Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history

evanhatch.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 167 posts

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history

#51

Post by temp8964 »

panorama wrote: post #33
temp8964 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the author of the article already assumes Satoshi is a single person. The name is simply a Japanese male name. So it is obviously wrong to call him "they". This kind of stupidity only works in Woke English. Translate it to most other languages will make the readers deeply confused: what's wrong with the writer? What's going on in his mind?

An author on the internet has adopted a writing style that you're clearly uncomfortable with, it's not grounds for disparaging the author. Your individual politics don't matter here, it is a technology article that happens to use a pronoun for an unknown entity which is entirely acceptable in common parlance. No one is clamoring that he/him is unacceptable, but to disparage people for their choice of expression in wr…

No. A technology article use they/them for a specific individual is a very new invention. Please don't make up stuff and claim this is a norm.

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history

#52

Post by reducesuffering »

nostrademons wrote: post #31

Satoshi came out of retirement in March 2014 to state that he was not Dorian Nakamoto, in the wake of a Newsweek article that falsely fingered the latter as Satoshi: https://techcrunch.com/2014/03/06/satoshi-dorian/ I still think it was Hal Finney, who was in similar cypherpunk circles, created the first PoW system, received the first Bitcoin transaction, lived in the same town as Dorian Nakamoto for 10 years, was di…

Hal Finney theory is too convoluted what with him talking to himself, a stark contrast in programming styles between Hal's organized manner and Satoshi's haphazard hacking, and no connection to the genesis block being a headline from UK/Europe and British lingo. A Nakamoto in town is just a common coincidence, there are 2,800 of them in the US.

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history

#53

Post by temp8964 »

3np wrote: post #35
temp8964 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the author of the article already assumes Satoshi is a single person. The name is simply a Japanese male name. So it is obviously wrong to call him "they". This kind of stupidity only works in Woke English. Translate it to most other languages will make the readers deeply confused: what's wrong with the writer? What's going on in his mind?

No, it is not “obviously wrong”. “They” can refer to a single person of any or undetermined gender. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

If you look at the examples, "they" are all used in a general sense not pointing to any specific individual.

In this case, Satoshi is a Japanese male name. If you have evidence to suggest otherwise, there is no reason to pretend you don't know the gender.

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history

#55

Post by panorama »

temp8964 wrote: post #51
panorama wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An author on the internet has adopted a writing style that you're clearly uncomfortable with, it's not grounds for disparaging the author. Your individual politics don't matter here, it is a technology article that happens to use a pronoun for an unknown entity which is entirely acceptable in common parlance. No one is clamoring that he/him is unacceptable, but to disparage people for their choice of expression in wr…

No. A technology article use they/them for a specific individual is a very new invention. Please don't make up stuff and claim this is a norm.

You've "made stuff up" about entire languages in your previous reply. I am struggling to find more ways to explain that, in English, it is acceptable to refer to unknown quantities or identities of people with "they" and "them".

"My bank denied my loan application again, I can't believe them!" - Correct - Unknown, amorphous entity, regardless if the rejection was specifically caused by a man or woman or otherwise.

"temp8964 replied to me on HN again, she's quite persistent." - Incorrect - Without knowing who you are, is it still acceptable for me to blindly assert that you must be a woman and doing otherwise is wrong?

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history

#56

Post by 3np »

temp8964 wrote: post #51
panorama wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An author on the internet has adopted a writing style that you're clearly uncomfortable with, it's not grounds for disparaging the author. Your individual politics don't matter here, it is a technology article that happens to use a pronoun for an unknown entity which is entirely acceptable in common parlance. No one is clamoring that he/him is unacceptable, but to disparage people for their choice of expression in wr…

No. A technology article use they/them for a specific individual is a very new invention. Please don't make up stuff and claim this is a norm.

If you read the replies to your other comments before writing this you would know that “they as singular” has centuries of use (which is besides the point as language is a living thing).

Also, see the HN guidelines.

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history

#57

Post by temp8964 »

panorama wrote: post #55
temp8964 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. A technology article use they/them for a specific individual is a very new invention. Please don't make up stuff and claim this is a norm.

You've "made stuff up" about entire languages in your previous reply. I am struggling to find more ways to explain that, in English, it is acceptable to refer to unknown quantities or identities of people with "they" and "them". "My bank denied my loan application again, I can't believe them!" - Correct - Unknown, amorphous entity, regardless if the rejection was specifically caused by a man or woman or otherwise. "t…

No. The author of the article already assumed Satoshi is a singular person. Your argument is irrelevant in this context.

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history

#58

Post by mdoms »

dereg wrote: post #46
trixie_ wrote: post #37

My money is on Paul Le Roux.. most hackers are too uppity to write windows software. Le Roux was a pragmatist with a real practical need to move dirty money without banks.

I went deep into the PLR rabbit hole because I too believed that PLR could have been Satoshi. The one dagger to the heart of the theory is that PLR lived in the Philippines at the time. If you line up Satoshi’s posting times with PLR’s local time zone, you’d have to assume that PLR was posting from 4-9ish in the Philippines.

> you’d have to assume that PLR was posting from 4-9ish in the Philippines.

Ok? Why is that a dagger in the heart? My most active posting times are 4-9 and I don't even know if you're talking AM or PM because both work for me.

Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history

#59

Post by dnqthao »

temp8964 wrote: post #53
3np wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is not “obviously wrong”. “They” can refer to a single person of any or undetermined gender. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

If you look at the examples, "they" are all used in a general sense not pointing to any specific individual. In this case, Satoshi is a Japanese male name. If you have evidence to suggest otherwise, there is no reason to pretend you don't know the gender.

I think people already explained above that Satoshi is just a pseudonym so there is nothing certain about the person’s gender.
Post reply on HN