Craig Wright is apparently promising to launch the attack on the halving in May 2020. Their group has at least 3 million TH/s (i.e. 3000 peta-hash/s).

The halving is the logical time to launch it because the income for miners temporarily is cut in half, so miners have less profit leeway to support shit they ideologically believe in. And market psychology reasons.

Note Craig’s blog post adds more support. So hilarious that Craig intentionally does a teapot-calling-the-kettle-black wherein he is both the teapot and the kettle simultaneously! Lol! He criticizes Core for mutating the protocol, yet he wants naive readers to not pay attention he necessarily implicitly (while explicitly claiming otherwise!) advocates to centralize the future increases in the block size of BSV because adaptive block size is otherwise insecure. It’s obvious what Craig is doing. He is employing Orwellian double-speak to fool all the snowflake idiots. Abstractly it’s as if he is performing a theatrical playbook for Revelation’s 666. More concretely, he’s possibly going to lead (or like an opportunist parasite, take credit for leading when it happens naturally) the SegWit donations defensive mechanism “attack” that will force Core to fork off from the real Satoshi v0.5.3 Bitcoin and self-destruct, whilst publicly claiming or insinuating (perhaps with continued double-speak) that BSV is the real Bitcoin with scaling (which it isn’t), all the while letting fools buy BSV while he (and his wealthy supporters) are trading BSV for the real Satoshi v0.5.3 Bitcoin that survives from the Core fork-off. Clever and so many idiot snowflakes will be duped. Love it! I have reason to believe that Craig was reading my stuff and getting some of his recent ideas from me (as have many others throughout our industry). Whereas, I tend to cite those I get ideas from such as Vitalik. Not that I care to receive recognition for it. I don’t need any recognition. I prefer to be ignored by the snowflakes and read by the experts, lol. Ignored but…pay attention and you might be able to figure out that I’m much more than you think I am… (so you like double-speak?)

Craig’s points about the law are basically correct. Anonymous tokens (i.e. where proof of source of funds is not provable) will of course be banned from registered exchanges eventually, but that doesn’t mean they won’t still function decentralized for those who want to use them as a medium-of-exchange in a black market. And it’s possible that anonymous cryptocurrencies with “view keys” that enable authorities to verify lineage will not be banned. And he is correct that for those who want to transact in Satan’s statism, they will need to deal with the law and anonymity won’t help them.

In the image below presumably “DL” is Daniel Larimer and “CZ” is Changpeng Zhao:

Here’s another source:

@jesseluther wrote:

What does "0 to 21 decimal places" mean?

0.000000000000000000001