from the COPA v. Craig Wright case. If you are good with computor you will delight in the list of reasons supporting the allegation that Wright's documents are forged. (PDF) (
from to on 28 Feb 2024 00:55


threaded - newest on 28 Feb 2024 01:47 next collapse

The content of {ID_004715} was written by ChatGPT. […] ChatGPT did not exist in 2007. on 28 Feb 2024 02:46 next collapse

DCG objects to the sale — that is, to the actions of its own subsidiary! DCG argued to Judge Sean Lane that the “sheer quantity of the Trust Assets at issue will pose a serious risk of value destruction.” LOL.

I realize this is all a clown show, but how is it possible for a subsidiary to defy their parent company like this? I figured in cases like this, the people calling the shots at the subsidiary generally get fired and replaced with folks willing to play ball on 28 Feb 2024 08:14 collapse

ch 11 bankruptcy is special. even if the same team is still running things, they’re highly restricted in what they can do. also, equity holders are generally presumed to go to 0 and can go whistle.

[deleted] on 28 Feb 2024 04:16 next collapse
. on 28 Feb 2024 08:50 next collapse

The most infurating thing to me about this whole thing that such a transparent fraud like Wright is still going through the courts and hasn’t been laughed out and forced to pay extraordinary amounts. on 28 Feb 2024 09:26 collapse

the joy of a billionaire backer - and so COPA rests on a countervailing billionaire on 28 Feb 2024 09:42 collapse

Whoever wins, we lose, but seeing CSW humiliated is worth it to me. on 28 Feb 2024 09:46 next collapse

Nah, we don’t get affected whatsoever. But it’s good to see scumbag billionaires setting buckets of money on fire like that. Classic “let them fight” scene. Sad thing that even the life-changing money involved here (for me), is not even pocket change for a billionaire :-/ on 28 Feb 2024 13:23 collapse

I have low regard for these people, but putting Prof Dr Dr Wright back in his box would be the most useful thing Dorsey has ever done with his money.

spez on 04 Mar 2024 18:22 collapse

nothing beats wright's 'explanation' of unsigned int:

Gunning asks if Wright knows what “unsigned” means in the variable declaration, and presses him to explain. Wright says yes, basically it’s an integer with… it’s larger… I’m not sure how to say it. I’m not sure how to describe it. I know what it is. Gunning pulls up a C++ book to show that “unsigned” simply means it cannot be negative. Wright’s says yes he knows that, he just didn’t think of how to say it in such a simple way.