The Face Behind Bitcoin? • Hacker News Board

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#331

Post by peterwwillis » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:34 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #285

peterwwillis wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Ah, you're actually really close to understanding the correct principle here! You've just confused a couple of different ideas.

First off, cognitive dissonance does not explain any behavior patterns other than those prompted by feeling distressed. If these people were exhibiting symptoms of depression, distress, confusion, etc, or were making their decisions under duress of emotion, you could classify it as cognitive dissonance. But the examples given don't paint the people as particularly distressed.

Doublethink is actually almost the opposite of cognitive dissonance, and is the more correct term for the behavior mentioned. Doublethink is when there is absolutely no conflict in the mind about the two conflicting ideas being held at the same time.

Denial is also a different idea, and probably not completely out of context for the individual's reasoning, but does not describe the behavior. Denial is when someone finds an idea so difficult to accept that they reject it in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In this case the person's opinion might actually be weighed on various information that seems credible, and so denial might not be a factor at all.

The reason I chose 'hypocrisy' to define this behavior is because it requires an act that is in direct opposition to the values one espouses. In this sense the major difference is that you don't have to hold two opposing views in your head (whether under distress - cognitive dissonance - or not - doublethink). You simply have to say you believe one thing, and do an act which is directly in opposition to that belief.

You seem to be conflating all these different concepts into one giant over-reaching idea. This is probably not a good thing to do throughout life, not only because you're failing to communicate properly by misusing words, but you're actually simplifying a set of complex behaviors into one single idea to make it easier to comprehend. This leads to all kinds of cognitive bias and illogical conclusions.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#332

Post by icebraining » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:35 PM UTC

cairnsh wrote: post #314

johngalt wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anti-government and inexperienced then: 'These libertarians are just backwards and don't understand government' If anti-government and experienced then: 'Hypocrites!' else: more government It's a stronger position to oppose something you are experienced with and benefit from. Imagine a nuclear engineer who's advocating that the new plant she's working on is being built dangerously by the people in charge. Would yo…

A libertarian government worker would be more like a nuclear engineer who thinks nuclear energy plants are intrinsically dangerous. So dangerous that they should be avoided if at all possible.

That's still not hypocrite, because the power plant would be built anyway. Her/His action is not causing the power plant to happen, unless somehow s/he's the only nuclear engineer available.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#333

Post by ajanuary » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:36 PM UTC

joncrocks wrote: post #88

watty wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why couldn't a random officer know what Bitcoin is? My father heard of it and knows nothing about technology. It's no longer a secretive online currency, it's everywhere.

If you read the article, it suggests that the police officer is told that the person is Satoshi Nakamoto and the officer exclaims: "What?" The police officer balks. "This is the guy who created Bitcoin?" I can accept that the man on the street would have heard about bitcoin, but to know the name of the person who did the original work on the currency? That just seems a bit unlikely.

It's not a stretch to imagine the conversation went something along the lines of ""I would like to ask him about Bitcoin. This man is Satoshi Nakamoto, he created Bitcoin." and a little bit of creative license was taken with the reporting.

It still colours the article, but perhaps not so strongly.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#334

Post by canistr » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:37 PM UTC

bane wrote: post #101

Topic other than discussing the irresponsibility of "outing" a guy using the clever tricks of using his name and public records look ups. > A libertarian, Nakamoto encouraged his daughter to be independent, start her own business and "not be under the government's thumb," she says. "He was very wary of the government, taxes and people in charge." > What you don't know about him is that he's worked on classified stuff…

Honestly, I think it's just as hypocritical to be working for Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, or anyone who works at a company that analyzes email or any amount of user data and still be up in arms about privacy issues.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#335

Post by bitJericho » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:39 PM UTC

orclev wrote: post #184

acjohnson55 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people have that much money in the US. SN might have to actually take precautions appropriate of someone of his net worth. Boo hoo.

Except his actual net worth is probably a fraction of what his theoretical net worth is. It's assumed for instance that he still has access to all those bitcoins, but something could have happened to that wallet. There's also the difficulty of actually converting those coins into something the average business will accept. It's like suggesting that handing someone a billion dollars in un-vested bonds suddenly makes t…

His cashing in bitcoins could destroy Bitcoin XD

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#336

Post by lmg643 » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:40 PM UTC

bane wrote: post #101

Topic other than discussing the irresponsibility of "outing" a guy using the clever tricks of using his name and public records look ups. > A libertarian, Nakamoto encouraged his daughter to be independent, start her own business and "not be under the government's thumb," she says. "He was very wary of the government, taxes and people in charge." > What you don't know about him is that he's worked on classified stuff…

Why disregard the topic of the way Newsweek handled this? Here's a private citizen. He has $400mm in an anonymous currency. Here's the city he lives in. Here's what his house looks like. I recognize they are just trying to prove that he isn't living some ostentatious lifestyle but for someone who appears to have no personal security, they could just say "he lives in a modest home" and that is really enough.

Focusing on the article itself - I'm glad it was not a pseudonym. Takes a lot of the mystery and shadiness away from the origins of the coin. Just an individual who believed in what he put together and didn't want a lot of attention or celebrity. I think that's a positive. I'd buy him a beer for sure.

As far as anti-government libertarians being hypocrites - who isn't? Silicon valley heavily favors the democratic party, a party that generally favor higher tax policy, and also has the largest tax avoiding corporations in the world. At a certain point, it's hard to rationally engage with what people claim to believe. Just watch what they do, focus on the outputs.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#337

Post by rosser » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:43 PM UTC

Houshalter wrote: post #313

cairnsh wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JTSummers: I don't think it's doublethink to complain about a situation you personally benefit from. (Actually, it gives you more credibility, because you have a personal stake in the problem: You yourself would be hurt by the change you propose.) But it is doublethink if you hold other people in contempt for getting benefits from tax revenue, or if you think they are immoral for doing so. For example, I think Ayn Ra…

Ayn Rand withdrew Social Security checks (to get back what the government took.) There is nothing necessarily wrong with that.

When you claim Social Security money, you aren't "getting back" what you put in/was "taken" from you. Your contribution is already gone, disbursed to current recipients. When you ultimately collect, that money is similarly coming out of someone else's pocket.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#338

Post by Crito » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:43 PM UTC

Amezarak wrote: post #254

judk wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point is that it paints a huge target on his back. And he isn't even using that 400m to do anything deserving of vigilante/criminal attacks, and no one knows if he even really has it

I did a quick Google search and found plenty of information about Bill Gates, including pictures of his house. In fact you can do this with just about anybody. How and why is he at more risk than any other multimillionaire for whom all this information is public?

Bill Gates uses his money. That means that he can use some of his money on security.

He would be in much more danger if he neither used his money nor kept his money in institutions that would raise alarms to authorities if you tried to force him to withdraw all of it.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#339

Post by rzt » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:44 PM UTC

BillyMaize wrote: post #225

michaelt wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

isn't the lack of a denial in this instance tantamount to an admission? I mean, if it were me, [...] responded to questions about Bitcoin with "bit-what-now"? If all his friends and family know he shares his name with the creator of bitcoin, he might have already heard all the jokes and think "not this shit again" as well as not being able to credibly deny knowing about it. There's a british general who goes by Mike…

As someone with the name Paul Brown in the Cincinnati area (where the Paul Brown stadium is) I deal with this almost daily. I'm sick of meeting someone and about 75% of the time they go "oh, do you own the stadium?". I'm seriously starting to think about moving far away so I don't have to hear it anymore. I don't even like football! I also went to high school with a guy named John Conner and everyone use to thank him…

People also probably give you immense grief over the ridiculous tax deal the stadium has with Hamilton County. :p

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#340

Post by Steko » Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 4:46 PM UTC

Shorter HN:

Would you all just think of the poor superrich for a minute? Clearly they are the ones in our society who need special protections and immunities from journalism.