your generosity and it has gone a long way towards covering the expenses for my work.
(Corrected from earlier post)
I truly appreciate your generosity and it has gone a long way towards covering the expenses for my work.
(Corrected from earlier post)
Waiting outside Court 26. Just a few people here. The air is breathable!
Hough just arrived - I held the door for him! We're still waiting in the hallway.
I'm seated, near the witness box this time. This room is at least as large as the other, but there is no overspill room now.
I thought I saw Pieter Wuille enter earlier, and it was him indeed. I got to shake his hand.
I thought I saw Pieter Wuille enter earlier, and it was him indeed. I got to shake his hand.
Wright takes his seat in the witness box. He's in a dark blue suit with pink stripes.
I talked to the AV guys since I've had trouble hearing Mellor and Grabiner – they tell me it should be easier in this room.
I talked to the AV guys since I've had trouble hearing Mellor and Grabiner – they tell me it should be easier in this room.
Mellor arrives. We are in session.
One housekeeping item. He got 3 emails, one from CAH, one from Shadders, and one from a Canadian relating to a trademark. Will ignore. It's an adversarial system, not an inquisitorial.
One housekeeping item. He got 3 emails, one from CAH, one from Shadders, and one from a Canadian relating to a trademark. Will ignore. It's an adversarial system, not an inquisitorial.
C: B&B wrote to Shoosmiths following last week. They raised issues of privileged. These issues are best considered after cross-examination. Shoosmiths might have to provide more information. Wright's wife has found a box of papers at home, bringing it today.
C: Devs have targeted questions around chain-of-custody.
Mellor: Dealing with issues of priviliged is very satisfactory so far.
C: [to Wright] In 97-98 you worked for Aus stock exchange. [shows section from his CV, quotes from stock exchange] Provided tech advice, supervised etc. That's how your CV describes your job, correct?
W: No, that's a marketing document from BDO. The one that focused on C++ coding etc is a different document.
Mellor: Dealing with issues of priviliged is very satisfactory so far.
C: [to Wright] In 97-98 you worked for Aus stock exchange. [shows section from his CV, quotes from stock exchange] Provided tech advice, supervised etc. That's how your CV describes your job, correct?
W: No, that's a marketing document from BDO. The one that focused on C++ coding etc is a different document.
C: [shows LinkedIn profile] Intrusion detection system (IDS). [quotes Wright saying he was there because of VMS experience] [shows SANS interview from '98] Quotes "security cowboys from the nineties", and Wriht says he learnt VMS there. Did you end up with ASX because of VMS, or did you learn it there?
W: Both, actually. I had learnt them on my own, but it wasn't professional. I learnt to work not as a cowboy at ASX.
C: You didn't have extensive experience [before ASX], isn't that right.
W: No, actually. I had been using a multi-party dungeon, running it in an amateur sense gives you skills.
W: Both, actually. I had learnt them on my own, but it wasn't professional. I learnt to work not as a cowboy at ASX.
C: You didn't have extensive experience [before ASX], isn't that right.
W: No, actually. I had been using a multi-party dungeon, running it in an amateur sense gives you skills.
C: Lasseters (online casino) closed in [missed, 2008?]
W: Designed security architecture.
C: [shows Wright's witness statement against McCormack] SCADA, cyber warfare, defense. World's first legal casino etc. That's how you described your jobs in that witness statement. [shows 2002 doc] It's a list of your tasks in DeMorgan and Lasseters.
W: No, that's a list of things staff did [something]
C: So it's a record of tasks performed by DeMorgan for Lasseters.
W: No, just [missed]
W: Designed security architecture.
C: [shows Wright's witness statement against McCormack] SCADA, cyber warfare, defense. World's first legal casino etc. That's how you described your jobs in that witness statement. [shows 2002 doc] It's a list of your tasks in DeMorgan and Lasseters.
W: No, that's a list of things staff did [something]
C: So it's a record of tasks performed by DeMorgan for Lasseters.
W: No, just [missed]
C: You said you conceptualized various token systems. There was nothing about digital cash for Lasseters in your LinkedIn profile, CV or McCormack statement.
W: No, that's actually incorrect. I architected a login system that was based on tokens. A series of rounds, every hour the block of login information would be sent. Enabled to know the logs couldn't have been changed.
C: Digital cash, these words, didn't appear.
W: Not in a one-liner now, but "architecture" includes that.
C: You haven't disclosed a single document about digital cash for Lasseters.
W: No, that's actually incorrect, I [missed]
C: [missed]
W: Again, wrong. Gavin's disclosure had my other reference, ones about programming.
C: They don't mention digital cash either.
W: Not per se, because I never had it working at Lasseters.
W: No, that's actually incorrect. I architected a login system that was based on tokens. A series of rounds, every hour the block of login information would be sent. Enabled to know the logs couldn't have been changed.
C: Digital cash, these words, didn't appear.
W: Not in a one-liner now, but "architecture" includes that.
C: You haven't disclosed a single document about digital cash for Lasseters.
W: No, that's actually incorrect, I [missed]
C: [missed]
W: Again, wrong. Gavin's disclosure had my other reference, ones about programming.
C: They don't mention digital cash either.
W: Not per se, because I never had it working at Lasseters.
C: [shows doc concerning DeMorgan work] Security consulting etc
W: Yes, this isn't the programming CV.
C: Your own docs all describe these jobs as straight-forward IT security work.
W: No, that's not correct. What you have from Andresen details high-level coding projects, including token systems and logging. Vodafone didn't have 3G, and to create a logging system required completely new system. We had basically a hashchain-based system.
W: Yes, this isn't the programming CV.
C: Your own docs all describe these jobs as straight-forward IT security work.
W: No, that's not correct. What you have from Andresen details high-level coding projects, including token systems and logging. Vodafone didn't have 3G, and to create a logging system required completely new system. We had basically a hashchain-based system.
C: You were at BDO from 2004-09, yes?
W: Technically I actually left in 2008. I was on leave from December.
C: [refers to CV] It described your role. Manages IT, consulting team, digital forensics services [quotes]. That's how your CV at BDO describes your role there.
W: No, it's one of [several CVs] I had other roles. Again, Gavin has disclosed it, so you have that other CV.
W: Technically I actually left in 2008. I was on leave from December.
C: [refers to CV] It described your role. Manages IT, consulting team, digital forensics services [quotes]. That's how your CV at BDO describes your role there.
W: No, it's one of [several CVs] I had other roles. Again, Gavin has disclosed it, so you have that other CV.
Mellor: Wright, last week you said you didn't prepare that CV.
W: No, I did not.
Mellor: It contains significant amounts of information [missed question]
W: I headed the forensics department, fraud detection. There was a separate CV in each area.
Mellor: But the information of prior things must have come from you.
W: They extracted information just for the role. It was consulting-focused.
W: No, I did not.
Mellor: It contains significant amounts of information [missed question]
W: I headed the forensics department, fraud detection. There was a separate CV in each area.
Mellor: But the information of prior things must have come from you.
W: They extracted information just for the role. It was consulting-focused.
C: I asked last week about meetings at BDO. [shows transcript of interview by CoinGeek in 2019] You were asked about working on Bitcoin while at BDO. You said [quotes] Alan Grainger, approach the company, bring it into BDO
W: That was paraphrasing, I didn't use that language.
C: [shows transcript from Hodlonaut case] You refer to Grainger meeting in 2019, you said having started the Bitcoin wp and hoped BDO would fund aspects. You were asked if that was the purpose of the meeting, and said 100%. Asked whether the meeting was successful, you said not long-term, it was successful in getting other meetings. Mentioned Sinclair and someone called [missed]
W: It wasn't called Bitcoin back then. It was a hash-based audit system. Economic security model, timechain or similar name, not Bitcoin.
W: That was paraphrasing, I didn't use that language.
C: [shows transcript from Hodlonaut case] You refer to Grainger meeting in 2019, you said having started the Bitcoin wp and hoped BDO would fund aspects. You were asked if that was the purpose of the meeting, and said 100%. Asked whether the meeting was successful, you said not long-term, it was successful in getting other meetings. Mentioned Sinclair and someone called [missed]
W: It wasn't called Bitcoin back then. It was a hash-based audit system. Economic security model, timechain or similar name, not Bitcoin.
C: None of them have come forward with evidence of you having pitched a digital currency system.
W: Sinclair was in court and said I pitched the system. Grainger doesn't want to give evidence due to death threats. He directed company that was running Bitcoin research for years, he was heavily involved.
C: Court can make his own mind up, but in Hodlonaut Sinclair said he had no recollection of digital currency system.
W: No, Bitcoin is not the end-game. What I'm building doesn't work if I don't have an economic system behind it, micropayments etc. To do that, I needed Bitcoin.
C: No witnesses. You have never put forward a single document to support the meeting, except the Quill document, agree?
W: Again, I also discussed it with Pang …
C: That wasn't the question. [repeats]
W: I will repeat: No. I also talked to Pang. If, My Lord, I can explain: I also discussed it with others. Pang also discussed it with others. He recalls the documents and others as well.
W: Sinclair was in court and said I pitched the system. Grainger doesn't want to give evidence due to death threats. He directed company that was running Bitcoin research for years, he was heavily involved.
C: Court can make his own mind up, but in Hodlonaut Sinclair said he had no recollection of digital currency system.
W: No, Bitcoin is not the end-game. What I'm building doesn't work if I don't have an economic system behind it, micropayments etc. To do that, I needed Bitcoin.
C: No witnesses. You have never put forward a single document to support the meeting, except the Quill document, agree?
W: Again, I also discussed it with Pang …
C: That wasn't the question. [repeats]
W: I will repeat: No. I also talked to Pang. If, My Lord, I can explain: I also discussed it with others. Pang also discussed it with others. He recalls the documents and others as well.
C: We'll hear from Pang later, but he doesn't testify he saw the documents.
W: I never called it Bitcoin, My Lord. A hash-chain structure that ensures integrity of data. You're misrepresenting my term, I didn't go to market with Bitcoin. I didn't sell Centrecoin on Bitcoin, but on Timecoin.
C: Wright, where is the glitzy PowerPoint pack pitching it to BDO?
W: I don't do those. I've done text-based ones. Even for academic presentations, ever.
W: I never called it Bitcoin, My Lord. A hash-chain structure that ensures integrity of data. You're misrepresenting my term, I didn't go to market with Bitcoin. I didn't sell Centrecoin on Bitcoin, but on Timecoin.
C: Wright, where is the glitzy PowerPoint pack pitching it to BDO?
W: I don't do those. I've done text-based ones. Even for academic presentations, ever.
C: LLM. It was started [year], awarded in 2008. [shows article saying thesis is full of plagiarism]. You have read it?
W: Yes, I have read this article by Greg Maxwell.
C: Well. [shows article with similarities pointed out] [Shows Pearson doc] Pearson says her text is her own work. Accept?
W: I accept it.
C: Comparing the two, do you accept they are identical, except S rather than Z in "analogizes"?
W: I do.
C: Further comparison. Accept virtually identical?
W: Yes, footnotes are actually referenced footnotes.
C: But the text is virtually identical.
W: Yes, because it's a referenced footnote.
W: Yes, I have read this article by Greg Maxwell.
C: Well. [shows article with similarities pointed out] [Shows Pearson doc] Pearson says her text is her own work. Accept?
W: I accept it.
C: Comparing the two, do you accept they are identical, except S rather than Z in "analogizes"?
W: I do.
C: Further comparison. Accept virtually identical?
W: Yes, footnotes are actually referenced footnotes.
C: But the text is virtually identical.
W: Yes, because it's a referenced footnote.
C: [turns page] Another section that is identical?
W: No, they are different, referenced from [missed]
C: [quotes] See that?
W: It's a quote.
C: It's not in quotation marks.
W: Because it's paraphrased.
C: [quotes] Clear parallel
W: Yes, each author has described these topics multiple times.
W: No, they are different, referenced from [missed]
C: [quotes] See that?
W: It's a quote.
C: It's not in quotation marks.
W: Because it's paraphrased.
C: [quotes] Clear parallel
W: Yes, each author has described these topics multiple times.
C: Pearson's work comes from 1996.
W: Yes, it's not an academic work. [therefore not cited properly] Was brought up [my Maxwell?], university dismissed it.
C: Initial version of your dissertation did not credit Pearson.
W: No, the initial version did, but the update removed her in part, [by software]. It was a mistake I made.
C: There are identical chunks to Pearson, correct?
W: In that version, yes. The other had it in italics and referenced.
C: And in quotation marks?
W: No, [something]
C: These passages show in large parts it was plagiarized.
W: No, that's not correct.
W: Yes, it's not an academic work. [therefore not cited properly] Was brought up [my Maxwell?], university dismissed it.
C: Initial version of your dissertation did not credit Pearson.
W: No, the initial version did, but the update removed her in part, [by software]. It was a mistake I made.
C: There are identical chunks to Pearson, correct?
W: In that version, yes. The other had it in italics and referenced.
C: And in quotation marks?
W: No, [something]
C: These passages show in large parts it was plagiarized.
W: No, that's not correct.
C: [shows Infosec article by Wright from 2011, about plagiarism] [Quotes Wright explaining what plagiarism is] In the dissertation, you were engaging in literal block copy of paragraphs of text.
W: No. The editor didn't use nnote, an error I am apologetic for. Several hundred pages, and I missed this one. nnote didn't handle blogs well back then, now it does. I should have validated the changes were made correct, but I didn't.
Mellor: How on earth would not handling blogs particularly well [lead to this]?
W: When I sent it to the editor, it had been removed. Quoting got lost, her material was no longer quoted. My bad for missing that.
W: No. The editor didn't use nnote, an error I am apologetic for. Several hundred pages, and I missed this one. nnote didn't handle blogs well back then, now it does. I should have validated the changes were made correct, but I didn't.
Mellor: How on earth would not handling blogs particularly well [lead to this]?
W: When I sent it to the editor, it had been removed. Quoting got lost, her material was no longer quoted. My bad for missing that.
C: [shows his first witness statement in TTL case, showing he signed it as true] You referenced the Painted Frog article.
W: Yes, I referenced Greg Maxwell at that point.
C: [quotes Wright as explaining plagiarism as "common terms" etc] In the sections we looked at, you directly copied whole passages.
W: No, what I've actually done it I had a block quote referencing Pearson. Her ideas are very different to mine. I quoted her initially, but when I sent it to the editors to restructure etc, some of that was omitted. The version online is the one with her name on.
C: An excuse to reduce size doesn't explain.
W: No, actually it does. When you send it to an editor, My Lord, they have their own macros. When loaded back, sometimes these things are missing. I am apologetic about it, but I didn't notice it happened.
Mellor: Who were the editors?
W: I can't remember their names. I woman in Australia, I can look it up.
W: Yes, I referenced Greg Maxwell at that point.
C: [quotes Wright as explaining plagiarism as "common terms" etc] In the sections we looked at, you directly copied whole passages.
W: No, what I've actually done it I had a block quote referencing Pearson. Her ideas are very different to mine. I quoted her initially, but when I sent it to the editors to restructure etc, some of that was omitted. The version online is the one with her name on.
C: An excuse to reduce size doesn't explain.
W: No, actually it does. When you send it to an editor, My Lord, they have their own macros. When loaded back, sometimes these things are missing. I am apologetic about it, but I didn't notice it happened.
Mellor: Who were the editors?
W: I can't remember their names. I woman in Australia, I can look it up.
C: Accept that paragraph 98 is the only place you [explain plagiarism]?
W: In this statement, yes.
C: Except the reduction of size argument, none of these [missed]
W: No, omitting […] meant it didn't update properly.
C: None of the other points correspond to the excuses you used today.
W: Stating a non-sequitur that no other explanation […], no, the answer is right there.
W: I'm not blaming [the editor], I'm blaming myself. I should have gone through the details.
C: In denying plagiarism, you are telling a lie.
W: No, actually, I'm not. Rather than hide it, I was open to the court right from the beginning.
W: In this statement, yes.
C: Except the reduction of size argument, none of these [missed]
W: No, omitting […] meant it didn't update properly.
C: None of the other points correspond to the excuses you used today.
W: Stating a non-sequitur that no other explanation […], no, the answer is right there.
W: I'm not blaming [the editor], I'm blaming myself. I should have gone through the details.
C: In denying plagiarism, you are telling a lie.
W: No, actually, I'm not. Rather than hide it, I was open to the court right from the beginning.
C: You have never disclosed any correspondence with the editors.
W: No, but the longer version is available.
C: Your actual activities from 2007-9. BDO until December 2008. You were also working on LLM.
W: And two other Master's degrees and running a farm and [something]
C: You were also working towards GIAC qualifications. They are extensively documented; you delivered presentations, blogging regularly.
W: Yes, I had one of my staff members load them, but I would write.
C: You posted 269 articles on the blog in 2009. In April 2008, you [worked on the boog]
W: Yes, and made other books.
C: You wrote article about harddrives with Dave Kleiman.
W: Yes, and one other.
W: No, but the longer version is available.
C: Your actual activities from 2007-9. BDO until December 2008. You were also working on LLM.
W: And two other Master's degrees and running a farm and [something]
C: You were also working towards GIAC qualifications. They are extensively documented; you delivered presentations, blogging regularly.
W: Yes, I had one of my staff members load them, but I would write.
C: You posted 269 articles on the blog in 2009. In April 2008, you [worked on the boog]
W: Yes, and made other books.
C: You wrote article about harddrives with Dave Kleiman.
W: Yes, and one other.
C: [shows blog post] [shows emails between him and SANS, quotes Wright explaining the type of work he's looking for] In [year] you wrote paper for SANS. [quotes 2009 where he blogs about work he's doing]. General plans for work at the time?
W: I set up Integyrs, had a number of clients, selling services, Timecoin system. I wasn't able to make money on it. Sold the system. Not good at commercializing.
W: I set up Integyrs, had a number of clients, selling services, Timecoin system. I wasn't able to make money on it. Sold the system. Not good at commercializing.
C: [shows blog post, refers to GIAC qualifications etc] Extensive records from 2008-9. You were doing demanding full-time job in security and writing books and papers.
W: No, you call it demanding. I wrote 600 papers relating to patents. At the moment of this court case, I'm writing 3 papers a week, doing Masters etc, that's right now. I would call *that* demanding. At the time, it was easy. You think a certification every week is hard. Now I do an exam every three days.
C: I'm sure we're all very impression. My point was that in all these docs we have, genuine docs, nothing addresses digital cash systems in those terms.
W: No, you're incorrect. There's the Timecoin document and others. You keep referencing Bitcoin as the end-goal. It never was, it was a small part of MetaNet. The goal is the other 4000 patents I have lodged, secure update of files. I've been creating a system where all info can be recorded and known. Partial parts of contracts can be reused. Files can be exchanged. Hence, worked with digital cinema group. High quality, extremely valuable digital assets…
C: Wright, when Satoshi published the wp, they were clear it was a digital currency system.
W: No…
C: Pause there. You disagree. We have docs in the hundreds, nothing expresses document cash or cryptocurrency.
W: First of all, it's not a cryptocurrency. Escrow etc. I said the reason for script is all these other systems. On top of that, with Gavin, Martti etc, I discussed timestamp server. Defined in the Bitcoin wp. You were saying it must be monetary, I'm not. Any interaction etc, those are transactions.
W: No, you call it demanding. I wrote 600 papers relating to patents. At the moment of this court case, I'm writing 3 papers a week, doing Masters etc, that's right now. I would call *that* demanding. At the time, it was easy. You think a certification every week is hard. Now I do an exam every three days.
C: I'm sure we're all very impression. My point was that in all these docs we have, genuine docs, nothing addresses digital cash systems in those terms.
W: No, you're incorrect. There's the Timecoin document and others. You keep referencing Bitcoin as the end-goal. It never was, it was a small part of MetaNet. The goal is the other 4000 patents I have lodged, secure update of files. I've been creating a system where all info can be recorded and known. Partial parts of contracts can be reused. Files can be exchanged. Hence, worked with digital cinema group. High quality, extremely valuable digital assets…
C: Wright, when Satoshi published the wp, they were clear it was a digital currency system.
W: No…
C: Pause there. You disagree. We have docs in the hundreds, nothing expresses document cash or cryptocurrency.
W: First of all, it's not a cryptocurrency. Escrow etc. I said the reason for script is all these other systems. On top of that, with Gavin, Martti etc, I discussed timestamp server. Defined in the Bitcoin wp. You were saying it must be monetary, I'm not. Any interaction etc, those are transactions.
We have taken a short break.
Correction: "impression" should be "impressed".
Usher said there's an issue with the stream, are you guys able to watch?
Usher apologizes for the delay. They're probably working on the stream issue. Room has fallen silent, scattered whispers. Hough standing ready.
We are back.
Mellor: During the break, I found out that a man called [George] is recording and making transcript. He thinks it's allowed, but he's mistaken. Speech-to-text tools. He's still creating a recording, and it's forbidden. I look forward to him stopping.
Mellor: During the break, I found out that a man called [George] is recording and making transcript. He thinks it's allowed, but he's mistaken. Speech-to-text tools. He's still creating a recording, and it's forbidden. I look forward to him stopping.
C: About theses
W: [lists theses] Doing one on CBDC and banking. One in law, the law of Bitcoin. Should have been submitted already, but trial is delaying me. One at Exeter, mathematical economics. [missed] [Minnesota university] interaction of micropayment system on webservers et cetera et cetera. Supervisor had a heart attack, so I'm getting a new one. [Arizona] modelling of Bitcoin at scale, 1+ million tps. 2 PhDs, 3…
W: [lists theses] Doing one on CBDC and banking. One in law, the law of Bitcoin. Should have been submitted already, but trial is delaying me. One at Exeter, mathematical economics. [missed] [Minnesota university] interaction of micropayment system on webservers et cetera et cetera. Supervisor had a heart attack, so I'm getting a new one. [Arizona] modelling of Bitcoin at scale, 1+ million tps. 2 PhDs, 3…
C: Moving on. You said you chose to develop Bitcoin pseudonymously [quotes: shared identity with small group of people. Sent drafts of Bitcoin wp to at least 21. Work colleagues, contacts like Sinclair, Jenkins, Kleiman etc]
W: I've actually met [missed]
C: You said you were content for your students to know you were Satoshi.
W: Some, not all.
C: And for people in the Australian government to know.
W: Yes, I presented for […] and department of finance. Timestamp server, creation of what is now called CBDC. Can integrate VAT instantly.
C: So you say it was more than just a small circle who knew your identity.
W: [vague] Still a small circle.
C: All these 21+ people, not too small a circle.
W: That's fairly small.
W: I've actually met [missed]
C: You said you were content for your students to know you were Satoshi.
W: Some, not all.
C: And for people in the Australian government to know.
W: Yes, I presented for […] and department of finance. Timestamp server, creation of what is now called CBDC. Can integrate VAT instantly.
C: So you say it was more than just a small circle who knew your identity.
W: [vague] Still a small circle.
C: All these 21+ people, not too small a circle.
W: That's fairly small.
C: Bitcoin source code. You say you chose C++ and Visual Studio.
W: Yes, with ngw
C: You don't mention ngw there.
W: I didn't think I had to.
C: It's common knowledge Satoshi worked in C++, isn't it.
W: The code is in C++, so that's obvious.
C: You said you engaged with others, like Mike [Turner?] You haven't disclosed any [missed]
W: Actually I have. Most of my stuff I keep in written format, which you don't like, since I use handwriting.
C: No email or anything like that.
W: Seems to have been lost in AlixPartners' QNAP debacle. [Likely?] Greg Maxwell actually compromised my server.
C: [asks bout being hacked a lot]
W: Multiple vulnerabilities in Bitcoin, discussed with Gavin.
C: You yourself have claimed to be hacked how many times?
W: Multiple since then [digressing]
C: You're digressing.
W: Actually I'm not. I used private chat. Martti would be able to read it, only Gavin [and someone] have seen them, not released.
C: Not by you either?
W: I have them on a piece of paper…
C: Don't tell us anything privileged. [missed]
W: Pang did, but before Bitcoin. I acted alone, there was no group. Hal Finney only proper interaction, but he died Gavin hasn't retracted anything. Most of your witnesses came in from 2011 on.
W: Yes, with ngw
C: You don't mention ngw there.
W: I didn't think I had to.
C: It's common knowledge Satoshi worked in C++, isn't it.
W: The code is in C++, so that's obvious.
C: You said you engaged with others, like Mike [Turner?] You haven't disclosed any [missed]
W: Actually I have. Most of my stuff I keep in written format, which you don't like, since I use handwriting.
C: No email or anything like that.
W: Seems to have been lost in AlixPartners' QNAP debacle. [Likely?] Greg Maxwell actually compromised my server.
C: [asks bout being hacked a lot]
W: Multiple vulnerabilities in Bitcoin, discussed with Gavin.
C: You yourself have claimed to be hacked how many times?
W: Multiple since then [digressing]
C: You're digressing.
W: Actually I'm not. I used private chat. Martti would be able to read it, only Gavin [and someone] have seen them, not released.
C: Not by you either?
W: I have them on a piece of paper…
C: Don't tell us anything privileged. [missed]
W: Pang did, but before Bitcoin. I acted alone, there was no group. Hal Finney only proper interaction, but he died Gavin hasn't retracted anything. Most of your witnesses came in from 2011 on.
C: [shows evidence from Hodlonaut case. Wright asked about sharing code, says he shared with a lot of people] Trammell says Satoshi never sent him software.
W: That's incorrect. He had a link. He's been a little disingenuous. The way svn works, is you send a link.
C: Let's see what he says [brings it up, quotes Trammell saying he first saw code when he saw it on mailing list] That's correct?
W: No, it's not. I put it on the mailing list. He downloaded it. You're saying because he didn't get email code, because it's svn, that's the same thing, it's not.
C: You named 3 people, one of them Trammell. He did not receive special direct communication from Satoshi about code. It's different.
W: No, you're trying to mince words. SourceForge is the svn, you download it from there. When I send link to SF, I'm sending them a link to code. In 2009, he communicated with me about issues. You're saying because he downloaded code from my site, I didn't send it to him. He questioned me and I sent responses. My answer is completely accurate.
W: That's incorrect. He had a link. He's been a little disingenuous. The way svn works, is you send a link.
C: Let's see what he says [brings it up, quotes Trammell saying he first saw code when he saw it on mailing list] That's correct?
W: No, it's not. I put it on the mailing list. He downloaded it. You're saying because he didn't get email code, because it's svn, that's the same thing, it's not.
C: You named 3 people, one of them Trammell. He did not receive special direct communication from Satoshi about code. It's different.
W: No, you're trying to mince words. SourceForge is the svn, you download it from there. When I send link to SF, I'm sending them a link to code. In 2009, he communicated with me about issues. You're saying because he downloaded code from my site, I didn't send it to him. He questioned me and I sent responses. My answer is completely accurate.
C: Of the 3 people, 2 were in public domain and the last was a lie, wasn't it.
W: No, I sent him the link because I sent it to everyone there, and he downloaded it.
C: MS Visual Studio (VS). You said you wrote the Bitcoin code in VS. [shows Malmi email saying he uses mingw]
W: It can be integrated in VS.
C: Malmi says he got in compiled with mingw. Satoshi wrote he only uses VS for debugging. He wrote that.
W: No, I wrote that.
C: He only used VS for debugging.
W: It's better for debugging […] I used a combination [missed technobabble]
W: No, I sent him the link because I sent it to everyone there, and he downloaded it.
C: MS Visual Studio (VS). You said you wrote the Bitcoin code in VS. [shows Malmi email saying he uses mingw]
W: It can be integrated in VS.
C: Malmi says he got in compiled with mingw. Satoshi wrote he only uses VS for debugging. He wrote that.
W: No, I wrote that.
C: He only used VS for debugging.
W: It's better for debugging […] I used a combination [missed technobabble]
C: This email is clear Satoshi didn't use VS for compiling the code. You sadded the mingw detail after you read Madden's unpublished email.
W: No [agitated] My Lord, Visual C++ is in VS. They're all in the same way. You have confused VS and VC++. In VS you can run VC. In the email I didn't say I don't use VS. Each package must be loaded in to VS. You have to integrate […] Still requires VS, but this is the package you load the other […] into.
C: The word mingw in the context of this code did not appear in any of the statements until you read this report.
W: VC++ runs inside VS. When I said I only use VS for debugging, it doesn't mean […]
C: The court can reach its own conclusions. Moving on.
W: No [agitated] My Lord, Visual C++ is in VS. They're all in the same way. You have confused VS and VC++. In VS you can run VC. In the email I didn't say I don't use VS. Each package must be loaded in to VS. You have to integrate […] Still requires VS, but this is the package you load the other […] into.
C: The word mingw in the context of this code did not appear in any of the statements until you read this report.
W: VC++ runs inside VS. When I said I only use VS for debugging, it doesn't mean […]
C: The court can reach its own conclusions. Moving on.
C: You refer to email accounts associated with Satoshi. You haven't disclosed any contacts of Satoshi that weren't already known.
W: I don't recall people's names. You're asking me who my supervisors are and I don't recall their names.
C: You've had many opportunities to identify Satoshi's contacts. You always failed to do so.
W: I don't remember names of people. As My Lord already saw, I don't even remember my supervisors' names. I remembered two, but only because I talked to them yesterday.
C: You didn't disclose Nicholas Bohm [missed]
W: There were many people, probably 100 different…
C: Bohm received an actual […] from Satoshi, and it never occurred to you […]
W: No, I transferred to many people.
C: None of those people have come forward.
W: No, and would I remember their names? No.
W: I don't recall people's names. You're asking me who my supervisors are and I don't recall their names.
C: You've had many opportunities to identify Satoshi's contacts. You always failed to do so.
W: I don't remember names of people. As My Lord already saw, I don't even remember my supervisors' names. I remembered two, but only because I talked to them yesterday.
C: You didn't disclose Nicholas Bohm [missed]
W: There were many people, probably 100 different…
C: Bohm received an actual […] from Satoshi, and it never occurred to you […]
W: No, I transferred to many people.
C: None of those people have come forward.
W: No, and would I remember their names? No.
C: Wei Dai's communications with Satoshi have been public for some time.
W: Some of it.
C: [shows email from Wei Dai responding to Bird & Bird, saying he's not a distinguished academic]
W: If he wants to call himself that. I looked at his work, I would say that's academic, whether at a university or not.
C: Academic usually refers to a position in academia.
W: No, [missed]
W: Also papers. Wei wrote extensively on SSL.
C: [quotes witness statement saying Adam Back's attitude was dismissive. [shows email from Back to Satoshi, asking about citations, looks like email is from 2008] [shows email from Satoshi to Back expressing gratitude]. Those are the email communications between Satoshi and Back.
W: Not all of them.
C: Back wasn't dismissive, was he?
W: No, he was. He hadn't read my work etc
C: It doesn't say that at all, does it?
W: [missed]
C: You said Back told you Bitcoin was bound to fail
W: [missed]
W: My Twitter was shut down by a certain COPA member, Jack Dorsey personally. I was allowed back on after Twitter was sold. I don't have any of the communication. Talks with Back are available on Wayback Machine, demonstrating I was communicating with him.
W: Some of it.
C: [shows email from Wei Dai responding to Bird & Bird, saying he's not a distinguished academic]
W: If he wants to call himself that. I looked at his work, I would say that's academic, whether at a university or not.
C: Academic usually refers to a position in academia.
W: No, [missed]
W: Also papers. Wei wrote extensively on SSL.
C: [quotes witness statement saying Adam Back's attitude was dismissive. [shows email from Back to Satoshi, asking about citations, looks like email is from 2008] [shows email from Satoshi to Back expressing gratitude]. Those are the email communications between Satoshi and Back.
W: Not all of them.
C: Back wasn't dismissive, was he?
W: No, he was. He hadn't read my work etc
C: It doesn't say that at all, does it?
W: [missed]
C: You said Back told you Bitcoin was bound to fail
W: [missed]
W: My Twitter was shut down by a certain COPA member, Jack Dorsey personally. I was allowed back on after Twitter was sold. I don't have any of the communication. Talks with Back are available on Wayback Machine, demonstrating I was communicating with him.
C: Back says in his witness statement that he provided his communication with Satoshi, you [made up extra communication]
W: No [missed]. Adam didn't try out any of the system, didn't read read the Bitcoin wp despite me giving it to him.
C: So when Back says he provided a complete set of emails, he's lying?
W: Or he's lost them.
C: He says that was the extent of it.
W: This morning and the day before he also promoted that Bitcoin will go up in price and that if you buy now, he will get rich. Ponzi. Technically, that's actually a breach of the financial services legislation. Highly irresponsible and also criminal [agitated] IT HAS TO GO TO A MILLION.
C: Pause there! This is not an answer, just allegations about people you don't like.
W: No, when he said sell your house…
C: Stop there, moving on.
W: No [missed]. Adam didn't try out any of the system, didn't read read the Bitcoin wp despite me giving it to him.
C: So when Back says he provided a complete set of emails, he's lying?
W: Or he's lost them.
C: He says that was the extent of it.
W: This morning and the day before he also promoted that Bitcoin will go up in price and that if you buy now, he will get rich. Ponzi. Technically, that's actually a breach of the financial services legislation. Highly irresponsible and also criminal [agitated] IT HAS TO GO TO A MILLION.
C: Pause there! This is not an answer, just allegations about people you don't like.
W: No, when he said sell your house…
C: Stop there, moving on.
C: [missed, had to stop Wright again] [shows Wright article, saying Bitcoin does not use Back's HashCash] [shows Satoshi's first 2008 post. He says Bitcoin uses HashCash PoW]
W: Yes, like HashCash, there is an economic cost.
C: [shows Bitcoin wp, quotes need for HashCash]
W: Similar to, not HashCash.
C: Your article said the system was not even similar to HashCash.
W: You're misrepresenting. Similar to. I didn't say PoW, I said system. I said *like* HashCash.
C: [shows The Satoshi Affair]
W: It's a fiction book.
C: [quotes HashCash being totally necessary] He's misrepresenting your words?
W: There's a reason it's listed as fiction.
W: Yes, like HashCash, there is an economic cost.
C: [shows Bitcoin wp, quotes need for HashCash]
W: Similar to, not HashCash.
C: Your article said the system was not even similar to HashCash.
W: You're misrepresenting. Similar to. I didn't say PoW, I said system. I said *like* HashCash.
C: [shows The Satoshi Affair]
W: It's a fiction book.
C: [quotes HashCash being totally necessary] He's misrepresenting your words?
W: There's a reason it's listed as fiction.
C: [Shows Coin-Exch doc provided to ATO, quotes ewallet cryptocurrency system based on Bitcoin.] Does it say that?
W: [sighs] Yes, I hate how [missed]
C: [quotes bitcoin mining definition, "similar to HashCash"] You forwarded this to ATO.
W: I forwarded it, I didn't write it. I told people not to use the "cryptocurrency" term.
W: My EA had access to my email. Most of these things were submitted on my behalf. I have patents filed even today [saying cryptocurrency], I tell people not to call it that.
C: In reality, you said in this doc and in O'Hagan what Satoshi said about being similar to HashCash.
W: No, [vague]
C: And later you said it's different in order to give yourself [missed]
W: The original code used a token word. Bitcoin doesn't use that, doesn't have difficulty adjustment. Using [Aurora?]
C: We dispute that Bitcoin doesn't use PoW similar to HashCash.
W: [sighs] Yes, I hate how [missed]
C: [quotes bitcoin mining definition, "similar to HashCash"] You forwarded this to ATO.
W: I forwarded it, I didn't write it. I told people not to use the "cryptocurrency" term.
W: My EA had access to my email. Most of these things were submitted on my behalf. I have patents filed even today [saying cryptocurrency], I tell people not to call it that.
C: In reality, you said in this doc and in O'Hagan what Satoshi said about being similar to HashCash.
W: No, [vague]
C: And later you said it's different in order to give yourself [missed]
W: The original code used a token word. Bitcoin doesn't use that, doesn't have difficulty adjustment. Using [Aurora?]
C: We dispute that Bitcoin doesn't use PoW similar to HashCash.
C: [shows Wright article "Fully Peer-to-Peer". Quotes him writing he used the mailing list in 2005, needed their graph theory knowledge for Bitcoin etc. Need for privacy. Cypherpunks. Came to the conclusion I could do something. [long quotes]] [shows email from University of Newcastle professor, responding to questions] You couldn't have had these discussion with Professor Wrightson because he had retired, right?
W: No, I was there in the nineties as well.
C: Your article was clear it was in your postgrad from around 2009.
W: [vague]
C: It was perfectly clear, wasn't it.
W: I'm not good at remembering people, not faces either. I'm horrible at recalling people. I had valuable conversations with him, more than that I can't say.
C: Your article dated these conversations to 2005-9, now you said you got it wrong by ten years?
W: Actually I don't know, I know I spoke to him many times.
W: No, I was there in the nineties as well.
C: Your article was clear it was in your postgrad from around 2009.
W: [vague]
C: It was perfectly clear, wasn't it.
W: I'm not good at remembering people, not faces either. I'm horrible at recalling people. I had valuable conversations with him, more than that I can't say.
C: Your article dated these conversations to 2005-9, now you said you got it wrong by ten years?
W: Actually I don't know, I know I spoke to him many times.
C: Wrightson says he has no recollection of dealing with you.
W: My supervisor was contacted by your lawyers. His comment was I don't recall Craig at all. You just said "Craig". Either people like me, or they want to get me.
C: The paper you hyperlinked from your article wasn't authored by anyone in your group. Does it surprise you?
W: Yes, because he has a book, and students that research this. [missed]
C: You disagree with him when he says his department doesn't have a lot of resources?
W: I thought they had a lot of access to [material]
C: Do you dispute him not having a lot of patents?
W: Actually [missed]
C: And transfer system?
W: I would call that a transfer system.
C: Is he wrong about the paper not being related to his group?
W: Possibly, I thought it was.
C: He says he's not familiar with Wei Dai. Surprised?
W: No, I'm terrible with people. I thought it was Wrightson I talked to. I get people wrong all the time. I call people by the wrong name all the time. I have [diagnose where you don't recollect faces]
W: My supervisor was contacted by your lawyers. His comment was I don't recall Craig at all. You just said "Craig". Either people like me, or they want to get me.
C: The paper you hyperlinked from your article wasn't authored by anyone in your group. Does it surprise you?
W: Yes, because he has a book, and students that research this. [missed]
C: You disagree with him when he says his department doesn't have a lot of resources?
W: I thought they had a lot of access to [material]
C: Do you dispute him not having a lot of patents?
W: Actually [missed]
C: And transfer system?
W: I would call that a transfer system.
C: Is he wrong about the paper not being related to his group?
W: Possibly, I thought it was.
C: He says he's not familiar with Wei Dai. Surprised?
W: No, I'm terrible with people. I thought it was Wrightson I talked to. I get people wrong all the time. I call people by the wrong name all the time. I have [diagnose where you don't recollect faces]
C: Do you dispute that [person] left Unviersity of Newcastle in 1999?
W: I was also at [place]
C: Is he wrong about Hal Finney?
W: I don't think so, but like I said, I'm not good with people.
C: He doesn't recognize the article. It's a whole lot of mistakes, isn't it?
W: Yes, when it comes to people I'm terrible. Its why I hide away from the world.
C: You do dispute professor [name] that he [never had anything to do with you]?
W: [missed, disputes]
C: You claim you worked together on Australian Stock Exchange. He didn't start until 2003.
W: Well I still remember him…
[missing things here]
C: You couldn't have [interaction] with him at Perth Mint in 2003
W: I remember him, but like I said I'm terrible with people.
C: Your whole article about dealing with these distinguished people is a work of fiction, isn't it?
W: No.
C: And it's written with such confidence.
W: Some of the things he does actually overlaps with mine [missed]
W: I was also at [place]
C: Is he wrong about Hal Finney?
W: I don't think so, but like I said, I'm not good with people.
C: He doesn't recognize the article. It's a whole lot of mistakes, isn't it?
W: Yes, when it comes to people I'm terrible. Its why I hide away from the world.
C: You do dispute professor [name] that he [never had anything to do with you]?
W: [missed, disputes]
C: You claim you worked together on Australian Stock Exchange. He didn't start until 2003.
W: Well I still remember him…
[missing things here]
C: You couldn't have [interaction] with him at Perth Mint in 2003
W: I remember him, but like I said I'm terrible with people.
C: Your whole article about dealing with these distinguished people is a work of fiction, isn't it?
W: No.
C: And it's written with such confidence.
W: Some of the things he does actually overlaps with mine [missed]
C: [shows witness statement about pitching Bitcoin to Microsoft] [shows evidence from Hodlonaut case] You described having interviews for management positions, saying Bitcoin could have been owned by Microsoft.
W: The early version of search&browser team, I met with them in 2008.
C: You were in communication with MS and Siemens expressing interesting in [position] [shows 2008 emails] You set out experience in security etc.
W: And C++ etc
C: You respond with details about coding experience.
W: [lists programming languages etc]
C: [shows application form, quotes Wright wright saying he enjoys a challenge, answering questions about IT infrastructure work, GIAC etc].
Lunch break.
Mellor: Dr Wright, relax and we'll see each other again at two o'clock.
W: The early version of search&browser team, I met with them in 2008.
C: You were in communication with MS and Siemens expressing interesting in [position] [shows 2008 emails] You set out experience in security etc.
W: And C++ etc
C: You respond with details about coding experience.
W: [lists programming languages etc]
C: [shows application form, quotes Wright wright saying he enjoys a challenge, answering questions about IT infrastructure work, GIAC etc].
Lunch break.
Mellor: Dr Wright, relax and we'll see each other again at two o'clock.
Back (a minute early).
W: My Lord, I said I would get the names. [Reads names of supervisors]
C: I was asking about a job application you made to Microsoft. You had a couple of interviews, February and October 2008?
W: Oh, I had a number [of them]
C: Nothing to suggest you were pitching a digital cash or logging system to them.
W: No, I wrote a paper [about click fraud?] At the time, it was touted as a computer system. [explains what he thinks a transaction is in compsci] What this means is we're looking at a system, proof-of-work etc, that will make [?] go away. Even Adam Back's HashCash was spam and people manipulating the system. I didn't think a thousand or million dollars a bitcoin, I was thinking cents [etc]
W: My Lord, I said I would get the names. [Reads names of supervisors]
C: I was asking about a job application you made to Microsoft. You had a couple of interviews, February and October 2008?
W: Oh, I had a number [of them]
C: Nothing to suggest you were pitching a digital cash or logging system to them.
W: No, I wrote a paper [about click fraud?] At the time, it was touted as a computer system. [explains what he thinks a transaction is in compsci] What this means is we're looking at a system, proof-of-work etc, that will make [?] go away. Even Adam Back's HashCash was spam and people manipulating the system. I didn't think a thousand or million dollars a bitcoin, I was thinking cents [etc]
C: You did actual interviews with MS in 2008, at the time when Satoshi was gearing up to issue the Bitcoin wp.
W: I released it right after this because I was told there's a hiring freeze.
C: Satoshi had been discussing it in August 2008 with others.
W: I mentioned it, yes.
C: Shortly after, Satoshi releases the whitepaper. Yes not a shred of evidence in any of these emails that you showed the Bitcoin wp to MS, but plenty of evidence you showed them your other work.
W: No, I tried to minimize emails through and from the work domain.
C: You said it might lead MS to owning Bitcoin, yet not a mention of the Bitcoin wp.
W: [missed] If you read Back's [something], he talks…
W: I released it right after this because I was told there's a hiring freeze.
C: Satoshi had been discussing it in August 2008 with others.
W: I mentioned it, yes.
C: Shortly after, Satoshi releases the whitepaper. Yes not a shred of evidence in any of these emails that you showed the Bitcoin wp to MS, but plenty of evidence you showed them your other work.
W: No, I tried to minimize emails through and from the work domain.
C: You said it might lead MS to owning Bitcoin, yet not a mention of the Bitcoin wp.
W: [missed] If you read Back's [something], he talks…
C: May I stop you there, I asked you a specific question. [repeats]
W: As I stated, I have very limited amounts of emails left. Over time I've lost those, many years ago. I wasn't sitting there going "Bitcoin is going to be worth millions".
C: [shows reliance doc. A handwritten note with "data station" logo on it. It says "no partner wants to listen, view it as a threat" "micropayments over ad-based model" "getting code working" "Fucking Visual Studio!"]
W: MS came back in 2011-12…
C: But BDO references things going on in 2008.
W: These were notes I made in 2012. [missed]
C: You first dated them to 2011-12.
W: No, goes back to the Kleiman case.
C: It's the first time with *us*
W: I don't know when you were told.
C: You're now saying it was written 2011-2012.
W: Yes.
C: You first came up with it after Ben Ford said that pad wasn't printed until 2010.
W. No, actually, I got a note from Zafar…
C: I don't want privilged…
W: It's not
W: As I stated, I have very limited amounts of emails left. Over time I've lost those, many years ago. I wasn't sitting there going "Bitcoin is going to be worth millions".
C: [shows reliance doc. A handwritten note with "data station" logo on it. It says "no partner wants to listen, view it as a threat" "micropayments over ad-based model" "getting code working" "Fucking Visual Studio!"]
W: MS came back in 2011-12…
C: But BDO references things going on in 2008.
W: These were notes I made in 2012. [missed]
C: You first dated them to 2011-12.
W: No, goes back to the Kleiman case.
C: It's the first time with *us*
W: I don't know when you were told.
C: You're now saying it was written 2011-2012.
W: Yes.
C: You first came up with it after Ben Ford said that pad wasn't printed until 2010.
W. No, actually, I got a note from Zafar…
C: I don't want privilged…
W: It's not
C: If this didn't come up, you would [stay with this being from 2008]
W: No [missed]
C: [quotes] This is plainly looking backward to Bitcoin starting in 2009
W: No.
C: Does "Gareth" reference Gareth Williams?
W: Yes.
C: He died in 2010.
W: Yes.
C: Makes no sense that the note come from 2011-12.
W: No, [missed] I always had them with me. When it came to the tribunal [in Aus?] I had to represent myself.
W: No [missed]
C: [quotes] This is plainly looking backward to Bitcoin starting in 2009
W: No.
C: Does "Gareth" reference Gareth Williams?
W: Yes.
C: He died in 2010.
W: Yes.
C: Makes no sense that the note come from 2011-12.
W: No, [missed] I always had them with me. When it came to the tribunal [in Aus?] I had to represent myself.
C: [quotes future tense] So this was something you wrote three years *after* the system started?
W: Yes [missed]
C: Just liies
W: No
C: [shows email "Citation of your b-money page" from Satoshi to Wei Dai] [shows transcript from Kleiman, question about release of wp. Quotes "I had an FTP in Australia"] [shows Wright4, quotes "dual-purpose architecture", "secondary server in Melbourne", "don't know what happened to the above service"] A site of *yours*.
W: No, I had a sub directory on that domain. I didn't own the domain.
C: In your witness statement you seem to say it was your server.
W: Sorry if I'm not clear. Different server from bitcoin dot org.
C: The domain was owned by [name] This idea of you having a subdir did not come up in Kleiman or Wright4.
W: I don't believe I also explained that is also a different server than
C: This is another explanation you have adapted to new information, isn't it.
W: No […]bitcoin.org/forum
bitcoin.org
W: Yes [missed]
C: Just liies
W: No
C: [shows email "Citation of your b-money page" from Satoshi to Wei Dai] [shows transcript from Kleiman, question about release of wp. Quotes "I had an FTP in Australia"] [shows Wright4, quotes "dual-purpose architecture", "secondary server in Melbourne", "don't know what happened to the above service"] A site of *yours*.
W: No, I had a sub directory on that domain. I didn't own the domain.
C: In your witness statement you seem to say it was your server.
W: Sorry if I'm not clear. Different server from bitcoin dot org.
C: The domain was owned by [name] This idea of you having a subdir did not come up in Kleiman or Wright4.
W: I don't believe I also explained that is also a different server than
C: This is another explanation you have adapted to new information, isn't it.
W: No […]bitcoin.org/forum
bitcoin.org
C: [shows doc] All info here is from the public domain.
W: They definitely are now.
C: There's no special information you couldn't have picked up from the public domain.
W: I've been talking about it for so many years that everything is public domain.
C: [missed]
W: No-one mentioned those.
W: They definitely are now.
C: There's no special information you couldn't have picked up from the public domain.
W: I've been talking about it for so many years that everything is public domain.
C: [missed]
W: No-one mentioned those.
C: [shows Kleiman transcript open sharing wp.] You say you produced handwritten draft in 2008, condensed into written version. Shared with Don Lynam, Max, people from university. 20-page second version shared with Gareth Williams and unnamed people at Newcastle University. You referred to a third iteration of 10 pages, shared with Wei Dai, Gareth Williams, Grainger, Back and others. Before this case, that was the fullest account you'd given.
W: No, I mentioned it [here and there]. I'm not good with names at all.
C: [shows Wright4] You gave these 21 names. If these people received drafts, they would have known it was a project you were working on.
W: Well, one of many.
C: WIth the exception of Lynam and Matthews, none of them has come out publicly about it.
W: No, these are prerelease drafts, different from Kleiman. They received Timecoin paper, multiple iterations.
C: Is it right to say none of them has come out publicly and said they received a draft from you?
W: I believe Bridges has. Jenkins remembers TimeCoin. Pang…
C: None of those have ever come out publicly saying they received a paper from you.
W: No, I just answered that. [someone] too. Edward Archer. Neville. Not Andrew Summer because privilege etc.
W: No, I mentioned it [here and there]. I'm not good with names at all.
C: [shows Wright4] You gave these 21 names. If these people received drafts, they would have known it was a project you were working on.
W: Well, one of many.
C: WIth the exception of Lynam and Matthews, none of them has come out publicly about it.
W: No, these are prerelease drafts, different from Kleiman. They received Timecoin paper, multiple iterations.
C: Is it right to say none of them has come out publicly and said they received a draft from you?
W: I believe Bridges has. Jenkins remembers TimeCoin. Pang…
C: None of those have ever come out publicly saying they received a paper from you.
W: No, I just answered that. [someone] too. Edward Archer. Neville. Not Andrew Summer because privilege etc.
C: Which of them have given evidence about it?
W: Jenkins talk about the system I built, hash-chain based on genesis file.
C: Do you say they describe in their evidence they received drafts before wp publication?
W: Yes, but you're mixing up Timecoin and Bitcoin.
C: Danielle DeMorgan, you sister, she…
W: Yes, but Kleiman was limited to one version of the paper.
C: She doesn't say she's seen a draft.
W: I'm saying I didn't *call* it the Bitcoin wp. I sent it under a number of names. Technically I didn't even send the Bitcoin wp to Wei Dai.
W: Jenkins talk about the system I built, hash-chain based on genesis file.
C: Do you say they describe in their evidence they received drafts before wp publication?
W: Yes, but you're mixing up Timecoin and Bitcoin.
C: Danielle DeMorgan, you sister, she…
W: Yes, but Kleiman was limited to one version of the paper.
C: She doesn't say she's seen a draft.
W: I'm saying I didn't *call* it the Bitcoin wp. I sent it under a number of names. Technically I didn't even send the Bitcoin wp to Wei Dai.
C: Dave Kleiman, no documentary evidence.
W: No, actually, that's incorrect. Unfortunately Ira Kleiman lost [everything]
C: Lynn Wright [brings up Kleiman deposition] [She says Wright talked about something] She says "he is always coming up with different ideas". [She doesn't remember him mentioning Bitcoin or digital currency]
W: Can we have a look at page 1? Ramona had been working with me since 2011. She was on a lot of medication.
C: She accepted she was fit. These answers are perfectly coherent.
W: She couldn't remember that my current wife had been working with me for years at that point. In the development of Bitcoin, I mostly talked about immutable logging and timestamp server. It needs digital cash to make it work.
W: No, actually, that's incorrect. Unfortunately Ira Kleiman lost [everything]
C: Lynn Wright [brings up Kleiman deposition] [She says Wright talked about something] She says "he is always coming up with different ideas". [She doesn't remember him mentioning Bitcoin or digital currency]
W: Can we have a look at page 1? Ramona had been working with me since 2011. She was on a lot of medication.
C: She accepted she was fit. These answers are perfectly coherent.
W: She couldn't remember that my current wife had been working with me for years at that point. In the development of Bitcoin, I mostly talked about immutable logging and timestamp server. It needs digital cash to make it work.
C: Back to your list of names. You sent them Bitcoin wp?
W: Or Timecoin, many versions [etc] Edward Archer…
C: Are you sure he was called Edward?
W: … Edwin Archer. Oh, you can laugh.
C: You could have learnt from the press that Gareth William died. You plucked his name out of the air as a mysterious collaborator. [Wright disagrees] You told the court Williams was in a video conference with you in 2011.
W: Yes, I got that date wrong.
C: You described him as former MI6/GCHQ. You say you trained him partially as a UK agent.
W: I met him at blackhat conferences.
C: You say you involved [Dave Kleiman?] because you wanted to clean up Satoshi.
W: Yes.
C: That dates the call to 2011 when Satoshi left the scene.
W: [missed something] I get dates wrong.
C: You describe a vivid recollection.
W: No I did not. I had a call, I was very, very angry. Trying not to respond, it was difficult.
W: Or Timecoin, many versions [etc] Edward Archer…
C: Are you sure he was called Edward?
W: … Edwin Archer. Oh, you can laugh.
C: You could have learnt from the press that Gareth William died. You plucked his name out of the air as a mysterious collaborator. [Wright disagrees] You told the court Williams was in a video conference with you in 2011.
W: Yes, I got that date wrong.
C: You described him as former MI6/GCHQ. You say you trained him partially as a UK agent.
W: I met him at blackhat conferences.
C: You say you involved [Dave Kleiman?] because you wanted to clean up Satoshi.
W: Yes.
C: That dates the call to 2011 when Satoshi left the scene.
W: [missed something] I get dates wrong.
C: You describe a vivid recollection.
W: No I did not. I had a call, I was very, very angry. Trying not to respond, it was difficult.
C: You have never been able to show a single email that you shared the wp with anything.
W: They've been lost.
C: And no soft or hard copies of what was shared.
W: No, that's actually incorrect, you have multiple hard copies.
C: Which?
W: [mentions Matthews]
C: Not only don't you have these emails or copies, none of the 21 people have come forward with their emails or copies.
W: No, it's been over 15 years. [They've moved on.] A lot of people don't have 15-year-old emails.
C: You're very unfortunate that not one of the 21 have come forward.
W: No, actually, they can talk about all of the systems they've seen et cetera.
C: Trying the question again: none of them have come forward.
W: No, and if they did, you'd say that it's just made up.
W: They've been lost.
C: And no soft or hard copies of what was shared.
W: No, that's actually incorrect, you have multiple hard copies.
C: Which?
W: [mentions Matthews]
C: Not only don't you have these emails or copies, none of the 21 people have come forward with their emails or copies.
W: No, it's been over 15 years. [They've moved on.] A lot of people don't have 15-year-old emails.
C: You're very unfortunate that not one of the 21 have come forward.
W: No, actually, they can talk about all of the systems they've seen et cetera.
C: Trying the question again: none of them have come forward.
W: No, and if they did, you'd say that it's just made up.
C: You say you shared wp with Matthews. nChain CEO and supporter.
W: No.
C: You wouldn't say he was instrumental for you in 2015-16?
W: I would say that's a LIE. It happened because I wanted to do research, got doxxed [etc]
C: Matthews in 2005 was CEO of Centrebet, you met there. [quotes Wright saying he handed wp to Matthews] That's your story, isn't it.
W: Yes, I actually did it multiple times. Just walk into offices and start talking with […]
C: [shows Matthews witness statement] He says he was handed a USB stick containing a paper. He printed it and read it later. He says he identified it as a draft of the Bitcoin wp. He's quite specific.
W: Yes, that would be the Timecoin paper. That's why he only became aware of Bitcoin later.
C: Ok, so the Timecoin paper in soft copy, and Bitcoin wp as hard copy?
W: Multiple versions, I describe it terribly.
W: No.
C: You wouldn't say he was instrumental for you in 2015-16?
W: I would say that's a LIE. It happened because I wanted to do research, got doxxed [etc]
C: Matthews in 2005 was CEO of Centrebet, you met there. [quotes Wright saying he handed wp to Matthews] That's your story, isn't it.
W: Yes, I actually did it multiple times. Just walk into offices and start talking with […]
C: [shows Matthews witness statement] He says he was handed a USB stick containing a paper. He printed it and read it later. He says he identified it as a draft of the Bitcoin wp. He's quite specific.
W: Yes, that would be the Timecoin paper. That's why he only became aware of Bitcoin later.
C: Ok, so the Timecoin paper in soft copy, and Bitcoin wp as hard copy?
W: Multiple versions, I describe it terribly.
C: In your first witness statement you describe giving him a single copy.
W: I said I shared one, not that it was the only one.
C: You didn't say […]
W: I didn't know I had to.
C: You've come up with the story of multiple versions to try to paper over differences.
W: No, he's talked about it multiple times. I said he dropped it in the bin.
C: You said you handed him a hard copy because it would fit with the story about coffee stains [etc]
W: No actually. Stefan often binned hardcopies, so I gave him a USB stick.
W: I said I shared one, not that it was the only one.
C: You didn't say […]
W: I didn't know I had to.
C: You've come up with the story of multiple versions to try to paper over differences.
W: No, he's talked about it multiple times. I said he dropped it in the bin.
C: You said you handed him a hard copy because it would fit with the story about coffee stains [etc]
W: No actually. Stefan often binned hardcopies, so I gave him a USB stick.
C: [shows 2014 email from Wright to Ira Kleiman]
W: I wanted to contact Dave's father and make him proud of his son.
C: [quotes] It was much later.
W: It took me that long to find him.
C: You were asked who the third person [behind Bitcoin] was. Objection based on US national security [?] You answered you didn't know. You were asked if the third person was a member of the US government. You said you don't know. Judge ruled you should answer questions on this subject. You were asked if you typed that, you said no. Directly opposite of what you said earlier.
W: No, I typed it, but I did not type the email.
C: You said it was probably written by [your assistant]. You said she got instruction to write those word from Uyen Nguyen or others.
W: [missed]
[Lots of quoting of the transcript, it's a bit messy to report on]
W: I wanted to contact Dave's father and make him proud of his son.
C: [quotes] It was much later.
W: It took me that long to find him.
C: You were asked who the third person [behind Bitcoin] was. Objection based on US national security [?] You answered you didn't know. You were asked if the third person was a member of the US government. You said you don't know. Judge ruled you should answer questions on this subject. You were asked if you typed that, you said no. Directly opposite of what you said earlier.
W: No, I typed it, but I did not type the email.
C: You said it was probably written by [your assistant]. You said she got instruction to write those word from Uyen Nguyen or others.
W: [missed]
[Lots of quoting of the transcript, it's a bit messy to report on]
W: I had typed the message, not the email, I had instructed the others to. I was an executive at the time.
C: How were you going to make [father] Kleiman proud of his son by telling him Gareth Williams etc were involved
W: [missed]
C: Your version just keeps changing.
W: Not at all. You asked what I said under oath and what I told the father of my friend to make him feel proud of his son. David died and I was happy for him to take some of my credit.
C: When asked about the email, you appeared to endorse [that Dave was involved?].
W: Not really
W: I was under oath to tell the whole story, which I didn't want to do. I had to say this, explain how Dave wasn't actually part of development.
C: About national security of US government, that couldn't possibly be a reference to Gareth Williams.
W: No, but I was being difficult at the time, was trying to waffle as much as possible.
C: How were you going to make [father] Kleiman proud of his son by telling him Gareth Williams etc were involved
W: [missed]
C: Your version just keeps changing.
W: Not at all. You asked what I said under oath and what I told the father of my friend to make him feel proud of his son. David died and I was happy for him to take some of my credit.
C: When asked about the email, you appeared to endorse [that Dave was involved?].
W: Not really
W: I was under oath to tell the whole story, which I didn't want to do. I had to say this, explain how Dave wasn't actually part of development.
C: About national security of US government, that couldn't possibly be a reference to Gareth Williams.
W: No, but I was being difficult at the time, was trying to waffle as much as possible.
C: You were telling the court in Kleiman a lie.
W: No, I was not.
C: So who was the member of government?
W: My uncle for a start, but other people as well.
C: SO you are saying your uncle could be part of the government?
W: He worked in America under the Aus military
C: But in 2019 he wasn't
W: He still hoped he could work out a deal.
C: Your account has been chaotic and confused because you were tried to […]
W: Actually the opposite, I was trying to distance myself. I was being incredibly difficult because I didn't want to answer the judge, I was under threat of contempt.
W: No, I was not.
C: So who was the member of government?
W: My uncle for a start, but other people as well.
C: SO you are saying your uncle could be part of the government?
W: He worked in America under the Aus military
C: But in 2019 he wasn't
W: He still hoped he could work out a deal.
C: Your account has been chaotic and confused because you were tried to […]
W: Actually the opposite, I was trying to distance myself. I was being incredibly difficult because I didn't want to answer the judge, I was under threat of contempt.
We're taking five minutes. We're all smiling incredulously at each other.
Back for the final session of the day.
C: Moving on to the genesis block and the early stages. Block 1 was mined [on date]
W: Yes, technically the system had to be restarted.
C: [shows transcript of video of Wright speaking about early stages of Bitcoin] Lots of problems. Patch Tuesday was horrible. [shows blog post from April 2019, quotes "I started with a miscalculation." something about licenses.] Your story is that the genesis block is mined and then MS' regular security updates called Patch Tuesday causes the machine to crash, and you address it by building a domain.
W: I had a domain, but I needed to integrate the systems. I wasn't doing like normal home users do and downloading updates from the internet. I had patch consolidation. When you're running [something], the patches don't necessarily run on a Tuesday.
C: In the course of the interview and blog you refer to problems causing shutdown on [dates]. You describe the cause of the problem as being MIcrosoft Patch Tuesday.
W: Yes, that's what the industry refers to. But when you're running a WSUS server, it's the local patch server. My server does it on my schedule. It's called Patch Tuesday even when it happens on a Friday.
C: Patch Tuesday took place on [other date].
W: WSUS does it on my schedule.
C: Moving on to the genesis block and the early stages. Block 1 was mined [on date]
W: Yes, technically the system had to be restarted.
C: [shows transcript of video of Wright speaking about early stages of Bitcoin] Lots of problems. Patch Tuesday was horrible. [shows blog post from April 2019, quotes "I started with a miscalculation." something about licenses.] Your story is that the genesis block is mined and then MS' regular security updates called Patch Tuesday causes the machine to crash, and you address it by building a domain.
W: I had a domain, but I needed to integrate the systems. I wasn't doing like normal home users do and downloading updates from the internet. I had patch consolidation. When you're running [something], the patches don't necessarily run on a Tuesday.
C: In the course of the interview and blog you refer to problems causing shutdown on [dates]. You describe the cause of the problem as being MIcrosoft Patch Tuesday.
W: Yes, that's what the industry refers to. But when you're running a WSUS server, it's the local patch server. My server does it on my schedule. It's called Patch Tuesday even when it happens on a Friday.
C: Patch Tuesday took place on [other date].
W: WSUS does it on my schedule.
C: [shows MS page with the real Patch Tuesday date]
W: Windows Server Update Services is different, separate to Windows Update that home users use.
C: [shows Patch Tuesday for January 2009] Anyone can look at Wikipedia and say Patch Tuesday is a regular monthly event.
W: You're mischaracterizing it. Patch Tuesday references Windows Update, I specified WSUS. Everyone just calls it Patch Tuesday.
C: [shows Microsoft saying Patch Tuesday is also for Windows Server] All happening, including for WSUS, on that Patch Tuesday.
W: No, actually. I was part of MSDN, and had access to pre-releases. Even source code. Ironically, people think MS is not open source. First it goes out to MSDN, including myself, then to everyone. When you say Patch Tuesday, you're saying I'm part of the everyday plebs.
W: Windows Server Update Services is different, separate to Windows Update that home users use.
C: [shows Patch Tuesday for January 2009] Anyone can look at Wikipedia and say Patch Tuesday is a regular monthly event.
W: You're mischaracterizing it. Patch Tuesday references Windows Update, I specified WSUS. Everyone just calls it Patch Tuesday.
C: [shows Microsoft saying Patch Tuesday is also for Windows Server] All happening, including for WSUS, on that Patch Tuesday.
W: No, actually. I was part of MSDN, and had access to pre-releases. Even source code. Ironically, people think MS is not open source. First it goes out to MSDN, including myself, then to everyone. When you say Patch Tuesday, you're saying I'm part of the everyday plebs.
C: So you're saying Patch Tuesday is not necessarily on Tuesday [except for "plebs"]
W: MSDN test things first, then it goes into the wider world. You can validate that.
C: You're trying to come up with some detail to give credence to your story, and you didn't know when Patch Tuesday was.
W: No, I knew perfectly well. I run these servers for Centrenet etc. One of the services a ran, My Lord, is I ran the updates first. One of my companies were the first in Australia to be MS Gold Partner, and first to be kicked out. MSDN provides early access. You have to be able to tell your clients whether the updates will work.
W: MSDN test things first, then it goes into the wider world. You can validate that.
C: You're trying to come up with some detail to give credence to your story, and you didn't know when Patch Tuesday was.
W: No, I knew perfectly well. I run these servers for Centrenet etc. One of the services a ran, My Lord, is I ran the updates first. One of my companies were the first in Australia to be MS Gold Partner, and first to be kicked out. MSDN provides early access. You have to be able to tell your clients whether the updates will work.
C: You said in the early days, the only ones involved with mining were you and your family.
W: That was the first few days. Later came Trammell etc.
C: You had 69 racks.
W: No, 69 machines, with virtual machines. Some Solaris, mostly Windows.
C: But your statement says 69 racks.
W: That's a typo, it should say 69 machines.
C: The machines ran for a while.
W: Yes, for two years.
C: You didn't tell them they were getting block rewards.
W: That wasn't the point, it was a timestamp server. Block rewards had no value.
C: You told us in 2010 you were able to put value on block rewards for accounting purposes.
W: I put a nominal value, and even then I was losing money.
C: You never told them about any rewards.
W: There was never any point back then.
C: You didn't tell them to retain the wallets, given they had electricity expenditure?
W: I was never [missed]
C: So you told them to protect the files?
W: Yes.
C: When?
W: In 2009.
C: After the expended all this electricity, you just stood by while they threw away their computers and make it impossible to check this story?
W: I was facing issues with the ATO and because of the actions of some of your clients, and getting divorced. My entire Bitcoin holdings, I never thought I'd make any of the money back. I had fees and other solicitors, probably 5 million in total. The cost of all this, hiring staff etc, probably came to 10 million. As soon as I got a break, Liberty Reserve shut down, so no.
W: That was the first few days. Later came Trammell etc.
C: You had 69 racks.
W: No, 69 machines, with virtual machines. Some Solaris, mostly Windows.
C: But your statement says 69 racks.
W: That's a typo, it should say 69 machines.
C: The machines ran for a while.
W: Yes, for two years.
C: You didn't tell them they were getting block rewards.
W: That wasn't the point, it was a timestamp server. Block rewards had no value.
C: You told us in 2010 you were able to put value on block rewards for accounting purposes.
W: I put a nominal value, and even then I was losing money.
C: You never told them about any rewards.
W: There was never any point back then.
C: You didn't tell them to retain the wallets, given they had electricity expenditure?
W: I was never [missed]
C: So you told them to protect the files?
W: Yes.
C: When?
W: In 2009.
C: After the expended all this electricity, you just stood by while they threw away their computers and make it impossible to check this story?
W: I was facing issues with the ATO and because of the actions of some of your clients, and getting divorced. My entire Bitcoin holdings, I never thought I'd make any of the money back. I had fees and other solicitors, probably 5 million in total. The cost of all this, hiring staff etc, probably came to 10 million. As soon as I got a break, Liberty Reserve shut down, so no.
C: When did you have 10 million USD?
W: [missed] I had been doing gaming work etc
C: You said the work you did required you to have many computers?
W: No, if you're an IT security person, you won't have [lots of things]. I had a quarter of PB before AlixPartners took it.
C: If someone says you were operating a server room in your house to operate logs for your clients, they would be wrong?
W: If only logs, then yes. [missed] That's not a normal security environment.
W: [missed] I had been doing gaming work etc
C: You said the work you did required you to have many computers?
W: No, if you're an IT security person, you won't have [lots of things]. I had a quarter of PB before AlixPartners took it.
C: If someone says you were operating a server room in your house to operate logs for your clients, they would be wrong?
W: If only logs, then yes. [missed] That's not a normal security environment.
C: You said [operating Bitcoin was expensive in 2009]. Professor [name] said such a setup wouldn't have been necessary.
W: Hashing is only one small component. ECDSA is a far more intensive process than hashing. We need to validate blocks before you distribute them. I had to run multiple system. 256 IP addresses, or more in IPv6, would only act as a single node on the network. That allowed me to have multiple systems including these logging servers, [all of this was costly]
C: You did not need the setup of the scale you describe.
W: I did, because I was running the majority of the network. Other people didn't because they came and left. I was often the only one on the network. In 2009 there was a black period, so I had to run up more and more servers. Without people with an intention to run a service, it wouldn't work.
W: Hashing is only one small component. ECDSA is a far more intensive process than hashing. We need to validate blocks before you distribute them. I had to run multiple system. 256 IP addresses, or more in IPv6, would only act as a single node on the network. That allowed me to have multiple systems including these logging servers, [all of this was costly]
C: You did not need the setup of the scale you describe.
W: I did, because I was running the majority of the network. Other people didn't because they came and left. I was often the only one on the network. In 2009 there was a black period, so I had to run up more and more servers. Without people with an intention to run a service, it wouldn't work.
C: It would increase the difficulty level.
W: That's a drastic misunderstanding of how Bitcoin works. You could distribute. Collection of [logs? blocks?] Put them in a tree structure. All that takes up [CPU power]. People came and went, even Hal Finney – it got too hot. I didn't have that luxury.
W: It's imply wrong that it would have required this volume of electricity.
C: No actually it doesn't take much to chew up a lot of electricity. You have routers, switches, backup servers, UPS, air conditioning. So if I were just running my laptop, that's OK, but then Bitcoin would have gone down. It had 100% availability because my machines sat there the whole time in multiple locations.
W: That's a drastic misunderstanding of how Bitcoin works. You could distribute. Collection of [logs? blocks?] Put them in a tree structure. All that takes up [CPU power]. People came and went, even Hal Finney – it got too hot. I didn't have that luxury.
W: It's imply wrong that it would have required this volume of electricity.
C: No actually it doesn't take much to chew up a lot of electricity. You have routers, switches, backup servers, UPS, air conditioning. So if I were just running my laptop, that's OK, but then Bitcoin would have gone down. It had 100% availability because my machines sat there the whole time in multiple locations.
C: Now to Bitcoin as a cryptocurrency. [shows "Satoshi's Vision" book", quotes "at no point have I said that Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency"] Did you write that?
W: I wrote the blog that was taken and used in the book.
C: Did you say that?
W: I have been lax at the term. When other people use it, sometimes I get upset and sometimes I don't.
C: [quotes "Bitcoin is not a cryptocurrency"] You've made this point a lot.
W: Yes, I noticed that "cryptocurrency" sounded cool, so I didn't crack down on it that hard. After 2019 I've been very hard on the term.
C: Do you accept that on [date] Satoshi announced Bitcoin as a cryptocurrency?
W: No, Martti made it for me. I wasn't really thinking…someone else mentioned it before Martti. Martin or something.
C: [shows email from Satoshi to Martti where Satoshi calls Bitcoin cryptocurrency] Satoshi stated they had prepared that post?
W: No, I took what Martti originally prepared. I put in what he put [drinks water]
W: He originally wrote some of that stuff.
C: Before this was released publicly, you said emphatically in Hodlonaut […]
W: [Drinks more, goes "aaah" loudly] Malmi wrote the initial term, I then prepared this.
W: I wrote the blog that was taken and used in the book.
C: Did you say that?
W: I have been lax at the term. When other people use it, sometimes I get upset and sometimes I don't.
C: [quotes "Bitcoin is not a cryptocurrency"] You've made this point a lot.
W: Yes, I noticed that "cryptocurrency" sounded cool, so I didn't crack down on it that hard. After 2019 I've been very hard on the term.
C: Do you accept that on [date] Satoshi announced Bitcoin as a cryptocurrency?
W: No, Martti made it for me. I wasn't really thinking…someone else mentioned it before Martti. Martin or something.
C: [shows email from Satoshi to Martti where Satoshi calls Bitcoin cryptocurrency] Satoshi stated they had prepared that post?
W: No, I took what Martti originally prepared. I put in what he put [drinks water]
W: He originally wrote some of that stuff.
C: Before this was released publicly, you said emphatically in Hodlonaut […]
W: [Drinks more, goes "aaah" loudly] Malmi wrote the initial term, I then prepared this.
C: But you stated specifically it was written by him.
W: The "peer-to-peer cryptocurrency" is from him. I added the extra command-line bits.
C: [shows transcript where Wright says the announcement was written by Malmi]
W: He wrote the text of [missed] I added the additions at the bottom. He then posted it on the site.
C: It is simply not true that Malmi came up with that post. It was prepared by Satoshi.
W: No…
C: Your evidence in Norway was dishonest.
W: Not at all. [Agitated] Malmi, AKA Cobra, came out with the text earlier. If I block-quote something from someone else, that doesn't mean I wrote it.
W: The "peer-to-peer cryptocurrency" is from him. I added the extra command-line bits.
C: [shows transcript where Wright says the announcement was written by Malmi]
W: He wrote the text of [missed] I added the additions at the bottom. He then posted it on the site.
C: It is simply not true that Malmi came up with that post. It was prepared by Satoshi.
W: No…
C: Your evidence in Norway was dishonest.
W: Not at all. [Agitated] Malmi, AKA Cobra, came out with the text earlier. If I block-quote something from someone else, that doesn't mean I wrote it.
C: Moving on. Matthews and Centrebet. Logging system. Madden has found a number of anomalies. No reason to trust that doctored document.
W: It hasn't been doctored. Files change when they're accessed. Without a file server and people accessing it, we would have perfect files.
C: You offered Matthews 500 bitcoin.
W: We haggled a bit, it started with 500.
C: [shows transcript where Matthews is offered 15k bitcoin] Matthews had no knowledge of how Bitcoin worked?
W: No, [vague]
C: So you were running servers along with Matthews?
W: No, I was managing servers for Centrebet. Binary tree structure…
C: By 2009 Bitcoin had been running for months. Matthews wasn't aware.
W: He was aware it was a logging system. The system we all call Bitcoin was actually […]
C: He wasn't aware that the Bitcoin system had been running for months, was he.
W: [Re-reads the definition of a transaction] He was aware, but [didn't care about something]
C: This was a meaningless offer, wasn't it.
W: No, actually, that's completely wrong. It has value now because [something about Adam Back]. When Martti dit it, was that meaningless for him? For Gavin? People saw that this was more than some money system.
W: It hasn't been doctored. Files change when they're accessed. Without a file server and people accessing it, we would have perfect files.
C: You offered Matthews 500 bitcoin.
W: We haggled a bit, it started with 500.
C: [shows transcript where Matthews is offered 15k bitcoin] Matthews had no knowledge of how Bitcoin worked?
W: No, [vague]
C: So you were running servers along with Matthews?
W: No, I was managing servers for Centrebet. Binary tree structure…
C: By 2009 Bitcoin had been running for months. Matthews wasn't aware.
W: He was aware it was a logging system. The system we all call Bitcoin was actually […]
C: He wasn't aware that the Bitcoin system had been running for months, was he.
W: [Re-reads the definition of a transaction] He was aware, but [didn't care about something]
C: This was a meaningless offer, wasn't it.
W: No, actually, that's completely wrong. It has value now because [something about Adam Back]. When Martti dit it, was that meaningless for him? For Gavin? People saw that this was more than some money system.
C: Can you stop making meaningless allegations and answer the questions.
W: [Gets agitated]
C: *Can you stop*. No evidence at all. We'll move on. At that time, Mr. Matthews new nothing of the operation of Bitcoin.
W: No. My Lord, is it possible to bring up Twitter? I would like to show every single COPA member this morning making Ponzi claims…
Mellor: Wright, I made it clear we shouldn't go into the current operation of the system. Do you understand?
W: I do.
C: [missed] If you wanted to demonstrate Bitcoin had value, this was a valuable exercise.
W: I tried to get different organizations using it. Bitcoin is a scarce good. [missed]
W: [Gets agitated]
C: *Can you stop*. No evidence at all. We'll move on. At that time, Mr. Matthews new nothing of the operation of Bitcoin.
W: No. My Lord, is it possible to bring up Twitter? I would like to show every single COPA member this morning making Ponzi claims…
Mellor: Wright, I made it clear we shouldn't go into the current operation of the system. Do you understand?
W: I do.
C: [missed] If you wanted to demonstrate Bitcoin had value, this was a valuable exercise.
W: I tried to get different organizations using it. Bitcoin is a scarce good. [missed]
C: [quotes] Pitching the system for PornHub as a payment system. No evidence of this.
W: No [missed] No-one took me seriously.
C: This is just another embellishment.
W: No [missed]
C: You say you retired the Satoshi persona due to the ATO troubles.
W: No, I left it to Gavin and others because ATO and also [someone] trying to bankrupt me. I had moved house, tried to rebuild my life.
C: But the chief reason was ATO?
W: It was the biggest thing on my mind. Also had […] trying to bankrupt me. Trying to rebuild companies through the divorce.
W: No [missed] No-one took me seriously.
C: This is just another embellishment.
W: No [missed]
C: You say you retired the Satoshi persona due to the ATO troubles.
W: No, I left it to Gavin and others because ATO and also [someone] trying to bankrupt me. I had moved house, tried to rebuild my life.
C: But the chief reason was ATO?
W: It was the biggest thing on my mind. Also had […] trying to bankrupt me. Trying to rebuild companies through the divorce.
C: You said you gave Gavin access to the source code on SouceForge. That's in the public domain.
W: It wasn't when I did it. I had a phone call with Gavin, and he came to London because he understood I knew about all the things we did together.
C: The real Satoshi, when he retired, said he had moved on to other things.
W: No, I did. I was focusing on other developments of the system. I needed to work on other scaling solutions. I talked to Martti and others to make sure there were working escrow systems etc.
C: You have complained that Malmi, admin of bitcoin dot org, set up a new system against your system. You have made extraordinary allegations against Malmi.
W: [seems to confirm]
C: You have described why you couldn't be associated with Satoshi. Made reference to Malmi. You allege Malmi has been responsible for setting up Silk Road, terrorist [websites?] etc.
W: He helped set up Silk Road. The exchange he mentioned in the email was the back-end for Silk Road.
C: No documentary support for these scandalous allegations.
W: I didn't have my emails anymore.
W: It wasn't when I did it. I had a phone call with Gavin, and he came to London because he understood I knew about all the things we did together.
C: The real Satoshi, when he retired, said he had moved on to other things.
W: No, I did. I was focusing on other developments of the system. I needed to work on other scaling solutions. I talked to Martti and others to make sure there were working escrow systems etc.
C: You have complained that Malmi, admin of bitcoin dot org, set up a new system against your system. You have made extraordinary allegations against Malmi.
W: [seems to confirm]
C: You have described why you couldn't be associated with Satoshi. Made reference to Malmi. You allege Malmi has been responsible for setting up Silk Road, terrorist [websites?] etc.
W: He helped set up Silk Road. The exchange he mentioned in the email was the back-end for Silk Road.
C: No documentary support for these scandalous allegations.
W: I didn't have my emails anymore.
C: [quotes Wright that Malmi was responible for a reputation system for assassination markets]
W: It was linked to that.
C: These are just a set of scandalous allegations [something] isn't it
W: No, [something] only Satoshi and Malmi knew this. Even before I had access to his emails.
C: You also gave an account of Andresen and van der Laan moving to GitHub against your wishes.
W: Yes, GitHub is multiple systems. Gavin asked if he could use GitHub for bug reports. He never asked if he could move the source code.
C: [quotes Wright about Van der Laan] He had nothing to do with it, did he.
W: He convinced Gavin to move to it. SF was a completely separate server.
W: It was linked to that.
C: These are just a set of scandalous allegations [something] isn't it
W: No, [something] only Satoshi and Malmi knew this. Even before I had access to his emails.
C: You also gave an account of Andresen and van der Laan moving to GitHub against your wishes.
W: Yes, GitHub is multiple systems. Gavin asked if he could use GitHub for bug reports. He never asked if he could move the source code.
C: [quotes Wright about Van der Laan] He had nothing to do with it, did he.
W: He convinced Gavin to move to it. SF was a completely separate server.
C: [quotes email where Gavin talks about GitHub]
W: He wanted it, but it didn't move at that time.
W: He suggested something, and I didn't accept it. I just kept running it.
C: [shows email from Andresen to Satoshi, "with your blessing …" Gavin talks about using GitHub for source code branch]
W: Yes, a branch is different in git. He's saying he's going to integrate patches on his system and push back to SourceForge.
C: [quotes Satoshi's response saying GitHub sounds like a good idea]
W: He's resp… I'm responding to the bug tracking. GitHub was better for bug tracking.
W: He wanted it, but it didn't move at that time.
W: He suggested something, and I didn't accept it. I just kept running it.
C: [shows email from Andresen to Satoshi, "with your blessing …" Gavin talks about using GitHub for source code branch]
W: Yes, a branch is different in git. He's saying he's going to integrate patches on his system and push back to SourceForge.
C: [quotes Satoshi's response saying GitHub sounds like a good idea]
W: He's resp… I'm responding to the bug tracking. GitHub was better for bug tracking.
C: [shows Gavin forum post where he sets up GitHub for source code]
W: No, he's setting up something so they can manage the main code repository. Very different things.
C: [shoes Satoshi talking about GitHub?]
W: SPV. A branch for a trial version of an SPV version.
C: [shows email from Andresen to Satoshi] [shows Satoshi's response, has given Andresen admin]
W: Yes, I thought a better helpdesk function would be great.
W: We had already set up the Bitcoin forum, now Bitcoin Talk. The forums on SF were horrible, still. We talked about archiving those communications.
W: No, he's setting up something so they can manage the main code repository. Very different things.
C: [shoes Satoshi talking about GitHub?]
W: SPV. A branch for a trial version of an SPV version.
C: [shows email from Andresen to Satoshi] [shows Satoshi's response, has given Andresen admin]
W: Yes, I thought a better helpdesk function would be great.
W: We had already set up the Bitcoin forum, now Bitcoin Talk. The forums on SF were horrible, still. We talked about archiving those communications.
C: [shows Satoshi's final email to Satoshi]
W: No, it was the final email from the gmx account.
W: The main system should have been stable.
C: These emails, mostly public domain, were fine with GitHub.
W: SF Forums isn't SF. My Lord, I said we coudl move the forums. The Bitcoin Talk forum was another server. SF Forums were horrible. was running, no good having a second. You could only post with admin access. It would be better to just use the one forum and make a subforum. At no point did I say the SF forum should be removed.
C: No objection from Satoshi about moving to GitHub.
W: No, bug tracking. SF as svn is good. GitHub runs multiple things. It has bug tracking, helpdesk, …Bitcoin.org/forum
W: No, it was the final email from the gmx account.
W: The main system should have been stable.
C: These emails, mostly public domain, were fine with GitHub.
W: SF Forums isn't SF. My Lord, I said we coudl move the forums. The Bitcoin Talk forum was another server. SF Forums were horrible. was running, no good having a second. You could only post with admin access. It would be better to just use the one forum and make a subforum. At no point did I say the SF forum should be removed.
C: No objection from Satoshi about moving to GitHub.
W: No, bug tracking. SF as svn is good. GitHub runs multiple things. It has bug tracking, helpdesk, …Bitcoin.org/forum
C: Far from Satoshi wanting to control every aspect, he was fine with giving developers freedom.
W: HELL YES, under the constraints I set. Set in stone. Very difficult to change. 30 years later, practically the same. I wanted Gavin to steward the protocol.
C: Not a word in this parting email about you wanting to maintain strict control.
W: I granted stewardship, not kingship. There's no voting in Bitcoin…
C: Not a word about Van der Laan about this.
W: Because that hadn't happened in July 2011. I was going through a divorce etc, wasn't focused on it. At the time, in July Van der Laan convinced Gavin to move the tree, not just a trunk.
W: HELL YES, under the constraints I set. Set in stone. Very difficult to change. 30 years later, practically the same. I wanted Gavin to steward the protocol.
C: Not a word in this parting email about you wanting to maintain strict control.
W: I granted stewardship, not kingship. There's no voting in Bitcoin…
C: Not a word about Van der Laan about this.
W: Because that hadn't happened in July 2011. I was going through a divorce etc, wasn't focused on it. At the time, in July Van der Laan convinced Gavin to move the tree, not just a trunk.
C: New topic. You said you wanted to dedicate yourself fully to Bitcoin. [shows Satoshi email forum post diagram] Highest concentration was for 4am to 5am.
W: That's when I'm up and working.
C: Very few in the evening.
W: Uhm, in the evening I rest.
C: [shows scatterplot] Shows a similar story.
C: If a person in the Sidney timezone, they would have been on antisocial and unusual hours.
W: Uhm [nervous laughter] I'm a programmer
C: If you dedicated yourself fully to Bitcoin, it would be strange to put in the entirety of the work in the early hours of the morning.
W: I would be up doing things on my system.
W: That's when I'm up and working.
C: Very few in the evening.
W: Uhm, in the evening I rest.
C: [shows scatterplot] Shows a similar story.
C: If a person in the Sidney timezone, they would have been on antisocial and unusual hours.
W: Uhm [nervous laughter] I'm a programmer
C: If you dedicated yourself fully to Bitcoin, it would be strange to put in the entirety of the work in the early hours of the morning.
W: I would be up doing things on my system.
C: New topic, the private keys. You said you were concerned about ATO seizing your assets. In 2011 you put assets including assets in the trust. Is that the Tulip Trust?
W: That's what it's called now.
C: What was it called in 2011?
W: At that time it was Tulip.
C: [shows witness statement about key slices] Corporate agents [and others] were slice holders. Here are the steps you said you took in [2016?]
W: Yes, but you're confusing things. "The Trust" isn't the trust, it's part of the Tulip Trust.
C: You said you collected slices for the signing sessions. Now you say the genesis block never had a public key associated with it.
W: Well what you can actually do is generate a key structure that doesn't have a private key
C: You said there is no key
W: You're misrepresenting what I said. The key structure isn't a key. It's a keyless key.
W: That's what it's called now.
C: What was it called in 2011?
W: At that time it was Tulip.
C: [shows witness statement about key slices] Corporate agents [and others] were slice holders. Here are the steps you said you took in [2016?]
W: Yes, but you're confusing things. "The Trust" isn't the trust, it's part of the Tulip Trust.
C: You said you collected slices for the signing sessions. Now you say the genesis block never had a public key associated with it.
W: Well what you can actually do is generate a key structure that doesn't have a private key
C: You said there is no key
W: You're misrepresenting what I said. The key structure isn't a key. It's a keyless key.
C: So we take it from you that the harddrive didn't have a private key for the genesis block.
W: It did not.
C: There was no [missed]
W: No, I can show you how to do it. Keyless key.
C: You couldn't show you had an association with the genesis key.
W: Not with cryptographic means, no.
That was all for today. Thanks for reading!
W: It did not.
C: There was no [missed]
W: No, I can show you how to do it. Keyless key.
C: You couldn't show you had an association with the genesis key.
W: Not with cryptographic means, no.
That was all for today. Thanks for reading!
Correction: the referenced email was not to Ira Kleiman, who is Dave's brother, but to his father.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
