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

441–450 of 703 posts

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#441

Post by npizzolato »

john_b wrote: post #422
arrrg wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doxxing? That is such a stupid term. It’s called journalism. Reporting on people with a huge impact on the world is sort of what journalists do. Of course that includes identifying information. Sure, publishing identifying information of people who did nothing special is unethical but that can hardly be said about Satoshi. If the story is correct then this is some insanely rich dude who got rich by inventing Bitcoin…

> "Sure, publishing identifying information of people who did nothing special is unethical but that can hardly be said about Satoshi." This is wrong on so many levels. Here is a guy who created arguably the largest financial innovation of the century and who only wants to be left to live a humble, private life instead of claiming his riches, and you think that a mass of curious strangers have a right to intrude into…

I would argue that there is in fact a public interest in learning more about the inventor of what is "arguably the largest financial innovation of the century". Learning more about his life and others involved in bitcoin can help us understand the motivations of the individuals that led to its creation. The fact that a man who worked in classified government projects for a long period of time went on to create bitcoin is certainly interesting.

My impression from the article was that all other interviews were given very freely. There's nothing unethical about asking Satoshi's family or those he worked with in creating bitcoin about him. I don't think there's anything wrong with posting his picture either.

Granted, the article could have done with a less-revealing picture of his house. But given the prevalence of things like Google street view etc., I'm not sure you can reasonably expect to keep that stuff secret.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#442

Post by mindslight »

drcode wrote: post #201
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…

Just because someone plays by the rules of the system doesn't mean he/she doesn't have the right to criticize it.

"Play" implies actively taking part and therefore positively consenting to the system, as opposed to just doing the bare minimum to avoid and not run afoul of it. So yes, they have become a direct supporter and thus have lost the right to criticize it.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#443

Post by bane »

TDL wrote: post #344
bane wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've met almost no libertarians of the anarchist persuasive in D.C. Anecdotal I know, but quite a few of my friends are former military of some type and their facebook feeds are jam pack full of libertarian group reposts. > Everyone has the programs that they like and the ones they don't. It's too bad that the rhetoric is "shrink government" not "I don't like this specific program". Because the former statement cre…

Have you ever considered the fact that former military personnel harbor some anti-government sentiments because of the experience with military? They have lived a fairly authoritarian lifestyle for an extended period of time, it's understandable that they develop a distaste for govenrment.

Yes.

Again, growing up and living in the D.C. area, I think everybody in these parts has distaste for government in some way.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#444

Post by dragonwriter »

bane wrote: post #432
mseebach wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah that's true in theory. But it can get out of control. It's like attending a rally about having too many strip clubs in your neighborhood, then chilling out after the rally in your local neighborhood strip club. It's a strained analogy, as strip clubs are fundamentally about the thing people who are opposed to them find objectionable - the stripping. Most things government is about these days isn't the thing li…

Yeah it's a strained analogy, but aren't they all? >Nothing about libertarianism compels you to move to a less government-y place just so you can work a more ideologically pure job. True, but it does compel you to work in a non-governmental job as much as possible. Or at least be honest about the situation: "I hate working for the government and all the waste, but I applied to 100 jobs and this is that only one I cou…

> True, but it does compel you to work in a non-governmental job as much as possible.

Not really. Libertarians want government limited to certain essential functions (exactly which those are varies a bit between individual libertarians.)

There's nothing inconsistent about being Libertarian and working for the government in one of those essential functions.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#445

Post by rsanders »

rosser wrote: post #337
Houshalter wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You never get your money back out of a bank; you get somebody else's money, if there ever even was physical money involved. And you never step in the same river twice. I think that's all splitting metaphysical hairs.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#446

Post by prostoalex »

Jtsummers wrote: post #287
MadManE wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How does one gain a first-hand knowledge of a corrupt system unless one has experienced it himself?

It's quite possible to be the user of the system due to the lack of other alternatives and oppose it in principle. People with mortgages or shares do not necessarily support corrupt Wall Street practices and financial institutions getting "too big to fail", yet benefit from low mortgage rates or bullish runs in the stock market.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#447

Post by olalonde »

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…

Ron Swanson.

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#448

Post by [deleted] »

mikeash wrote: post #133
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…

My favorite are the guys who rail against socialized medicine while simultaneously praising the care they get from the VA. I think a lot of these people just subconsciously see "the government" as simply not including the security apparatus.

[deleted]

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#449

Post by rayiner »

cgore wrote: post #302
spindritf wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the paradox of the deeply conservative anti-federal government types who work for the government - directly or as a fed contractor Those are the people who have a realistic, first hand understanding of the government innerworkings. Also, a contradiction between believing that allocation of capital would be more efficient under a less centrally-influenced system, and being willing to accept higher pay and benefits fro…

I think a lot of people seem to be confusing Libertarianism with Anarchism. Libertarians typically do see roles for SOME government, and those roles are typically the military, judges, roads, police, and the like. Not other things though, so no Social Security, no Obamacare, no National Endowment for the Arts, and no space program (other than for space weapons, so get rid of NASA and establish some sort of "US Star F…

I don't think he's confused, its just that online you tend to get more of the anarchist type who oppose the government's monopoly on violence. I think there has been a trend away from "statist" libertarianism because that ideology puts you in the awkward position of arguing that we should have military and police to keep people in line, but shouldn't subject that government to democratic control (because otherwise people would vote themselves universal healthcare and social security).

Re: The Face Behind Bitcoin?

#450

Post by prostoalex »

rosser wrote: post #337
Houshalter wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's the same with the bank deposits - would you expect do get exact same dollar bills with serial numbers you've deposited every time you use an ATM?

Are you then looting somebody every time you make a cash withdrawal?

Post reply on HN