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

The Face Behind Bitcoin?

mag.newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 703 posts

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#281

Post by bane »

ctdonath wrote: post #242
bane wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Suffice to say Nakamoto did have a change of mind We actually don't know that. On the surface sure look like it, but he could have had a similar personal philosophy before during and after his time working for the government. > We can point at ANY part of the sociopolitical spectrum and find hypocrites. Absolutely agree. I could add also the large number of pacifist liberal vegan types I know who work for the DoD o…

Just because you live/work in close & frequent proximity with people exemplifying such outrageous cognitive dissonance does not negate the outrageousness thereof. And just because you don't know whether Nakamoto suffered & acted on such cognitive dissonance doesn't justify posting outrageous examples of what you're imputing.

I guess everything is outrageous then so nothing is?

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#282

Post by jtbigwoo »

blakesterz wrote: post #34

"What?" The police officer balks. "This is the guy who created Bitcoin? It looks like he's living a pretty humble life." That quote smells totally fake to me. There's just no way some random office would know what Bitcoin is, and even if he did, that's not something a police officer would say. I don't know what that says about the rest of the article, but that quote doesn't read very factual to me.

In the mainstream media, Bitcoin = Silk Road = Drugs. It's not too surprising a random cop would know about that.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#283

Post by samstave »

rtpg wrote: post #41
ewoodrich wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is hardly untraceable. I hear Bitcoin advocates frequently claim that government has an interest in "shutting down Bitcoin", but compared to the all-cash industry of most organized crime, Bitcoin's pseudonymity is law enforcement's dream come true. A state actor would merely have to obtain the identity of one key in a series of transactions on the blockchain, and would gain far more information than any informant…

One thing that someone noted is that for a seller of illicit goods, bitcoin is better than paper in that with dollar bills you have to physically pick them up at one point. With bitcoin, sure you can trace coins, but laundering services (namely things like exchanges) can make you disappear a bit quicker. Overall, though, bitcoin is the IRS' dream.

I love the idea that bitcoin is the beta test for a global cryptocurrency to replace all money in the future and it is created by the government to test this form of currency. They will regulate all transactions/exchanges and will be able to trace the life of every coin.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#284

Post by stevewilhelm »

nwh wrote: post #22

Being labeled Satoshi regardless of truth is pretty much going to get you robbed, kidnapped or killed. This dude lives in this town and has $400M of untraceable currency? The article gives his name, face, address and relatives. You can be sure as hell that somebody will do something stupid to try and get to it. I wouldn't wish this label upon anybody, it's exactly why the community tries to avoid speculating about it…

There is a long tradition of reporting the details of wealthy people. [1]

[1] http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/#tab:overall

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#285

Post by wpietri »

peterwwillis wrote: post #175
confluence wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A term exists for such self serving and convenient thinking: cognitive dissonance. The religious are no different, they rail against how wrong science is, and yet at the same time have no problem using the fruits of scientific labor like air travel, the Internet or clean water. People just do what's most convenient for them at the time.

Cognitive dissonance actually refers to the excessive mental stress and discomfort suffered by holding two opposing ideas in one's mind at the same time. Since these people don't seem to be particularly discomforted by this, the term 'hypocrisy' might apply better.

I think it's legitimate to talk about cognitive dissonance here because it explains the behavior patterns.

When I was a kid I hung around a farm; on the inside of the wooden fence was a wire that regularly got an electric pulse. After the first time it bit me, I spend a couple of weeks being very careful not to touch it again.

Hypocrisy can happen in a variety of ways. But there's a particular sort of doublethink and denial that comes from avoiding cognitive dissonance.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#286

Post by fiatpandas »

Completely irresponsible to put a picture of his house in the article. I mean, she didn't even blur out his house number. It took me a single google search to find his full address with that number (matching street view).

It's been taken out of the article now, but the damage has been done.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#287

Post by Jtsummers »

MadManE wrote: post #263
omegaham wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh god yes. I'm currently a relatively junior flunky in the Marine Corps, and the GS civilians who work here are hilarious. "We need to cut the fat!" We work at a minor airbase in the middle of nowhere... oh. Oops. Whatever we are, it sure as hell ain't muscle. "Government spending is out of control" while talking about how they exploit the DTS system to get as much per diem as possible. "Those lazy people who expect…

Taking advantage of the existing situation for maximum personal gain doesn't indicate doublethink. It only indicates that they care more about themselves than they care about "the greater good" - which, in my opinion is how it should be. Somebody's going to be getting paid for doing nothing - it might as well be me.

It's doublethink or hypocrisy to complain about people getting fat off the government dole while getting fat off the government dole.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#288

Post by theklub »

wil421 wrote: post #183

I feel sorry for this guy. The reign of hell newsweek is about to put on him is not going to be fun. Especially since this guy is pretty ecentric and doesnt like being in the public eye. My hopes are no one tries to rob this guy or kidnap his family to get to his supposed 400m.

Could be worse, if he has a meltdown and hurts himself.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#290

Post by jeremyt »

bane wrote: post #182
mseebach wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, "deeply conservative" and "libertarian" aren't freely interchangeable. Second, it's a quite small branch of libertarianism that doesn't recognise any role for the state (and thus, taxation) at all - and the one they do recognise is mostly concerned with security.

Something I've learned over the years is that there are a tremendous number of highly different personal philosophies that call themselves "conservative" or "libertarian" that share only the loosest similarities, but the people who self-identify these ways also seem to comfortably self-group and display similar behavior and thought patterns. This is regardless of the textbook definitions of what these philosophies sh…

I'm going to take you at your word that you're actually curious.

I think you're seeing hypocrisy here when there is really a lot less in reality.

People who are in favor of a certain outcome have no obligation to act as if that outcome has already come to pass. This is why I don't give liberals a hard time because they are in favor of higher taxes but don't voluntarily pay higher taxes themselves.

First of all, most conservatives/libertarians are in favor of a smaller government, but smaller doesn't mean nonexistent. There are often large swaths of the government that they are in fact in favor of, and defense is one of them. I would be more surprised if these type of people that you're observing worked in places like the EPA, the Department of Education, and other things that the worldview opposes.

But even if… One can't just concede the playing field to the other side. If there is to be an EPA or Department of Education, been all things being equal it's better to have some conservative/libertarian people working there to keep things from getting out of control.

Post reply on HN