In the COPA proceeding, the claim statesd that nodes run the network and that (8) “The Bitcoin White Paper also defines, inter alia, the steps required to operate as a computer node of the Bitcoin Network”.[1] This paper states the following:

5. Network
The steps to run the network are as follows:
1) New transactions are broadcast to all nodes.

2) Each node collects new transactions into a block.

3) Each node works on finding a difficult proof-of-work for its block.

4) When a node finds a proof-of-work, it broadcasts the block to all nodes.

5) Nodes accept the block only if all transactions in it are valid and not already spent.

6) Nodes express their acceptance of the block by working on creating the next block in the chain, using the hash of the accepted block as the previous hash.

This process is very clear. In the definition, nodes only “vote” or process transactions through the creation of blocks and by building new blocks on previously broadcast blocks of accepted transactions. The number of nodes that have created blocks is publicly available. At most, 2016 nodes may operate as the difficulty adjustment period of two weeks only allows this number. Further, the claim that nodes can run and create blocks using different software versions is misleading as the other nodes will reject these blocks. The definition of how bitcoin works preclude this.

Bird and Bird want to make one claim in one proceeding and another in a separate one.

CSW
Jan 19, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1642619905047800?thread_ts=1642619905.047800&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3772

There is no accident - that is misleading.

Yes, by stating the client committed a perjury

No. That is not knowledge at that point

The WP is knowledge

CSW
Jan 19, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1642619994048500?thread_ts=1642619994.048500&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3774

Equality of the Law
By Craig Wright
21 Jan 2022
https://craigwright.net/blog/bitcoin-blockchain-tech/equality-of-the-law/

https://archive.is/MPVDt

The concept is that everybody in the world HODL a little BTC, and then you have a separate layer where you have a loan in US dollars and other assets. I am sorry, but I fail to see how this is in any way related to the invention I noted in the whitepaper. There is no second layer of digital gold in the White Paper. There is no third-party trusted entity where you take out a fiat-backed loan in the whitepaper

And making a statement that there is any relevance between the two is, in fact, misleading.

In the abstract of my White Paper, I define  “A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution”.

I’m sorry to say, but the system of digital gold held in exchanges and used against a fiat-based loan to exchange for US dollars is anything but the definition in my White Paper.

Peer-to-peer electronic cash means that you are exchanging money directly between individuals using the system and not going through third parties. This includes the nodes. The users of the system can send directly between each other. For example, suppose Alice and Bob want to exchange money. In that case, Alice can give a signed transaction incorporating all of the transaction details, including the hash of the invoice that Bob has exchanged with her and any identifying information that needs to be recorded. In giving this directly to Bob, Bob now needs to perfect the transaction by sending it to be recorded on the Blockchain. That is not what is becoming part of BTC or multilayered digital (sort of) gold coin.

CSW
Jan 25, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1643100175383300?thread_ts=1643100175.383300&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3832

Bitcoin addresses are not designed in the same form as PGP keys. There is a lot of cypherpunk mentality that has seeped into my invention. People argue this online and social media to demonstrate the ownership principles of possession created by cyberpunks and criminals. However, this was not how bitcoin is designed.

The same goes for issues such as paper wallet and keys.
The answer to much of this is very simple.

I was not the owner of 1Feex… Rather, as I’ve stated a corporation is the owner of the tokens held in that address. Note how I have said that. Not the company owns the address but rather the company owns the tokens. Addresses should not be reused and when I bought it; it wasn’t that valuable. The transfer was done to a single address. That was how I received it. I received from a third-party and did so for valid consideration.

When I received it, I recorded it on my tax for my company. Not mine personally but, the trust had a couple entities in Australia that linked to it and managed the trust and the Seychelles company.
When you are holding assets for a corporation, you have a fiduciary duty. The duty is not to protect the address but rather the tokens. The transfer of that amount was kept in a paper wallet for years. However, paper wallet can easily be lost or damaged. They can fade even when stored in a safe deposit box. Yes there are alternatives now based on metal and all sorts of other things but even safe-deposit boxes can get damaged. In moving this into a digital format the idea is not to protect the address but rather to protect the contents.

The address is not valuable, the tokens are.

People need to stop thinking cypherpunk PGP mentality and understand that bitcoin is not analogous to these and that the system described in the whitepaper is not similar in any way to PGP.

CSW
Feb 6, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1644139009928599

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/3928

Ver "Desayuno - Webinar: El libro blanco del Bitcoin" en YouTube
https://youtu.be/OKR5EoA0RrQ

Let me explain something to everyone about bitcoin. The protocol is fixed. There is a unilateral contract that was set in 2009 when the product was released. That contract has no provision for change. Rather, it has a promise of stability. While some of the codes that are currently disabled will not be re-enabled anytime soon others will be. None of this will impact any existing transaction now all that may exist in the future. But, you have no guarantee or promise of when some of the other codes that are not currently used will be implemented and you shouldn’t be developing anything that is based on them.

The operation of nodes is very simply defined in overview in section 5 of my White Paper. This is not negotiable. It does not matter that you don’t like it. It does not matter if you think it can be optimised in a better way or improved. That is it. Simplicity is actually a good thing in complex systems.

There is no consensus on block cap. Honestly, I’m getting tired of this and it should be what can be handled by the majority of nodes. That is by computational power. If the size of the blocks is too large for a node, this is capitalism and that node goes out of business. If you want to run a rasberrypie go to BTC.

In time... It will be an INTERESTING year

I won't say more for the moment

Welcome to another day in Bitcoin

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645620494472599?thread_ts=1645620494.472599&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4055

Asunto: Re: Cita de su página de b-money
"... La infraestructura de la red puede admitir una gama completa de transacciones y contratos de depósito en garantía (scrow), pero por ahora el enfoque está en los aspectos básicos del dinero y las transacciones".

Satoshi Nakamoto
10 de enero de 2009
Para: Weidai https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/2008-nakamoto

"Desayuno - Webinar El libro blanco del Bitcoin -3ª parte-"
Organizado por el Colegio de Economistas de Valencia (COEV)
9 de Marzo del 2022
https://youtu.be/UgDuFL8fUhI

CSW
Mar 1, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1646137493324119

CSW
Mar 16, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1647434435870539?thread_ts=1647434435.870539&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4190

I am going to make this nice and clear.

Nodes prune. Any old transaction, any old data, anything that has been spent can be pruned.

Equally, this does not mean that nodes need to prune. However, you cannot guarantee that your data will not be pruned. Nodes (note, nodes are exclusively miners) have the option of keeping or removing data at will. There is a section in my White Paper if you don’t understand this.

Equally, nodes can maintain a complete copy if they so choose. They can equally require payment for access. There is no requirement to distribute the entire Blockchain. In section 7 on page 4 of my White Paper, the reclaiming of disk space may be achieved by removing old spent transactions and even the branches. Block headers can be kept in memory and no more.

The development of overlay networks allows for the complete history to be maintained for limited subsets of the entire Blockchain. This will allow individual token issuers including some of the people on here to have a limited copy of the Blockchain that only serves their clients or people on their token system. Honestly, I really don’t understand why people think you need to validate everyone else’s transactions.

CSW
Apr 13, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1649859044420089?thread_ts=1649859044.420089&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4297

I wrote the code in 2007.

It was incomplete, the settings only became fixed in Dec 2008

The paper was in Many iterations

The last PoW version was in 2008.

It was released in May 08, then Oct 08

Then Nov 08

Finally set in Feb 09

Some parts of the paper go to 2003

But, then it was a PoS system

It was stated that a Byzantine problem needs 2/3rds agreement

It always ends in this as an oligarchy

CSW
Jun 19, 2019
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1560967786215800?thread_ts=1560966490.195700&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4305

"Bitcoin: A Peer-to-peer Electronic Cash System"
https://youtu.be/_x5HQq9up54

Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System
9 Pages
Posted: 22 Aug 2019
Dr Craig S Wright
nChain; University of Southern Queensland - University of Southern Queensland, Students; Leicester Law School; University of London, Birkbeck College, School of Social Sciences, History and Philosophy, Politics, Students; Harvard university

Date Written: August 21, 2008

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3440802

Bitcoin Nodes
ramonquesada.com
May 26, 2022

https://telegra.ph/Bitcoin-Nodes-05-26